The other day I wrote about a complaint filed with the Federal Elections Commission against Giffords PAC. They are accused of violating FEC joint fundraising rules in their efforts to raise money for their PAC and certain anti-gun Democrats in combined solicitations.
Today’s email brings a response from Giffords.
It is so utterly typical. Rather than accepting that they crossed the line, they are claiming victimhood saying they are being attacked by the “gun lobby”.
The gun lobby is coming after us.
This week, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) — one of the largest gun lobbies in the country — filed a complaint with the FEC against GIFFORDS….
We cannot let their attacks go unanswered. What GIFFORDS needs right now is our most dedicated supporters stepping up to help fight back.
Will you please rush a donation to help us beat back the gun lobby and defeattheir extremist candidates everywhere?
Let me simplify this argument.
How dare that evil gun lobby insist we adhere to the rules! We are the victims here. We only did it for the “greater good”. Oh, and we need you rubes to send us more money.
The gun control industry and their assorted organizations have long targeted pro-rights firearms-related organizations and their political activities on behalf of pro-rights candidates. For example, the Cult of Personality known as Giffords filed a complaint in 2019 with the Federal Elections Commission against the NRA alleging illegal campaign coordination and excessive contributions. They later sued the NRA directly in a case that is still pending. That case was filed in 2025 and they were represented by the Campaign Legal Center Action. If the board and their activities are any indication, they are your typical leftist group that targets conservatives and non-RINO Republicans despite the claim of being non-partisan.
Thus, it was with great pleasure that I read today that the National Shooting Sports Foundation has filed a complaint against Giffords PAC with the Federal Elections Commission. Their complaint alleges Giffords PAC and their allies have been skirting the FEC’s joint fundraising rules. The campaigns involved are all anti-rights Democrats including U.S. Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.), Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), Gov. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.), Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Gov. Mikie Sherrill (D-N.J.), Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Gov. Roy Cooper (D-N.C.) and Gov. Katie Hobbs (D-Ariz.).
From the NSSF press release:
“Giffords PAC has been playing fast and loose with how they are soliciting funds to support themselves and their preferred gun control candidates for elected office,” said Lawrence G. Keane, NSSF’s Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “The FEC’s joint fundraising rules are clear but Giffords ignores them because they believe they are above accountability. Their fundraising misleads consumers by falsely claiming these joint fundraising solicitations are not authorized by any candidates or their campaign committees. Giffords PAC and these candidates are knowingly ignoring mandatory FEC disclosure requirements.”
Giffords PAC sent fundraising emails in partnership with preferred federal and gubernatorial candidates for office that ask potential donors to “split a donation between my campaign and Giffords PAC…” yet it has failed to properly follow the required FEC joint fundraising procedures. FEC regulations require the appointment of a joint fundraising representative or formation of a joint fundraising committee with the associated campaigns, yet Giffords PAC’s most recent FEC Statement of Organization does not reflect its involvement in any joint fundraising efforts.
Further, these emails soliciting donations stated they were “Paid For By Giffords PAC” and “not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.” However, the joint fundraising emails are obviously authorized by candidates. In fact, the emails are signed by candidates and jointly solicit contributions for the campaigns. Those email solicitations sent donors to an ActBlue website that asked donors to support candidates and Giffords antigun agenda. FEC regulations require that mass mailings of 500 or more substantially similar communications include appropriate disclosures, however Giffords PAC has not included appropriate joint fundraising disclosures in either their emails or ActBlue contribution pages, and falsely claim that these communications are not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee.
Turnabout is fair play. I’m pleased to see the pro-rights side finally taking action about the dubious activities of the gun control industry and their allies.
You can read the full complaint here. It does give an item by item accounting of their illegal joint fundraising activities.
As a final aside, I remember when Mark Kelly was running for the US Senate. Out of the blue I started getting campaign solicitations asking for donations for his campaign. Strangely enough they were all sent to me using a nickname I never use but had used to sign up on the Giffords website. I’m sure there was no coordination between the organization named for Kelly’s wife of which he was a co-founder and his campaign (wink-wink). Right.
Prof. Kerr assumed the presidency of AUB during the midst of the Lebanese Civil War which went from 1975 until 1990. His death in January 1984 came less than a year after the bombing of the US Embassy in Beirut and the bombing of the US Marine Barracks. To say the situation in Lebanon was tenuous for anyone as well as violent would be an understatement. As a prominent American, Prof. Kerr was undoubtedly a target.
ORDERED, that judgment be entered in favor of the plaintiffs against defendants the Islamic Republic of Iran and its Ministry of Information and Security, jointly and severally, for compensatory damages as follows: Ann Z. Kerr, as executrix of the Estate of Malcolm H. Kerr: $8,025,296.00 Ann Z. Kerr: $10,000,000.00 Susan (Kerr) Van de Ven: $3,000,000.00 John M. Kerr: $3,000,000.00 Stephen D. Kerr: $3,000,000.00 Andrew S. Kerr: $3,000,000.00 Dorothy (Kerr) Jessup: $1,500,000.00 Susan Miller Muhammad, as executrix of the Estate of Marion Kerr Miller: $1,500,000.00 It is FURTHER ORDERED, that the Clerks of Court forthwith enter judgments in accordance with the foregoing; and it is
FURTHER ORDERED, that plaintiffs may arrange for this Decision and Order to be translated into Farsi and, at plaintiffs request, the Clerk’s Office shall cause a copy of the translated Decision and Order to be transmitted to the U.S. Department of State for service upon defendants through diplomatic channels.
Steve Kerr later said he didn’t need revenge nor closure but only went along with the lawsuit as it was important to his family. That indeed may be the case but it was a public acknowledgement that his father’s murder was an act of political violence. In my opinion, political violence, with or without firearms, is a wholly different animal than “gun violence” (sic).
Circling back to the post by Kerr and Giffords PAC, disarming responsible Americans in the face of attacks by Islamic terrorists on a Jewish pre-school in Michigan and an Army ROTC class at Old Dominion University is not only bad policy but dangerous. It was only due to armed private security at the pre-school that no child was hurt. As to ODU, how many more laws could have averted that attack. The killer was a prohibited person, was illegally in possession of a firearm that had been previously stolen, and was in a gun-free zone.
Steve Kerr is free to rail against “gun violence” (sic) all he wants. However, to say he lost his father to “gun violence” is disingenuous at the best and dishonest in light of the facts.
I received an email yesterday from Peter Ambler who is the executive director of that cult of personality known as Giffords. His email said they inundated you with emails on a regular basis in the hopes you’d kick in a few bucks. I was shocked by this honest admission.
John –
We send a lot of emails. No doubt about it. You probably get as many messages from us as you do from members of your family. There’s a reason for that.
Can we explain?
The truth is, the overwhelming majority of the donations we receive come from lots and lots and lots of people giving small amounts of money. People of all backgrounds and in all communities chipping in 5, 10, 20 bucks because we all share one goal: changing our gun laws and saving lives.
And most of those donations? They come in response to emails like this one. So now you can see why they are so important… and why we have to ask:
Can you chip in $3 to Giffords PAC as part of our emergency 72-hour fundraising drive? It ends tomorrow at midnight. So this is important.
Gabby, Mark, and everyone at Giffords are extraordinarily proud of the way we raise our money here. Not just because it keeps us in the fight against the gun lobby, but because so many people stepping up to take ownership of our country’s future on this issue is how we create change.
All my best,
Peter Ambler
Executive Director, Giffords
I can’t say this email is completely honest because I know they’ve received many five and six figure donations. In their latest report with the Federal Elections Commission they reported large donations from people like Jon Shirley ($30,000), former president of Microsoft, and Marcy Carsey ($25,000), the Hollywood producer. Going back even further you find donations from Michael Bloomberg ($250,000) and Connie Ballmer ($250,000), wife of former Microsoft CEO and LA Clippers owner. I will give Ambler this that the trend is now towards unitemized donations aka small ones as opposed to large donations that the FEC requires to be identified as to the donor and amount.
Nothing says cult of personality quite like being asked to sign a “birthday card” for the namesake of a gun prohibitionist organization. I don’t ever seem to remember the NRA asking me to sign a birthday card for Wayne LaPierre nor the Second Amendment Foundation asking me to sign a birthday card for Alan Gottlieb. Hell, even the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence (sic) doesn’t ask people to sign a birthday card for Joshua Horwitz.
When all your gun control proposals do nothing to stop the criminal misuse of a firearm, you have to resort to something. In this case, it is playing on the cult of personality that is being built around the tragic shooting of Gabby Giffords and murder of innocents. Never mind that the murderer passed a FBI background check to purchase his firearm and that the Democratic sheriff of Pima County, AZ looked the other way more than once about his behavior.
It’s just, I don’t know, kinda pathetic.
All that is to say, Gabby loves receiving those notes of support. And
since tomorrow is her birthday, we were hoping you can sign a card we
created for her before the big day. What do you think?
First there was the National Council to Control Handguns which became Handgun Control, Inc. for the next 20 years. Eventually this morphed into the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence. In making this name change in 2000, Handgun Control, Inc. did two things. This helped to soften their image from control to merely prevention. Just as importantly, by deciding to rename the organization after Jim and Sarah Brady, HCI was aiming to make sympathetic figures the face of gun control.
Now that the Bradys have passed away, gun control needs to regain its cult of personality. Mike Bloomberg is not sympathetic nor is home-wrecking, socially and politically ambitious Shannon Watts. However, Gabby Giffords does make a sympathetic figure.
Playing up this cult of personality was the announcement today that Americans for Responsible Solutions will now just be called Giffords. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (sic) which used to be known as the Legal Center Against Violence will now be the Giffords Law Center. Finally, their PAC will be known as Giffords PAC. Giffords is also now subtitled, “Courage to fight gun violence.”(sic)
“Addressing a problem that almost took my life will be the cause of my life,” said Congresswoman Gabby Giffords upon the announcement of her namesake gun violence prevention organization. “I’ve seen great courage when my life was on the line. But I’ve also seen great courage as we’ve fought to save lives from gun violence. Every day I meet brave Americans who are standing with me in the fight for a safer future—from law enforcement officers and military veterans, to parents, community leaders, and concerned voters. When we stand together, stand up for our children, and use the full power of our voices and votes, I know that we can make change happen.”
“When people think of Gabby, they think of courage, determination, and grit—and it’s exactly those characteristics Americans need to channel in order for us to save lives from gun violence and make our communities safer,” said Captain Mark Kelly, co-founder of Giffords. “When Gabby and I began this journey, we knew this wouldn’t be an easy fight. The gun lobby has been selling a message of fear to the American public for years. It’s used its money to scare lawmakers into following its extreme ideology—and it’s made talking about guns culturally divisive, despite the fact that the majority of gun owners support stronger gun laws. A safer America requires changing that dynamic. We need more people to show the courage to stand up for what’s right and we need more elected officials to show the courage to take action.”
It is probably a smart move on the part of these gun prohibitionists to reemphasize Gabby Giffords as the face of their organization. She is a sympathetic (and pathetic) figure who survived an assassination attempt in the prime of her life and seems to have regained some of what she lost from her injuries.
With the renaming of the organization, the image of Gabby Giffords will always be more important than the reality. The image is that of the courageous survivor who fought back and is now leading the fight against “gun violence” (sic). The reality is that we don’t really know what level of mental capacity she retains given her servere brain injuries and that she very well could be more of a puppet than an actual leader. As for her husband Mark Kelly, the image he wants the world to see is that of a devoted husband caring for his grievously wounded spouse and seeking to protect others from what happened to her. However, when I look at the reality of today’s Mark Kelly, words like “puppet master”, “leech”, and the male equivalent of “gold digger” come to mind. Obviously, I don’t think much of him as he seems to have abandoned the oath he took as an officer to support and defend the Constitution in favor of political and monetary gains.
It will be interesting to how well gun control uses the cult of personality to make political gains. Time will tell.
by 
