Trump OCC Gives Customers New Tools to Hold Banks Accountable for Anti-Gun Discrimination.

By Larry Keane

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is giving bank customers, including firearm industry members, a clearer path to document politicized de-banking and enter those concerns into the regulatory record. The move is a welcome development to further implement President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14331, “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” and marks another needed step toward ending the practice of denying lawful businesses access to essential financial services because “woke” banks disfavor the firearm industry.

NSSF has long reported on banks using vague “reputational risk” excuses and woke boardroom gun control policies to choke off access to accounts, loans, credit, payment processing and other essential financial services. That discrimination hit lawful, highly regulated businesses whose only offense was serving Americans who choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

President Trump’s order states banking decisions must be based on individualized, objective and risk-based analysis, not politics, ideology or hostility toward lawful business activity. The order specifically cited the former Obama administration-era Operation Choke Point as a “well-documented and systemic” effort by federal regulators to pressure banks away from serving lawful industries that are disfavored by the political left…like the firearm industry.

That insidious practice was discontinued under President Trump’s first term but returned anew in a privatized form under former President Joe Biden.

The OCC’s new public comment guidance, however, gives President Trump’s executive order practical force. The agency says bank customers and stakeholders can share de-banking experiences with the OCC and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and those complaints may be considered when the agency reviews bank licensing filings. They may also be considered during Community Reinvestment Act examinations.

Continue reading “”

Associated Press caught producing anti-gun advocacy

Lee Williams

Traditional journalism is pretty simple, really. If you’re writing about a complex issue, make sure to include all of the sides.

For example, most political stories usually involve two sides. A good reporter will include both sides in their fair and balanced story and then let the readers decide whom to believe. If the journalist only includes one side in their story, it becomes advocacy instead of journalism, which should be avoided.

No one should know this better than the Associated Press, which was founded in 1846—15 years before the start of the Civil War. During the AP’s vast 180-year history, they’ve had a bit of experience producing good journalism, at least until now it appears.

AP reporters Josh Funk and Claudia Lauer published a story Thursday titled: “Amtrak may make it easier to bring guns on its trains despite the alleged attempt on Trump’s life.”

Quite frankly, it needed a bit of work.

Their story only includes comments from one side, John Feinblatt, whom the reporters only identified as the “president of the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety.”

The AP reporters never mentioned that Feinblatt is also president of the Trace, which is paid to produce anti-gun propaganda, or that both anti-gun groups are funded by former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Certainly, these omissions would have helped Funk’s and Lauer’s readers put Feinblatt’s comments into better context.

Feinblatt, of course, used the story to further erode our Second Amendment rights.

“Just days after a man took an Amtrak train to Washington with a shotgun and pistol and tried to assassinate the president and other federal officials, the Trump Administration is trying to open the floodgates for firearms on every Amtrak route, while also moving to hollow out the agency responsible for enforcing gun laws and preventing gun trafficking. This will only make Americans less safe and Congress must step in before the next tragedy,” the AP quoted him as saying.

A pro-gun voice could have pointed out Feinblatt’s dual anti-gun roles, or that millions of riders have safely carried firearms aboard Amtrak for years, or that Congress has far more important things to occupy its time than turning trains into yet another anti-gun zone.

Funk, who was evidently the lead reporter, did not return emails seeking to interview him about his story. Unfortunately, that was expected, since the AP is not nearly what it used to be.

Since the mid-19th century, the AP served a vital role for newspapers, but not anymore. Print readership has tanked. The two largest newspaper chains in the country, Gannett and McClatchy, both dropped AP in 2024. The third largest newspaper firm, Lee Enterprises, announced it will be dropping AP at the end of this year.

Just last month the AP announced it was offering buyouts to a large number of its U.S. staff. They did not publish the number of staffers who would be losing their jobs.

Takeaways

One thing is certain: There will always be a market for factual and accurate journalism, but by publishing only one side of an important issue with layoffs looming, the Associated Press may get what it certainly deserves.

 

I’ve got a phone number for him: 1-800-CRY-BABY.

Amtrak May Soon Expand Policy on Firearms, and Gun Control Advocates are Fuming

Amtrak could soon be expanding the number of routes where gun owners can bring their firearms in their checked baggage, and one anti-gun activist has gone off the rails with his response.

Amtrak currently allows gun owners to bring their firearms along when they’re passengers on trains that have locked baggage cars. According to the Associated Press, the Trump administration has been pushing Amtrak to expand that access by putting lockboxes on most trains. Passengers still couldn’t carry their firearms on board, but they could at least store them until they get to their destination.

This seems fairly reasonable, unlike the reaction from the head of Everytown.

John Feinblatt, president of the advocacy group Everytown for Gun Safety, said doing this would decrease safety.

“Just days after a man took an Amtrak train to Washington with a shotgun and pistol and tried to assassinate the president and other federal officials, the Trump Administration is trying to open the floodgates for firearms on every Amtrak route, while also moving to hollow out the agency responsible for enforcing gun laws and preventing gun trafficking,” he said. “This will only make Americans less safe and Congress must step in before the next tragedy.”

Allowing guns in locked boxes on trains is going to make Americans less safe? I thought Everytown was in favor of locking up unloaded firearms.

This policy, if enacted, would simply bring Amtrak in line with the rules for transporting firearms while flying. Given that the rail system operated $1.76 billion in the red in last fiscal year, Amtrak needs to be doing everything possible to be competitive with airlines, and making it possible for lawful gun owners to travel with their firearms on more trains is a small step in the right direction.

If the man accused of trying to assassinate President Trump had flown from Los Angeles to D.C., would Feinblatt be demanding airlines stop allowing guns in checked baggage? If he’d driven cross-country, would Everytown’s president be calling for a repeal of the Firearm Owners Protection Act? I wouldn’t put it past him, to be honest.

But here’s what Feinblatt is ignoring: there is no TSA for Amtrak. No baggage screening. No magnetometers or body scans before passengers get on board. There’s nothing stopping someone from carrying a gun on board an Amtrak train at the moment, except for Amtrak’s policy about keeping guns in locked luggage.

Security expert Sheldon Jacobson, whose research contributed to the design of the TSA PreCheck system used in aviation, said railroads should do more to screen their passengers ahead of time by collecting more information when they sell the tickets and checking passengers’ backgrounds. But he said it’s not possible to eliminate guns on trains when there is no way to enforce the rule.

“The initial condition is that there’s almost 400 million guns in this country,” he said. “Then work from there as opposed to trying to create a utopian environment where there’s not guns and we’re going to keep it that way.”

Rail travel poses fewer risks than air travel, so it wouldn’t be worth the investment needed to create a strict passenger screening system at every train station similar to what TSA does at airports, Jacobson said. But he acknowledged that calculation could change if there ever were a major tragedy on a passenger train.

“You have to weigh the risks and rewards. And you have to say, ‘Where are we going to put our money to get the greatest risk reduction for the greatest benefit with the least inconvenience to people?'” he said.

If Congress wants to step in, it should be to demand Amtrak allow lawful concealed carry as well. I don’t think that’s going to happen anytime soon, but that would be a major policy change. What Amtrak is considering now is basically expanding its current policy to cover more routes in order to serve more customers. That shouldn’t alarm anyone, but activists like Feinblatt will do whatever they can to convince Americans to join their freak out… including hiding the facts from their audience.

Every member of the State ought diligently to read and to study the constitution of his country and teach the rising generation to be free. By knowing their rights, they will sooner perceive when they are violated, and be the better prepared to defend and assert them. – U.S. Chief Justice John Jay

King Soopers Homicide Trial: Jury Clears Mansoor Ali of Second-Degree Murder

A Laramie County jury has found 22-year-old Mansoor Ali not guilty of second-degree murder and four counts of aggravated assault and battery. The verdict follows a high-profile trial where Ali’s defense successfully argued that he acted in self-defense when he fatally shot 19-year-old Benjamin Glenn, who had approached Ali with a firearm in a Cheyenne King Soopers parking lot.

CHEYENNE, WY — In a case that tested the limits of Wyoming’s self-defense laws, a Cheyenne man has been cleared of all charges related to a fatal September 2025 shooting. On April 29, 2026, a Laramie County jury returned “not guilty” verdicts for Mansoor Ali, who had been facing a life-altering sentence for second-degree murder.

The incident began as a “road rage” style confrontation on Dell Range Boulevard. Prosecutors alleged that Ali “lured” Benjamin Glenn and three friends into the King Soopers parking lot by flashing his high beams and engaging in aggressive driving. However, the defense team, led by attorney Thomas Fleener, presented a narrative of a man attempting to reach a well-lit, safe area to escape a car full of aggressive individuals.

The Point of Contention: The “Lure”

The prosecution’s case centered heavily on a phone call Ali made to his brother, in which he reportedly used the word “lure”. Police argued this proved Ali intended to provoke a confrontation.

The defense countered with video evidence showing that Glenn’s group had actually left the parking lot and returned moments later. It was during this second encounter that Glenn exited his vehicle while brandishing his own firearm. “My client was not out looking for trouble,” stated Ali’s previous attorney, Crystal Stewart, during earlier proceedings. “He goes to turn around to leave, and this car comes back… the decedent had a gun, and the situation unfolded”.

Immediate Surrender and Acquittal

Ali’s defense was bolstered by his behavior immediately following the shots. Records show he identified himself as the shooter as soon as officers arrived and fully cooperated with the investigation.

The jury’s decision to acquit on all five counts—including four counts of aggravated assault for the other occupants in Glenn’s car—indicates they found Ali’s fear of imminent bodily harm to be “reasonable” under Wyoming law.

Safety Tip: This case is a stark reminder of the “Disparity of Force” and “Retreat” dynamics. Even if you are involved in a verbal dispute or a “road rage” incident (like flashing high beams), your right to self-defense remains intact if the other party escalates the situation to lethal force (brandishing a gun). However, the word “luring” almost cost this defendant his freedom.

As a concealed carry holder, your words—both during the incident and in recorded calls—will be scrutinized by a jury. If you are being followed, your best move is to drive to a police station rather than a commercial parking lot. If you are forced to stop, keep your doors locked and stay inside your vehicle as long as possible to maintain a “protective barrier” between you and the threat.