These leaked emails prove Democrats have a sinister plan in store for America

It’s no secret the radical Left wants to transform America. They despise every one of our founding principles.

And these leaked emails prove Democrats have a sinister plan in store for America.

Democrats have proven over the years that they are willing to sacrifice any and every freedom Americans enjoy if it means advancing their agenda.

It’s gotten to the point where they will use the power of government to suppress information that doesn’t back up their worldview.

We saw it with lockdowns and mandates during the COVID-19 pandemic, and we just now found out about Joe Biden’s collusion with the FBI to gain power in 2020.

But one freedom the Democrats have been hellbent on curbing is the right to bear arms guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution – and now their dirty plot is being exposed.

A report says that a key federal agency worked with people who want stricter gun laws to hide the results of a study that showed law-abiding gun owners use their guns to protect themselves millions of times a year.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) took out a reference to a study it had paid for after people who want stricter gun laws said it made it harder to pass new laws. The pro-Second Amendment website The Reload said that the White House and the powerful Democratic senator from Illinois, Dick Durbin, helped set up a series of meetings where gun control supporters persuaded the agency to hide the study.

“[T]hat 2.5 Million number needs to be killed, buried, dug up, killed again and buried again,” Mark Bryant, head of the Gun Violence Archive, wrote to CDC officials after a meeting. “It is highly misleading, is used out of context and I honestly believe it has zero value – even as an outlier point in honest DGU discussions.”

The Reload got a few emails, like Bryant’s, that show how the study by Gary Kleck, a professor of criminology at Florida State University, made gun control advocates angry. That study was one of several that the CDC looked at about using guns for self-defense. Kleck’s results were at the high end of estimates of how many times legal gun owners have used their guns to protect themselves.

Bryant said that Kleck’s estimate was “misinformation” and that it shouldn’t be on the CDC’s website because gun-rights supporters were using it to support their arguments about the Second Amendment.

At first, the CDC stood by the study and put it on its website under “Fast Facts: Firearm Violence Prevention.” But after a virtual meeting with gun control supporters on September 15, 2021, the agency promised them that the section would be changed in 2022, according to an email The Reload got on December 10, 2021.

“We are planning to update the fact sheet in early 2022 after the release of some new data,” Beth Reimels, associate director for policy, partnerships, and strategic communication at the CDC’s Division of Violence Prevention, wrote in the email. “We will also make some edits to the content we discussed that I think will address the concerns you and other partners have raised.”

In 2022, studies about using guns for self-defense were taken off the site.

“Estimates of defensive gun use vary depending on the questions asked, populations studied, timeframe, and other factors related to study design,” the site now states. “Given the wide variability in estimates, additional research is necessary to understand defensive gun use prevalence, frequency, circumstances, and outcomes.”

The Reload asked the CDC to comment on the decision, but they didn’t answer. Durbin spokeswoman Emily Hampsten told the site her boss’s only involvement was “simply connecting” “stakeholder organizations” with a federal agency.

Kleck said that the decision was “blatant censorship” that was made to change the way people talked about gun rights.

“You can’t understand any significant aspects of the gun-control debate once you eliminate defensive gun use,” said Kleck, professor emeritus at Florida State University’s College of Criminology and Criminal Justice.

“It becomes inexplicable why so many Americans oppose otherwise perfectly reasonable gun-control measurements. It’s because they think it’s going to lead to prohibition, and they won’t have a gun for self-defense.”

“It’s not complicated,” added Kleck, who said it was the latest example of how the CDC has become politicized.

The Trace, a pro-gun control site that questioned Kleck’s scholarship, was the first to report that the CDC had decided to get rid of all estimates on defensive gun use. The emails that The Reload talked about were found because the California Rifle & Pistol Association used the Freedom of Information Act to get them.

Bryant’s group is one of many that support gun control and have used a broad definition of “mass shootings” to make them seem like they happen all the time in the U.S. According to their definition, a mass shooting is any time four or more people are hurt or killed in a shooting.

By that measure, there are 10 times as many mass shootings as the more common definition, which says that at least four people have to die.

But when it comes to defining defensive gun use, Gun Violence Archive uses very conservative criteria and only counts incidents that are reported in the news or by police. Gun Violence Archive estimates that there are less than 2,000 cases of defensive gun use each year, based on how they measure it.

In response to a question from the Trace, which it never sent, the CDC tried to explain why it took defensive gun use statistics off its fact sheet. In it, the CDC said the fact that the range of estimates was so vast that including them might “raise more questions than it answered.”

But Americans know the real reason – any information that cuts against the liberal narrative is erased and anyone cutting against their agenda is censored.

Stay tuned to DC Daily Jurnal.

Email Newsletter

Sign Up for our Newsletter

Enter your best address below to receive the latest cartoons and breaking news in your email inbox:
Please wait...
You are successfully subscribed!
There was an error with subscription attempt.