Sign up to receive Alan's newsletter by email.

Speaking engagements

  • Invite Alan Korwin to speak at your event! Thought-provoking, entertaining, freedom-oriented topics -- your guests will thank you for the excitement -- long after the applause ends!


« April 2017 | Main | June 2017 »

Pro-Gun-Rights Bills Stalled

It was exciting to see them introduced


HR367 Hearing Protection Act (Silencers)
HR38 FTC: Freedom To Carry (National Reciprocity)

Jeff Knox, Director, The Firearms Coalition

“DC scuttlebutt says to expect no action on national carry reciprocity or hearing protection (silencers) this year -- too many higher priorities, etc...

“CMP (Civilian Marksmanship Program) might get guns (from Philippines). ATF will try to get State Dept. to block it. Trump could very easily clear the way for this, and the long-awaited guns from S. Korea too. It would be a smart move for him to do it, to give some crumbs to the GunVoters who are starting to get restless -- and will get more so as hearing protection and reciprocity flounder.

“If they don't get those bills out of committee this year, odds of them doing so next year go down. Republicans sort of get that Dems pushing gun control hurts Dems and helps Republicans. But they can't seem to grasp that pushing pro-rights legislation -- and forcing D's to vote on the record on them -- helps R's and hurts D's. To most, it is just a political issue, and their only real concern is where NRA will come down on their race in the next election cycle. We need to be pushing to get those bills out of committee to get clear recorded votes.”

If you’re not getting Jeff’s inside info on Congress and the states, go to his Facebook page now and sign up.

Clamor to move these bills, or see them rust.

The political left, by keeping the president preoccupied with razzle dazzle, is preventing real work.

Proof of Voter Fraud?

Media inconsistent, Congress incontinent

Letter to reporter,


Your well-researched article (5/1/17) on the 100,000 lost-then-found voter registrations did the math for a sampling (43 out of 74) and found the 58,000 people who may have been denied a vote. That's critically important.

The bigger controversy though, or at least equally important, is over fraudulent voting -- it's what the president raised such a fuss about. The article implies 42,000 people attempted to vote fraudulently. That math, simple addition and subtraction I believe should have been included, if not the headline. Did 42,000 people actually register to vote when they are forbidden to do so (assuming the projected math, the same used to estimate the 58K, holds)?

If yes, how about a story on that? If projected out across the country, what sort of affect would that have? If similar numbers apply (and Arizona is a small state comparatively) 42K x 50 states is 2.1 million fraudulent applications to vote. Is that even remotely possible? Why hasn't Congress actually attempted to study this? That alone is a story worth a Pulitzer. No one wants to know the real answer -- but maybe you do?


The reporter replied saying the balance of the forms aren't necessarily fraudulent, they were incomplete or hard matches, the real number is estimated now at closer to 17,000. That may be, but a) why wouldn't the anomalies have shown in the random sample, b) the accuracy arbiter is DMV and those issues are well known, c) the 17K is of eligible voters disenfranchised, an important stat but, d) the question was, are any of these overlooked applications fraudulent, or sufficient to swing an election. Her followup is quite illuminating, well written, an exploration of a slice of the voting system, and I've learned this very item is in the hands of the Trump administration.

She notes, "However, your question is one I had as well, and I am currently digging through a sample of the applicants to see if I can determine any fraudulent ones. Stay tuned!" Yes, indeed.

P.S. There is a reference to 85 denieds out of 130 applicants sampled in a different set, where 85 were citizens, and the rest were "hard matches." Only two categories? That doesn't even pass the sniff test.

Suspicious Google Result in Georgia Vote


Their democrat spin is 100%: "We losers came so close!"

The top 10 results in a Google search for the winner of the contentious Georgia election on April 18 brought up only left-wing and alt-Left media sources.

Each of the results cast the election as “just short” and “narrowly missed” victory instead of anything suggesting Republicans defeated the democrats effort, or democrat loses. Making matters worse, the sole democrat in the race faced a divided opposition, with 11 republicans running and dividing the vote.

This poses a stinging rebuke to the supposed neutrality of the vaunted search engine. Google is known to have been built and is being run by an overwhelmingly non-diverse staff, essentially white and Asian, with liberal sensibilities, according to numerous studies, including their own.

Among those represented in the search results are (in order of appearance, excluding Twitter comments): NY Times, CNN, New Yorker, NY Times, CNN, NBC, Salon, The Guardian,, and, a web site created by a liberal blogger, according to Wikipedia.

The run-off election is set for June 20. The New York Times, in a lengthy piece, did little more than lament the loss, praise the narrow loss, extol the virtues of the loser, point how much more he spent, slap Donal Trump several times, and almost campaign for the loser.

BHO Anti-Gun Lawlessness Reversed


"If it’s in the news and it’s about guns, it’s probably 100% wrong.” --Alan Korwin

The lamestream media told you:

“Is there someone who ran for office on the need to get guns into the hands of people who are literally too mentally ill to cash a check?” --Rachel Maddow (MSNBC) on Twitter

“The U.S. House of Representatives has voted to scrap regulations that require background checks for gun buyers with mental health issues.” --BBC article

“House votes to roll back Obama rule for background checks for gun ownership.” --AP headline

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The “news” media, in a typical anti-gun-rights frenzy, has gone off the rails in flat-out deception about a simple move by our new president to reestablish the rule of law.

Backstory: When you get old enough for social security payments, the system allows you to designate a “representative payee,” so your benefits (payment checks) can go to a third person you select. That person can deposit them and basically handle your finances, checkbook, bills and other matters for you, according to your instructions. It’s a common practice, making life easier. Typically, people select a spouse, child, accountant, lawyer or other trusted advisor.

The issue: Former president Hussein-Obama, whose middle name we’re not supposed to mention for reasons that remain unclear, especially since he steadfastly refuses to release the stack of documents that would clarify his pedigree far more significantly than the furor raised over the current president’s legally private tax returns, claimed that third-party payment plan revokes your Second Amendment rights. Experts agree it was an outrageous de facto illegal dictate from a decidedly anti-gun-rights office holder. B.H. Obama constantly denies his self-evident anti-rights position and acts.

According to Hussein-Obama shortly before leaving office in Dec. 2016, who instructed the Social Security Administration to act without an act of Congress -- assigning a designated payee means you are “adjudicated as a mental defective.” That is a condition in federal gun statute that makes you “a prohibited possessor” (18 USC §922) banned from gun ownership. Assigning a payee however is not an adjudication, and says nothing about your mental state. It does say something about the former White House occupant’s mental state.

Tens of thousands of decent hard-working Americans on social security would have summarily lost their constitutional right to keep and bear arms under this stroke of a pen. Any arms they owned would have become contraband, subject to confiscation. Purchase of new ones, or ammunition, would have been forbidden. Their names were to be entered into the centralized federal “NICS” database of people whose gun rights have been lost.

Congress acted to rescind the illegal Obama abomination soon after president Trump took office, prompting the political left to go berserk. Locally, channel 12 (NBC News) interviewed me about the decision to rescind Obama’s order. The station used one fair sentence from a 20-minute videotaping, then ran a straw poll asking, “Should crazy people be allowed to have guns?” and got a 97% “No” response. It is unclear whether that is fake news, phony news, prejudice, fantasy or something else. A clip of the segment cannot be found on their website. Thanks to Chris Cox of the NRA who researched the media quotes used in this piece.

"Rainbow Flag" Burning Protest Planned


LGBT community has and flaunts rights others are denied

Phoenix, AZ -- According to a source who was present, a group of activists meeting secretly in an undisclosed location are considering staging a national demonstration protesting the fact that the LGBT community can eat where ever it wants, and even behave offensively, but people discreetly exercising the civil and human right to keep and bear arms are discriminated against and banned from restaurants as if they have no rights at all.

“This is intolerable discrimination against an entire class of decent Americans,” said a spokeswoman for the group, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisals from a group, she claimed, has demonstrated violent hatred against people who don’t agree with them. “Why is it gays and sexually orientated persons (sic) get rights other civil Americans don’t have but should? Our rights, unlike theirs, are explicit in the Constitution.”

The flag burning is designed to point out that burning the U.S. flag has been determined to be free speech, so burning other “symbols of oppression” should carry the same protection, another person familiar with meeting said. The demonstration will be announced on social media and take place at a location "that cannot be ignored," the spokeswoman said.

What Did Russia Really Do?


Permanently bent out of shape from Hillary's loss

The lamestream media told you:

Russia hacked America's election to help Donald Trump win. We've been telling you this non-stop for six months without backup. We do not add to this line, we just keep repeating it without adding any significant illuminating detail besides conjecture that might affect your perception. Let's bring in our opinion panel. Hillary lost because Russia helped Donald Trump win. Repeat after me. We even have investigations going now.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

Russia MAY HAVE helped another outfit (we don't know yet) release secret democrat emails that revealed Hillary and her aides were cheating to win the election. If the secret emails were not leaked, Hillary's cheating might have given her the election.

By learning of her direct cheating, American's were able to make a more informed choice, and chose to reject her corrupt attempt to get herself and her scandal-ridden husband back into the White House.

The secret emails revealed the "news" media, including CNN and others, were giving her debate questions before presidential debates. Her campaign was even suggesting debate questions to them that would make Hillary look good and hurt her opponents. That's what happened.

In addition, it was exposed by the hacking, whose actual sources have not been even partially attributed, that the democrat's party, which is supposed to neutrally act in support of its candidates, worked directly to defeat Bernie Sanders, who had a brutally real chance of defeating the baggage-laden Clinton candidate, whose leading claim to fame apparently was the fact that she wasn't a man, apparently.

Rumors of homosexual behavior on her part were never proven, and no un-retouched photographs have ever surfaced. Her husband's illicit, immoral and apparently illegal sexual behavior and deviancy is well known and documented. Aside from impeachment, he has not been charged.

Despite the "news" media's incessant harping on Russia's possible hacking as a total excuse for Hillary's failure, it's obvious if Hillary had managed to keep all her dark criminal activity secret that likely could have made a difference. Americans and the media should be thankful it all came out, instead of voting in ignorance, but reporters were rooting for one side instead of reporting. They still are.

It was the dirty work turned up and leaked about Clinton's top staffer John Podesta, the democrat's party, its disgraced former leader Debbie Wasserman Schultz and others in Hillary's campaign and around her, including sexual pervert Anthony Weiner, Hillary's top advisor Huma Abiden's husband, that brought on Hillary's defeat, among other factors. Left-wing operatives could not be reached for comment.

A Page Nine reader makes this very important point: No democrat has denied the truth of the hacked material. (-Sleuth)

Read what people are saying about Page Nine, or tell Alan yourself.

See the archives below, or click through to an index of Page Nine posts at

About the Author

  • Freelance writer Alan Korwin is a founder and past president of the Arizona Book Publishing Association. With his wife Cheryl he operates Bloomfield Press, the largest producer and distributor of gun-law books in the country. Here writing as "The Uninvited Ombudsman," Alan covers the day's stories as they ought to read. Read more.

Recent Comments

Read the last 100 comments on one handy page here!