“Disappearing” David Codrea

“Here today, gone tomorrow.”

ScreenHunter_03 Mar. 04 09.40

ScreenHunter_01 Mar. 06 08.43

As David says, KABA is Gottlieb’s site. He can do what he wants with it. But it’s also supposed to be a gun news site — which Gottlieb pledged not to nerf when he bought it.

The banned “Regrettable Announcement” was, of course, David’s post about leaving JPFO over … KABA’s banning of stories.

We now know that news is not news in the KABA world if it mentions Mike Vanderboegh. In the future will news not be news to KABA if it’s about or written by David Codrea? Only time will tell. But “disappearing” two of the most prominent figures in the gun-rights movement is … well, you know.

And war is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
We have always been at war with Eastasia
And Big Brother loves us.


22 thoughts on ““Disappearing” David Codrea”

  1. Now more than ever, I eagerly anticipate Mr. Gottlieb’s guest post providing a clear up-front point-by-point clarification of this whole silly misunderstanding.

    I’ll just grab a beer or 10 while I wait. …and maybe that flask of Everclear from my cleaning kit. …and the other one from my owie kit. Sure am glad it’s the weekend.



  2. I’ve read Mike V’s stuff and he’s on the lunatic fringe. You are known by the company you keep; in my viewpoint, AG is trying not to associate with people who advocate breaking the law and killing cops. (Who else would you be shooting?) AG’s credibility and the reputation of his organizations would be tainted. Codrea, in attempting to ‘purify’ the gun rights movement, splinters it instead.

    1. So, David B, if I understand correctly you believe that a gun-news aggregator (which KABA is) should not print news or commentary about someone — just because the person is, or may be, on the lunatic fringe?

      And furthermore, you believe David deserves to be “disappeared” after the fact from KABA because he wrote news or commentary about someone who is, or may be, on the lunatic fringe?

  3. David B,
    By all means, explain what the proper, non-lunatic, fringe-less way is to protect one’s Rights when force is used to impose upon them. & perhaps you can explain why it’s obligatory to obey a law that intrudes upon Rights clearly enumerated in the constitution?

    Advocating use of force to protect one’s self, one’s property & one’s Rights is not the lunatic fringe – it’s American.

    Gottlieb’s credibility & the reputation of his organizations are already tainted. He had done some good work in the past involving court cases, but his willingness to strike a deal (Manchin-Toomey) made him untrustworthy. His barring mention of anyone that’s pro-gun because he has personal issues with them further erodes that trust. Finally, KABA has always been a news aggregator. I knew the fellow that got KABA off the ground & ran it successfully for ages. It would be very surprising if he didn’t get assurances from Gottlieb that the independent content would not be altered after Gottlieb took over. Driving away one of the most dedicated writers because of a personal dislike of someone that is relevant to the pro-gunowner movement is not only a betrayal of the premise of KABA, but it cements the notion that Gottlieb is a petty, vindictive person whom trust is not to be bestowed upon.

    So to be clear, it seems that Gottlieb is acting like an ass, and it may not be merely an act. I’m fighting my cynical nature by not asking if you’re on the payroll of Gottlieb or Bloomberg, but it does seem that the defenders of a lot of gun groups that do questionable things are either employed by said gun groups, or by folks that prefer to have “reasonable” people that they can strike a deal with instead of those “lunatics” on the “fringe” that insist upon their Rights being respected.

    1. We all like to think that the Constitution is the Supreme Law of the Land and that when politicians recite their oaths and swear allegiance to the Grand Old Flag that they mean it. In reality, the Constituton, which united the states, has been replaced with a federal form of government where the states bow to centralized power. (Special thanks to Abe Lincoln for that.) To say that the Constitution is the SLOTL is not facing the reality that it’s been long ago replaced by whatever laws Congress or its bureaucracies enact and enforce. I don’t like it, but it is what it is. To advocate force and killing to return the country back to 1789 is living in the land of the delusional.

      1. Even Josiah returned to the Law and Israel prospered when it was so, 2 Kings 22.

        Obviously you lack the faith it takes to do simple demonstrations of faith and obey the Law regardless of the faintness of heart.

        “The People-the People are the rightful masters of congress and the courts. Not to overthrow the Constitution but those men who pervert it.”
        Abraham Lincoln

        Maybe you don’t know Lincoln as well as you should. You must be speaking of the preposterous blather of Grant and others who believe that signing onto the Republic gave up the right to resist tyranny in any way it needs be resisted. The Framers never wrote such a comment in any of the formations documents, the right has never been surrendered.

        Only those who lack the mental fortitude and the sureness of understanding waver in their resolve and inability to find a spine.

        Of course this is just an observation of course.

      1. “Regarding Gottlieb, it’s his playground. Play nice or go home.”

        Are you aware that, when David Codrea stayed with JPFO after the sellout, it with the explicit agreement from Gottlieb that his work would not be censored, even if Gottlieb disagreed with it?

        1. Why yes, yes I am, but things change Claire. It’s like when you vow in marriage “Till death do us part.” If one spouse becomes an adultering, abusive, psychotic, homicidal maniac, there are grounds for divorce. Of course, I’m using hyperbole as that’s not what happened here (though some people suspected otherwise).
          [This is a funny reference to the Doeg article in case you missed it.] Things change. Business conditions change. Visions and purposes change. Life changes.

          Gottlieb isn’t an angel (none of us are), but if gun rights are this important to you, why not circle the wagons against MDA or Everytown rather than trying to scalp one of the wagon leaders?

          1. “Gottlieb isn’t an angel (none of us are), but if gun rights are this important to you, why not circle the wagons against MDA or Everytown rather than trying to scalp one of the wagon leaders?”

            You should ask Gottlieb that same question — not only regarding his “scalping” of Mike and David, but also regarding his failure to circle the wagons against the victim disarmers (e.g. Gottlieb’s support for Manchin-Toomey; Gottlieb’s dividing the forces so I-594 passed more easily).

          2. David B — I’d also like to hear how you think David Codrea changed (“adultering, abusive, etc.”) in the six months since he and Gottlieb agreed not to censor David’s work.

            I don’t know David well, but I’ve known him a long time and have worked with him and he’s the same person, the same writer, the same highly principled individual I’ve always known. His relationship with Mike Vanderboegh is longstanding (after all, they broke the Fast & Furious story together) and his reporting on Mike’s separate activities is no different now than it has been in the past.

            So please explain to me: In what way did David’s behavior become so awful in the six months after the JPFO sale that Gottlieb was driven, out of desperation, to ban his work from KABA?

      2. I think it belongs to the members else it has become a tyranny and the one who owns the toys rules the sand box, how childish….

        Nice comment, we know them by their works, in this case the expression from the heart. God is not a respecter of persons, I am quite content to take His lead.

        Of course using His Title is not using His Name so I would expect that anyone who is reasonable not to grasp at straws and claim another irrational position but then again expectations sometimes are not fulfilled….

  4. @Claire–Manchin-Toomey, at least to my eyes, was a clever play by Gottlieb. Despite giving Dems a lot of what they wanted, they refused to pass it. It allows AG to point back to it and say, “See, we are trying to cooperate.” It’s smoke and mirrors; it’s ripping a play from the Dems own handbook. It’s like the Dems crafting a bill eliminating all taxes with a small rider that forces all women to have an abortion at least once in their life. If a Republican president vetoed the bill, the focus would be on how the pres is against the economy, unpatriotic, and sold us out to China. Manchin was a high-stakes bluff and AG won.

  5. @Claire–Need I remind you of Codrea’s associations? He wrote a glowing introduction to Mike Detty’s “Guns Across the Border.” For you gentle readers who have not yet come across this book, it details how Detty profited by breaking the law by selling guns that ended up fueling violence in Mexico. He closely worked with the ATF which all gun writers (especially Codrea) are supposed to hate. Detty’s own issues with promiscuity and grousing about how little he made by breaking the law were ignored by Codrea. Last time I checked, Gottlieb hasn’t written glowing endorsements of this type of behavior.
    To continue with my Old West/Pioneer analogy, Codrea would support selling whiskey and trading guns with the Indians if a corrupt fort commander said it was ok. He may not lead the pack mules, but he sure did look the other way. Your thoughts?

    1. “Your thoughts?”

      My thoughts are that you’re carefully failing to answer my questions (or anybody else’s). For instance, you haven’t addressed the very large question of how David Codrea’s writing has changed so drastically in the six months since Gottlieb promised not to censor it.

      1. David B — From the beginning you haven’t actually been addressing the issues raised in the post. You appear to be here only to express personal animus toward David and Mike and to justify anything Gottlieb does. Fine. You’re entitled to your opinions. But I’m going to ask you to stick to the issues raised in the post if you want real discussion.

  6. I have no idea why AG changed his mind. I am not defending Gottlieb or attacking Codrea. Rather, I am trying to highlight a greater point that tempering your disagreement with AG for the advancement of the overall cause would better serve gun owners.

    1. Wake me up when Alan Gottlieb “tempers” any of the unpleasant things he’s done to gun owners and to gun-rights activists who don’t happen to agree with him.

      Until then, you’re just proving yourself to be a troll with an agenda — and not as amusing a troll as you appear to imagine. Stay on topic.

  7. I have no personal animus towards anybody! Lol. In all my comments, I tried to use humor rather than anger to advance my points and further the discussion. πŸ™‚

  8. David B,
    I agree you’re humorous. Saying that Gottlieb’s support of Manchin-Toomey was a bluff designed to give the anti-gunowners bad press? Now that right there is funny. Ever think of going to work for hollywood? I mean, as sincere as you make that retcon sound I’m sure they could use you on A Guiding Light or maybe even a Marvel production. πŸ™‚

    Gottlieb is cool with universal background checks. He thought he could wrangle some tidbits that he wanted in exchange. Schumer took away one of the 40 glass beads & Gottlieb backed off. That’s as charitable as I can be in describing what happened with Manchin-Toomey.

    I’d hope Codrea would sell guns & whiskey to the Indians. Or did you come here to argue that some folks should be denied the Right to weapons because of their ethnicity?

    Wagon leader you say? See that’s another divide. I don’t want no leader. I don’t need no stinkin leader. or liter (I prefer pints, as the Good Lord intended). A representative at most, but never a leader. & Gottlieb doesn’t seem to be that great a rep, so I don’t see how he’s earned any sort of promotion.

    To try to keep it short (pun intended), Gottlieb’s actions proved him to be untrustworthy. If KABA was his personal site then fine, cool, whatevs. But KABA was and is supposed to be a clearinghouse of gun related info, not a place where Gottlieb doles out & with holds links based on his liking someone or not.

    Gottlieb has different goals than I do. His methods should be beneath him (despite his vertical challenges). He’s just not trustworthy. I’d prefer things were different, but until he admits he was in the wrong and tries to make amends for his errors then there’s not going to be a big happy group hug as we prepare to take on the anti-gunowners.

    btw, did I mention how petty he was about all this? Do mention that next time y’all talk πŸ™‚

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *