Tuesday, February 9, 2016

Guess Which Gun Grabbers Actually OWN STOCK In Gun Companies?




Guess Which Gun Grabbers Actually OWN STOCK In Gun Companies?

Image result for GUESS WHICH GUN GRABBERS HAVE STOCK IN GUN COMPANIESPresident Obama and gun control advocates may want to limit your right to purchase firearms, but they are not opposed to owning stock in gun and ammo manufacturers.
An investigation by Reuters revealed that Obama and other anti-gun Democrats have money invested in funds that involve gun stocks.
President Obama has $100,000 invested in a $16 billion Illinois state pension plan from his days in the state senate. That $16 billion plan has $5 million invested directly in several gun and ammo makers, and it also includes a small-cap mutual fund with a $9.5 million stake in Smith & Wesson, the news service reported.
But it’s not simply gun control advocates from the Illinois state legislature who have money invested in gun and ammo stocks. US Senator Dick Durbin (D-Illinois), a leading advocate of gun control, has $115,000 invested in an S Fund through the federal Thrift Savings Plan that involves stock in gun companies. The S Fund lets members of Congress invest in mutual funds such as the First Eagle Global Fund, which has $196.9 million worth of stock in ammo and gun maker Vista Outdoor.
Image result for GUESS WHICH GUN GRABBERS HAVE STOCK IN GUN COMPANIES
Image source: flickr
Former US Congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy (D-New York), a relentless gun control crusader when she was in office, owned between $3,003 and $45,000 in exchange traded funds with stakes in gun and ammo makers, Reuters reported. McCarthy also invested between $2,002 and $30,000 in college savings plans for her grandchildren that involved firearms stocks.
Business is Booming
Gun ownership has soared under Obama’s presidency and has been further propelled in recent months in response to a series of mass shootings.
Do You Know The Best Way To Hide Your Guns?
Smith & Wesson’s stock value increased by 80 percent between September 2014 and September 2015, Market Madhouse reported. During the same period, applications for background checks increased by 20 percent, and observers credited the increase to louder demands for gun control.
“The politics of gun control could stay in the headlines, which we believe could lead to a record year (for gun stocks),” Chris Krueger, a senior research analyst at Lake Street Capital, wrote to investors in January.
Gun sales increased again after President Obama announced plans to expand background checks and increase licensing requirements for firearms dealers in the wake of last year’s San Bernardino (California) massacre.
The week of December 20 saw the second highest level of firearms background checks since 1998, the FBI reported.
Gun control demands have prompted firearms and ammo makers to ramp up production, Reuters reported. Vista Outdoor’s ammunition factories have been operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week for the past two years, the company’s chief financial officer, Stephen Nolan, revealed in November.
Ruger is boosting its inventory in expectation of even heavier demands this year. The company’s CEO, Mike Fifer, is afraid that demand for his products will exceed supply as it did after Obama was first elected.
“Orders at every level of the distribution channel exploded” in the weeks after Obama’s first presidential election in 2008, Fifer said, “and continued to do so for months afterward.”
What is your reaction to Obama and other gun control advocates owning stock in firearm companies? Share your thoughts in the section below:
There’s A Trick To Navigating Federal And State Gun Regulations. Read More Here.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Decision day has arrived for Clinton and her illegal activities.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/clinton-speeches-218969

The time has come for Hillary to admit she's a crook. She deliberately lied about everything because she and John Kerry desired to get rid of Ambassador Stevens and the rest of them by any means publicly available.

It was the height of hypocrisy for Hillary Clinton to not be reminding herself that such idle gossip would be disastrous to the intelligence community. Ruining people was one thing, sabotaging national security where a slew of diplomats get killed is something else all together.

She knew the risks of passing around classified information and did absolutely nothing to stop it. John Kerry told her everything she was discussing is classified, and that if any of it ever got out that would be the end of their career.

There are countless hordes banging at the gates for Hillary Clinton to be sent to the prison camps for treason with not a whole lot pushing against that result except this station.

Hillary is older but not senile. She knows what she did was very illegal, and should not have happened save the fact she cannot stand ambassador Chris Stevens. Hillary needs to point across the table now at John Kerry in the court room and admit that he put her up to this.

Kerry was already dead set on carrying out illegal cabal operations in Lybia which cost a lot of people their lives and positions, which none are even aware of. Both Hillary Clinton and John Kerry were tremendously foolish to think they wouldn't get caught once classified information was passed.

Each of them need to admit their guilt, and stop acting like Obama had any part of this so things go smoothly. After Obama's staff contacted Hillary's private e-mail eighteen times, I'm sure he recognized they were doing something outrageous.

And just because he contacted Hillary's private email, does not ever indicate he was passing those emails around. In all likelihood they never knew anything of the top secret status of what Clinton had gotten herself into. In spite of it all, Clinton's attorney claims Obama set this up.

But this is easy to prove as perjury, since the most anyone can see from the evidence is Obama's staff sent supplies to Lybia for diplomacy purposes. Did he need to look into this matter further, so the State Department did not refuse to send aid when aid was requested?

Yes, he did but that sabotage lies squarely on Clinton and Kerry's shoulders. The White House cannot control or micro manage what their own State Department does, especially when it is as serious as that. Right after this mess broke out, Clinton was removed and resigned so we know where to place the real blame.

Hillary Clinton needs to state on the record that the White House had little to do with any of it. She needs to openly proclaim that John Kerry partly put her up to this, and Kerry needs to admit the entire affair was a pitiful mistake. Then Clinton will be shown leniency by the court, receive some time in a correctional facility and be treated justly.

Kerry then needs to resign from politics and go into a prison cell for at least a year rather than be sent to a prisoner camp.

Anonymous said...

For a corporate CEO, Obama has a long rap sheet.
The indefensible items of treason better be punished.

From my viewpoint everything associated with him is
unethical, therefore he should expect to have to forfeit
some or all of his anticipated shared profits, bonuses,
predicted windfalls or any stolen or 'abandoned' treasure.

I told him via email that's how we're going to be able
to afford to re-pipe the nations' infrastructure,
if clearing the system of years of foul matter isn't enough.

He better watch out for Soros though, because he's in it too,
planning what I wonder?
Maybe they're both up to something?

I'd like to see his 'proceeds' confiscated and shared
with 'we the people'.