DeStefano: ‘I will never tell Letitia James who bought my guns’
Excerpt:
Orlando, Florida resident and Indie Guns owner Lawrence Michael DeStefano wants his 50,000 New York customers to know he will never give up their names, even though New York State Attorney General Leticia James has threatened to put him in prison for more than 500 years if he doesn’t comply immediately and furnish their personal information and purchase history.
As we first reported last week, DeStefano has been held in Florida’s Orange County Jail for nearly 90 days. He could be taken to New York’s infamous Rikers Island any day.
“I will never tell Letitia James who bought my guns,” DeStefano said Sunday night from the Orange County jail. “I care about my customers. They should know I will never turn over their customer data. That’s why James went criminal, but I will never give them up. They are law abiding citizens and do not need to worry.”
DeStefano’s firm Indie Guns was one of 10 self-built arms dealers James targeted because they allegedly shipped gun parts kits to New York. The other nine firms handed over their customer data to James, DeStefano said, but he refused. Instead, he decided to fight James and her unconstitutional out-of-state requests.
Two New York State detectives accompanied ATF agents in October, when they executed search warrants of DeStefano’s home and rental properties. The ATF agents seized 68 items from DeStefano’s home—including $500,0000 worth of gold Krugerrands and $110,000 in cash—but took thousands of gun-parts kits from his rental properties. More than 100 typed pages were needed to list all of the items seized from DeStefano. Most were Polymer 80 kits.
DeStefano has sold his “self-built arms” kits to customers in all 50 states, but New York is the only state where he ever encountered legal problems.
On Nov. 12, 2025, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul signed a letter and sent it to Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, charging DeStefano with 71 state crimes, which total 521 years behind bars.
They included:
1 count of Conspiracy in the Fourth Degree
2 counts of Sale of a Criminal Firearm in the First Degree
39 counts of Criminal Sale of a Firearm in the Third Degree
28 counts of Manufacture, Transport, Disposition and Defacement of Weapons and Dangerous Appliances
1 count of Criminal Sale of a Frame or Receiver in the Second Degree
On December 5, 2025, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis responded with a letter sent to all Florida Sheriffs and other peace officers in the state, commanding them to arrest DeStefano, who was already in custody.
DeSantis did not respond to calls or emails seeking to know why he ordered DeStefano’s arrest.
This is certainly not the first time DeStefano and James have battled publicly.
After James won a $7.8 million civil lawsuit against him—DeStefano did not go to New York for the case—he expressed his outrage over social media.
“I had around 15,000 followers on Instagram, but a few days after my posts I had a quarter-million followers,” DeStefano said. “They quickly shut down my Instagram account.”
He expects to be extradited to New York within the coming days, but he is more concerned about his customers, who he said may be worrying about what will happen next. Said DeStefano . . .
I care about my customers. They do not need to worry. Gun privacy to me is sacrosanct, just like confession. Please tell all of my 50,000 customers in New York that they don’t have to hide anything. Please reassure them that they do not have to be scared. I will die in jail before I ever give them up.”
Farmed, Not Represented: How Champagne Socialists And Country-Club Republicans Built Connecticut’s Chattel Economy
Excerpt:
.....And every time, I’ve watched politicians on opposite sides of the aisle blame each other.
That’s the lie.
Because the truth is simpler and much harder to face: Connecticut isn’t broken. It’s being run exactly the way it was designed to be run — for the benefit of a protected class that never shares the risk.
They use different language. They fly different flags. They pretend to hate each other.
But when it comes to who pays and who doesn’t, who sacrifices and who stays insulated, champagne socialists and country-club Republicans land on the same side every time.
.....fter a meet-and-greet tied to Erin Stewart’s political circle, several Republicans reached out to me directly. These weren’t party insiders. They were homeowners. Blue-collar conservatives. People who work, pay taxes, and don’t have lobbyists.
They asked me to write something very specific.
They wanted an article that would show, plainly, why their taxes keep going up while certain powerful organizations in Fairfield don’t pay their fair share. Not spin. Not ideology. Just something factual they could point to when they said, “This isn’t fair, and it isn’t sustainable.”
What stood out immediately was this: they weren’t blaming teachers, firefighters, or town workers. They were blaming protected institutions.
Around the same time, I was talking to people on the opposite end of the political spectrum — progressives protesting January 6th, and later people protesting around Exit 15. People who see themselves as fighting corruption, inequality, and abuse of power.
So I started asking them the same question, point blank:
“Did you know Republicans in Fairfield are angry because their taxes keep going up to cover institutions that don’t pay their fair share?”
Almost every time, I got the same reaction. Shock. Not defensive shock. Real surprise. They had no idea.
And when I followed up — “Do you realize you’re pointing at the same problem?” — the room would go quiet.
That’s when it clicked for me. This wasn’t a partisan problem. It was a deliberate separation problem.
We’ve Seen This Before — They Just Renamed It
We need to be honest about something: this system isn’t new. We’ve seen it before. It was called trickle-down economics. Trickle-down wasn’t invented by working-class conservatives. It was invented by country-club Republicans — people who never worried about rent, never worked without benefits, and never had to justify a tax bill that threatened their home.
They sold it to blue-collar conservatives as a promise: protect the top, and prosperity will reach you eventually. It never did.
What actually happened was:
wealth pooled at the top
wages stagnated
workers lost leverage
communities absorbed the damage
And when blue-collar conservatives noticed, they were told they didn’t “understand economics.”
That same contempt is still here. It just wears better clothes now.
Same Contempt, New Language
Today’s country-club Republicans talk about “stability,” “business climate,” and “not rocking the boat.”
What that always means in practice is:
don’t touch wealthy institutions
don’t reassess exempt land
don’t disrupt donor networks
shift the burden downward
Blue-collar Republicans are expected to defend this as fiscal responsibility, even as it costs them their bargaining power, their homes, and their sense that anyone is actually representing them.
Champagne socialists play the other half of the role. They talk endlessly about equity and compassion while building careers inside systems that cannot afford for problems to actually be solved.
If poverty ended, funding would dry up. If people became independent, programs would shrink. If systems were fixed, entire professional classes would disappear.
So crises are managed, not resolved. Suffering is documented, not prevented. People are cycled, not freed. Different rhetoric. Same outcome.
How People Become Chattel
This is where the word chattel stops being dramatic and starts being accurate.
In Connecticut’s economy, people are treated as inputs:
homeowners become revenue units
workers become cost centers
patients become settlement leverage
the poor become grant justification
You are not meant to stabilize.
You are not meant to exit the system.
You are meant to stay just precarious enough to justify the next budget, the next grant, the next tax increase.
That’s not failure. That’s design.
.....In Fairfield, homeowners are constantly told they need to “pay their fair share.” What that actually means is middle-class residents absorbing major tax increases while some of the wealthiest institutions in town remain largely untouched.
Private country clubs like the Country Club of Fairfield and Brooklawn sit on enormous, extremely valuable land. Elite nonprofit schools like Fairfield Prep, Notre Dame, and Sacred Heart University occupy massive footprints.
They all use public roads. Public police. Public fire and emergency services. Those services are paid for by people who don’t belong to the club, don’t attend the school, and don’t sit on the board.
When residents ask why the burden never shifts upward, they’re told it’s complicated. Too risky. Too disruptive.
Funny how disruption is only ever a problem when it threatens people with power.
I live in Connecticut. I’ve watched this happen up close, not as a theory, not as a talking point, but as something people quietly admit once they think no one is listening.
I’ve watched homeowners open property-tax bills that jump so much they have to reread them just to make sure they’re real. I’ve watched people stand up at town meetings — polite, careful, clearly nervous — and ask how they’re supposed to absorb yet another increase when their wages haven’t moved in years. I’ve watched boards thank them for their concern and pass the vote anyway.
I’ve also watched nonprofits expand — more staff, more administrators, nicer offices, new branding — while the same people cycle through the same programs year after year, never really getting out. I’ve watched public money pour into systems that never seem to fix the problem they exist to address.
And every time, I’ve watched politicians on opposite sides of the aisle blame each other.
That’s the lie.
Because the truth is simpler and much harder to face: Connecticut isn’t broken. It’s being run exactly the way it was designed to be run — for the benefit of a protected class that never shares the risk.
They use different language. They fly different flags. They pretend to hate each other.
But when it comes to who pays and who doesn’t, who sacrifices and who stays insulated, champagne socialists and country-club Republicans land on the same side every time.
How This Actually Came to Me
This didn’t start as a political project. It started with people talking to me.
After a meet-and-greet tied to Erin Stewart’s political circle, several Republicans reached out to me directly. These weren’t party insiders. They were homeowners. Blue-collar conservatives. People who work, pay taxes, and don’t have lobbyists.
They asked me to write something very specific.
They wanted an article that would show, plainly, why their taxes keep going up while certain powerful organizations in Fairfield don’t pay their fair share. Not spin. Not ideology. Just something factual they could point to when they said, “This isn’t fair, and it isn’t sustainable.”
What stood out immediately was this: they weren’t blaming teachers, firefighters, or town workers. They were blaming protected institutions.
Around the same time, I was talking to people on the opposite end of the political spectrum — progressives protesting January 6th, and later people protesting around Exit 15. People who see themselves as fighting corruption, inequality, and abuse of power.
So I started asking them the same question, point blank:
“Did you know Republicans in Fairfield are angry because their taxes keep going up to cover institutions that don’t pay their fair share?”
Almost every time, I got the same reaction. Shock. Not defensive shock. Real surprise. They had no idea.
And when I followed up — “Do you realize you’re pointing at the same problem?” — the room would go quiet.
That’s when it clicked for me. This wasn’t a partisan problem. It was a deliberate separation problem.
We’ve Seen This Before — They Just Renamed It
We need to be honest about something: this system isn’t new. We’ve seen it before. It was called trickle-down economics. Trickle-down wasn’t invented by working-class conservatives. It was invented by country-club Republicans — people who never worried about rent, never worked without benefits, and never had to justify a tax bill that threatened their home.
They sold it to blue-collar conservatives as a promise: protect the top, and prosperity will reach you eventually. It never did.
What actually happened was:
wealth pooled at the top
wages stagnated
workers lost leverage
communities absorbed the damage
And when blue-collar conservatives noticed, they were told they didn’t “understand economics.”
That same contempt is still here. It just wears better clothes now.
Same Contempt, New Language
Today’s country-club Republicans talk about “stability,” “business climate,” and “not rocking the boat.”
What that always means in practice is:
don’t touch wealthy institutions
don’t reassess exempt land
don’t disrupt donor networks
shift the burden downward
Blue-collar Republicans are expected to defend this as fiscal responsibility, even as it costs them their bargaining power, their homes, and their sense that anyone is actually representing them.
Champagne socialists play the other half of the role. They talk endlessly about equity and compassion while building careers inside systems that cannot afford for problems to actually be solved.
If poverty ended, funding would dry up. If people became independent, programs would shrink. If systems were fixed, entire professional classes would disappear.
So crises are managed, not resolved. Suffering is documented, not prevented. People are cycled, not freed. Different rhetoric. Same outcome.
How People Become Chattel
This is where the word chattel stops being dramatic and starts being accurate.
In Connecticut’s economy, people are treated as inputs:
homeowners become revenue units
workers become cost centers
patients become settlement leverage
the poor become grant justification
You are not meant to stabilize.
You are not meant to exit the system.
You are meant to stay just precarious enough to justify the next budget, the next grant, the next tax increase.
That’s not failure. That’s design.
Fairfield, By Name — Not in Theory
Let’s talk about Fairfield specifically, because this isn’t abstract.
In Fairfield, homeowners are constantly told they need to “pay their fair share.” What that actually means is middle-class residents absorbing major tax increases while some of the wealthiest institutions in town remain largely untouched.
Private country clubs like the Country Club of Fairfield and Brooklawn sit on enormous, extremely valuable land. Elite nonprofit schools like Fairfield Prep, Notre Dame, and Sacred Heart University occupy massive footprints.
They all use public roads. Public police. Public fire and emergency services. Those services are paid for by people who don’t belong to the club, don’t attend the school, and don’t sit on the board.
When residents ask why the burden never shifts upward, they’re told it’s complicated. Too risky. Too disruptive.
Funny how disruption is only ever a problem when it threatens people with power.
This Is the Farming
This is what “farmed” actually looks like.
Conservatives are farmed into defending “stability” that never benefits them.
Progressives are farmed into defending “help” that never ends dependency.
Homeowners are farmed into paying more.
Protesters are farmed into fighting each other.
And the institutions in the middle — with exemptions, grants, donors, and access — remain untouched.
No accountability. No shared sacrifice. No real reform.
.....The Divide That Matters
Connecticut’s real divide isn’t partisan.
It’s between people who: work, pay, comply, and sacrifice and institutions that: extract, manage, and insulate.
Champagne socialists and country-club Republicans built this chattel economy together, even while pretending to be enemies.
And the moment people stop being farmed into narratives and start comparing notes, tax bills, and exemption lists, the whole thing starts to fall apart.
That’s why this conversation is discouraged.
That’s why it’s framed as partisan.
And that’s why it matters that it’s finally being said out loud.
**************************************
Even though article is about Connecticut you could substitute any state and come to similar conclusions. This article is a good description of the Uniparty.
If there were more men like this and we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re in now.
The other 9 firms are why we are. Capitulating to democrat tyranny only emboldens them and they double down on it.
Democrats are overgrown toddlers who have not been told *NO* enough.
Appeasement DOES. NOT. WORK.
Another reason I'll never support DeSantis.
Six for North Carolina House try fake political party affiliation
https://www.thecentersquare.com/north_carolina/article_2922e29b-45ff-48bf-809d-bef7f7f906aa.html
Excerpt:
.....A half-dozen former Democrats will need more than luck after failing one of the first tests for any stripe of politician: trust. Six people now registered Republicans running for the North Carolina House of Representatives were Democrats last summer, and their campaign stumps are a dead giveaway nothing else really changed.
Can they win?
“In a word, no,” Dr. Chris Cooper told TCS. He’s director of the Haire Institute for Public Policy Institute at Western Carolina University in Cullowhee and veteran politico of state politics.
“All of these Democrats are running as Republicans in strongly Republican districts,” he said. “Indeed, that’s likely why they’re making the switch – because, as unlikely as they are to win as a Republican, they’re even more unlikely to win as a Democrat.”
Absentee voting in a 51-day window started Monday. Super Tuesday is March 3.
It is a coordinated effort, replete with group photo for campaign purposes. Pamela Ayscue is trying to win House District 32, Michele Joyner-Dinwiddie HD35, Pamela Zanni HD81, Lisa Deaton Koperski HD89, Kelly VanHorn HD105 and Dr. Christopher Wilson HD117.
.....House District 32, for Ayscue, is a run against former Rep. Frank Sossamon in the Republican primary. Both are Henderson residents. Incumbent Democratic Rep. Bryan Cohn chose family and his business over a second term, leaving Henderson’s Melissa Elliott and Oxford’s Curtis McRae in the Democratic primary.
Cohn flipped the seat in 2024, helping Democrats climb out from a 72-48 hole against Republican majority that couldn’t stop a veto override to within 71-49.
In the other five races, there are no other candidates and the primary winners move on to Jones Street in Raleigh.
House District 35, for Joyner, is a run against incumbent Republican Rep. Mike Schietzelt. Both are Wake Forest residents.
House District 81, for Zanni, is a run against incumbent Republican Rep. Larry Potts. Both are Lexington residents.
House District 89, for Koperski, is a run against incumbent Republican Rep. Mitchell Setzer. She’s from Maiden, he’s from Catawba.
House District 105, for VanHorn, is a run against incumbent Republican Rep. Tricia Cotham. Both are Charlotte residents.
And House District 117, for Wilson, is a run against incumbent Republican Rep. Jennifer Balkcom. Each is a Hendersonville resident.
Changing parties for political gain prior to an election isn’t new. Walter B. Jones Jr. lost a 1992 run for Congress in the 1st Congressional District as a Democrat, then ran two years later in a redrawn 3rd Congressional District as a Republican and won. He got at least 61% of the votes in each of his next five reelections, too.
Cooper notes Chris Anglin, changing from Democrat to Republican in 2018 three weeks before the filing deadline for state Supreme Court, was accused of taking votes from incumbent Justice Barbara Jackson. Democrat Anita Earls won the seat, and a liberal majority for the bench in the process; she’s up for reelection this year pressed against Republicans on the cusp of a 6-1 majority if state Rep. Sarah Stevens wins.