Among the plethora of inane and predictable reactions to President Obama's speech unveiling executive actions on gun regulation was a diamond-studded piece of dickery from Speaker of the House Paul Ryan in which he called stemming the tide of 30,000 annual deaths a "distraction." Aside from the misplaced priorities he demonstrated by announcing yet another bill to defund Obamacare at the same press conference, Ryan rolled out a claim that might come as a surprise to some, including Paul Ryan: there is no "gun show loophole":
"There isn't a loophole. This is a distraction. The President clearly does not respect the Second Amendment rights for law abiding Americans."
At Wednesday's White House daily briefing, Press Secretary Josh Earnest busted Ryan over this claim, reminding reporters what the congressman said about the loophole in 2013:
One of those common-sense steps is closing the gun show loophole, something that, in 2013, Speaker Ryan described as “obvious and very reasonable.” But I did note that in his news conference today, he said “there isn't a loophole.” So, as confusing as his declaration about a distraction is, it's a quite alarming reversal of opinion for him to say that the gun show loopholes are a reasonable issue and it's “obvious that it should be addressed,” and now three years later, he’s denying that it even exists.
That's a nice try at "gotcha" there, Josh, but what did Ryan really say in 2013? I bet there's some context Earnest left out:
"I think we need to find out how to close these loopholes, and do it in such a way that we don't infringe on people's Second Amendment rights."
"...I think that's a very reasonable problem -- I think that's obvious, and I think we should look into how to do that."
Okay, technically, he said exactly what Earnest said he said, but those commie reporters were probably putting thoughts in his head, leading the witness. It's not as if Paul Ryan thought up this "loophole" nonsense by himself, and thought it up so many years ago that he has to weirdly drum his fingers on the table just to recall when, exactly, that was, is it?
"You know, there is a loophole here, and I think we should address it."
How hipster of him, thinking about closing the gun show loophole before it was cool, and before it stopped ever having existed.
Okay, fine, wait, give me a minute. Um, what about the Second Amendment, though? Paul Ryan said that Obama "clearly does not respect the Second Amendment rights for law abiding Americans" because he believes in this fictitious "gun show loophole," so show me where Paul Ryan ever made a clear distinction between things that actually do encroach on the Second Amendment and the gun show loophole, by name, using those exact words. And giving a blonde lady hope in the process.
I've always said background checks, it depends on where you're going. You're talking about private sales, you're talking about things that do end up encroaching on the second amendment? Or gun show loopholes and things like that?
Oh, no. You know what this means, don't you? Paul Ryan has no choice but to impeach Paul Ryan. He clearly does not respect the Second Amendment rights for law abiding Americans.