Dan Helmer: Liar and Disgrace to the Uniform [VIDEO]

Dan Helmer: Liar and Disgrace to the Uniform [VIDEO]

Dan Helmer: Liar and Disgrace to the Uniform [VIDEO]

Meet Dan Helmer – a self-described father, husband, business strategist, U.S. Army veteran of Iraq/Afghanistan, and Rhodes Scholar running for Congress in Virginia’s 10th District. This is what what hopes to represent Virginia’s 10th District after winning against entrenched RINO Barbara Comstock: Helmer – a liar and a disgrace to the military uniform.

I don’t say this lightly, but this Helmer creature is an embarrassment to the uniform, to his unit, to the oath he took to defend the US Constitution, and to the Army values by which we all promise to live: loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity, and personal courage.

If you haven’t yet heard, Helmer went on a little undercover escapade to show how easy it is to get an “assault” weapon at a gun show, and the media breathlessly came to a collective orgasm over his “courage” and willingness to put himself on the line to besmirch the Constitution he swore to defend.

As with all things, however, there are two sides to every story, and by his failure to objectively tell his story, Helmer has shown himself to be an opportunistic, lying swine – unworthy of the uniform he ostensibly wears and certainly unworthy of representing the people of Virginia’s 10th district.

Let’s start with the fact that this noxious, prevaricating dickbag – like most dishonest, liberals (but I repeat myself)  – conflates “weapons of war” with semi-automatic rifles available to civilians. “This is the same gun, same magazine I had in Afghanistan. Thirty-round magazine. 5.56 millimeter,” he derps, trying to highlight the liberals’ favorite strawman, “the gun show loophole.”

Not true. The M-4, if he even carried one downrange (most officers I know carried an M-9 pistol, but it’s possible), can fire in full auto mode, which means that IF this was the same rifle, the person who sold it to him would be in violation of the law as an FFL.

If the person was a private seller, private sales were never regulated to begin with, and therefore, there’s no “loophole.” Additionally, machine guns will run you around $25,000 or so; ergo, it’s highly unlikely that Helmer there walked out with the “same gun” he had in Afghanistan, unless he routinely carries that much money or spends that much to prove a point.

Fully automatic weapons are rarely used in crime – even the clueless mainstream media confirms this. They’re too expensive and unwieldy, and most common criminals can’t afford them. As a matter of fact, most criminals prefer small, easily concealable handguns, and most of them don’t get their firearms from gun shows.

So, as I said, Helmer is a liar, or he’s too stupid to figure out that the rifle he ostensibly carried downrange is nothing like the civilian version he bought at the gun show. Either way, he shouldn’t be serving in Congress or making gun policy.

But it doesn’t end there.

Helmer’s claim that it took him less time to purchase this “weapon of war” appears to be a lie – an even bigger lie, since he accused the fellow veteran who sold him this firearm of at the very least not doing his due diligence when selling him the gun (if he was a private seller) and at worst of committing a felony by selling Helmer a machine gun (if he was an FFL).

Either way, Helmer is a repugnant, lying pud, who posted a selectively edited, misleading video online to get brownie points from the liberals he’s trying to impress in Northern Virginia.

Virginia Citizens Defense League’s Philip Van Cleave spoke to the seller, whom Helmer conveniently edits to make him appear as if he was an FFL, and if laws were being broken (which makes me wonder why Helmer – a US Army officer and ostensibly a law-abiding citizen – did not report this apparent crime), and who is a military veteran and a collector, and has the rest of the story.

* The story says 10 minutes to purchase, while the seller says it was almost an hour! During the first 20 minutes Dan Helmer showed the seller his military ID and they spoke about their military experiences. Mr. Helmer claimed to be doing reserve duty at the Pentagon. The seller used this time to also make sure that Mr. Helmer was telling the truth and didn’t have any obvious mental problems. Prices were negotiated. Mr. Helmer left for about 20 minutes and then came back, saying his wife had given him permission for the purchase. The purchase was then completed in the final 20 minutes. The seller asked Mr. Helmer if he was a felon, to which Helmer replied, “no.” (The reason that Mr. Helmer wanted the gun was supposedly to take his accompanying friend to the range. The accompanying friend was really there to surreptitiously film everything.)

* Mr. Helmer said in the video that he only supplied his driver’s license, but he also showed his military ID, as I mentioned previously.

* The video is highly, but unprofessionally, edited and is very deceiving as to what actually happened. Mr. Helmer is refusing to provide the raw video. No surprises there.

* Mr. Helmer is clearly not the firearms expert he claims to be in the article, as he doesn’t know the difference between at AR-15 and an M-16! That’s pretty sad.

The seller told me that he was extremely disappointed that another military man would lie to him and use him as a pawn in some political game.

So to recap…

Dan Helmer is a liar.

He lied about the type of rifle he purchased, claiming it was the same one he carried in Afghanistan.

He lied about the length of the transaction.

He lied when he claimed he only presented a driver’s license.

He lied when he selectively edited his video to make it look as if an FFL illegally sold him a machine gun.

And he refused to provide the raw footage of his video, ostensibly because he knows it will out him as a lying sack of shit.

Is this the behavior of someone who lives his life by the Army values? Is this someone with honor and integrity? Does someone with honor and integrity accuse a fellow veteran of committing a crime for political brownie points?

After being summarily ridiculed and called on his lies, Helmer posted a follow-up “explanation” about what really went on in this video – several days later – claiming he won’t release the video because he wants to protect the privacy of the seller, but not explaining why he selectively edited his video and claimed it took him all of 10 minutes to make a lawful purchase, when it took nearly an hour. Helmer has no problem impugning the integrity of a fellow vet and lying about the transaction, but pretends to care about said vet’s privacy?

PLEASE!

I repeat – Dan Helmer is a lying sack of shit not fit to wear the US Army uniform. He’s a disgrace and an embarrassment.

And while Barbara Comstock represents the worst of the GOP establishment RINOs, if I lived in the 10th, I would proudly cast a vote for her if Helmer was the only alternative! I mean, really, does someone who is serious about representing the people of Virginia’s 10th district make an awkward campaign ad such as this and expect to win?

He also can’t carry a tune.

Written by

Marta Hernandez is an immigrant, writer, editor, science fiction fan (especially military sci-fi), and a lover of freedom, her children, her husband and her pets. She loves to shoot, and range time is sacred, as is her hiking obsession, especially if we’re talking the European Alps. She is an avid caffeine and TWD addict, and wants to own otters, sloths, wallabies, koalas, and wombats when she grows up.

11 Comments
  • MikeyParks says:

    Did you say he was in OUR army or the pink army? The recruiters obviously need to be more vigilant about who they let into the military.

  • J August says:

    Thanks for this article. It’s amazing how many so-called vets will whore themselves out to the Democrat Party.

  • Kate says:

    Lying loser.

  • […] Victory Girls Blog: Dan Helmer: Liar and Disgrace to the Uniform [VIDEO]. […]

  • John C. says:

    I don’t know how it is in Virginia, but in Georgia a person holding a valid Georgia Weapons Carry License or Military I.D. can buy firearms without a background check; having one of those lets the seller know the background check has already been made. I can buy firearms in Georgia without a background check because I have the first, and my stepson who is in the National Guard can do likewise because he has the second. We both have to fill out the Form 4473s, though. If Helmer has a similar I.D. that allows him to skip the background check, he should mention that.

    • Marta Hernandez says:

      The NICS check is a federal law. Has nothing to do with your state laws. States might have additional regulations. Filling out the 4473 is so they can run an instant background check. I have a DD214 that allows me to skip the mandatory training requirement when I apply for a concealed carry license, but as a Virginia resident, I undergo a background check if I want to purchase a firearm, per federal law.

  • […] friends at Victory Girls wrote a very good piece on Helmer that you should […]

  • GWB says:

    The M-4… can fire in full auto mode
    One very minor nit, Marta: the M-4A1 can fire full-auto. The M-4 is semi-auto or 3-round burst. Either one is covered by the “automatic” restrictions in the various federal laws, however.
    (And, I carried the M-4 in Bosnia as an officer, along with my M-9. I was AF with an Army armor unit, then a mech infantry unit. Was terribly handy in a HMMWV. I saw lots of Army officers did just carry the M-9, though.)

    Also, your paragraph transition there seems to imply that a private sale of a Title II regulated firearm is not covered. I believe those are actually illegal altogether. Any Title II (i.e., “machine gun”) transaction must take place through a FFL.

    Fully automatic weapons are rarely used in crime
    I wonder what the actual stats are (though I’m sure they’re probably terribly incomplete from that era) for the reign of the gangsters? Because we always see them posing with tommy guns and such, and the movies depict all these fully auto gun battles with police during that era. I wonder what the numbers really show for back when they were still legal unregulated? (Especially since those memes were exactly what was used to pass the National Firearms Act of 1934.)

    The problem, Marta, is this guy is running in an ever-expanding “northern Virginia” where all the swamp creatures live. It’s turned this lovely state bluer than the mists of the Shenandoah Valley.

  • GWB says:

    One tangential comment:
    If it weren’t for the dishonesty, I wouldn’t mind “just like I carried in war”. Because…
    1) The very first weapons the gov’t (in this case, the English one) tried to confiscate were weapons our forefathers DID carry in war. And they had ones just like them at home. And I’m not talking just muskets, but cannon, too.
    2) We should be bearing arms that are suitable for war. WE are the standing fighting force of the nation and the states. We should possess them, train with them, and bear them when necessary.
    3) Lots and lots of soldiers did bring home with them their war weapons back in the day. Oh yes, they didn’t bring home many crew-served weapons. But they did bring home weapons “just like I carried in the war.”

    I would love to see a modern version of the Tommy Gun over every mantel. At least over the mantels of those who love America as much as our forefathers did.

  • Keith Glass says:

    Sweet slithering mother of shitcakes and syrup, this actually makes me WANT to put up a Comstock sign, even if I haven’t voted for her before. . . .Prior to this year, it was SAFE to vote Libertarian, as the Democrat was not going to win. Now. . . . damn. . .

Leave a Reply

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

Subscribe
Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner
gisonboat
rovin_readhead
Instagram
Instagram has returned invalid data.