New York Attorney General Seeks To Dissolve NRA in Lawsuit Alleging Massive Fraud

The lawsuit accuses the group's leaders of fraudulently diverted millions of dollars to prop up their luxury lifestyles.


New York Attorney General Letitia James wants to dissolve the National Rifle Association (NRA). In a suit filed today, she accuses the leaders of the nation's largest gun rights group of a long pattern of fraud.

James' lawsuit—and a second suit, filed simultaneously by D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine—allege that longtime NRA chief Wayne LaPierre and others in the group's leadership fraudulently diverted millions of dollars from the NRA's charitable mission to prop up their luxury lifestyles.

LaPierre "has spent millions of dollars of the NRA's charitable assets for private plane trips for himself and his family, including trips for his family when he was not present," James' lawsuit alleges.

James seeks the dissolution of the NRA and removal of LaPierre as the group's CEO, among other conditions.

Racine's lawsuit accuses the NRA of illegally raiding the funds of its independent nonprofit foundation to plug budget gaps caused in part "by the NRA's decision to continue to waste funds on improper, lavish spending."

James announced the investigation last year amid a Machiavellian power struggle within the gun group. On one side was LaPierre and his loyalists, and on the other was former NRA head Oliver North and other disgruntled board members. "Former" tells you who won, but that internal drama spilled into court in a nasty lawsuit between the NRA and its largest contractor, the advertising firm Ackerman McQueen. 

Both sides accused the other of financial improprieties and extravagant spending. The Wall Street Journal reported last year that the NRA considered buying a $5 million mansion on a Dallas golf course for the LaPierres. The Daily Beast reported that the NRA spent $275,000 over 13 years on designer clothing for LaPierre and tens of thousands of dollars to fly in hair and makeup artists for LaPierre's wife.

James' lawsuit alleges that LaPierre and other NRA executives used Ackerman McQueen as a pass-through to conceal millions of dollars of questionable spending from NRA board members. The firm then billed the NRA for "out-pocket-expenses," a practice that James says did not comply with IRS reporting requirements.

Whether or not the lawsuits' allegations are true, the suits, brought by Democratic officials against one of the most divisive advocacy organizations in the country, are guaranteed to ignite a political firestorm.

The Washington Free Beacon reported yesterday that the NRA is planning to spend "tens of millions" in battleground states to reelect President Donald Trump. Jason Ouimet, the head of the NRA's lobbying arm, told the Free Beacon that the NRA has added more than 1,000 new dues-paying members per day since June. 

There has been a record-breaking surge in gun sales over the past several months, driven by both the COVID-19 pandemic and the unrest following the police killing of George Floyd in Minneapolis.

Bloomberg News reports Trump's response to the New York lawsuit: "I just heard about that. That's a very terrible thing that just happened. I think the NRA should move to Texas and lead a very good and beautiful life. And I've told them that for a long time."

NEXT: Nashville Promised a Crackdown on Mask-Defying Partiers. Then They Arrested a Homeless Man with a Drug and Drinking Problem.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. No political angle here.

    I’m sure SPLC with their off shore accounts is next.

    1. Man, first comment. Didn’t take long for someone to want to excuse prosecuting criminals.

      1. So you think the NRA should be dissolved? I guess all of their millions of members are “criminals”.

        1. I guess all of their millions of members are “criminals”.
          They probably are to NY. They can all be unindicted co-conspirators.

          1. Maybe they’ll demand a list of members and their addresses. It’ll be funny to see a leftist DA end up on the wrong side of NAACP v Alabama.

            1. I quit working at shoprite to work online and with a little effort I easily bring in around $45 to 85 per/h. Without a doubt, this is the easiest and most financially rewarding job I’ve ever had.JVf I actually started 6 months ago and this has totally changed my life.

              For more details visit………► Cash Mony System

            2. Didn’t a NY judge just rule that didn’t apply “Because there was no likelihood of persecution of the members”?

              1. I would say their “persecution” is likely.

        2. I think the argument here is that the organization is corrupt beyond redemption. If you are too corrupt for Ollie North, you got problems.

          Anyway, if the NRA were to be dissolved, it would actually help gun rights, as more money would flow to organizations that actually focus on defending the 2nd Amendment, such as The Second Amendment Foundation.

          1. well thats one way to rationalize an antilibertarian position. Force people to move from a group they voluntarily joined into a group you approve of.

            1. Nowhere in my comment did I say what should be done.

              1. No, you just said it would be a good thing.

                Anyway, if the NRA were to be dissolved, it would actually help gun rights,

                1. That’s not saying the NRA should be forced to dissolve.

                  I can say that we’d be better off without Twitter without calling for the government to destroy it.

                  1. It was possible for him to emphasize against the action to dissolve. He didn’t. He even called the organization corrupt.

                    No where does he defend against the AGs action but seems to commend them with his comparative view.

                    1. The NRA is corrupt. What is wrong with recognizing that?

                      It was possible for him to congratulate Neil Armstrong, but he didn’t do that either.

                      “Seems to commend them” is purely subjective and speculative.

                      You are really grasping at straws. Why not man up and admit you were wrong?

                    2. First your premise of fact isn’t actually a fact. It is a contention.

                      And second, when I am against an action I don’t agree with the adjectives used but the corrupt actor and then say it is probably a good thing.

                      Again, not once did he actually attack the actions of the AG, but he did emphasize agreement.

                    3. Let me actually clarify for you sqrly.

                      Do you understand the difference between:

                      George floydd was a high piece of shit.


                      George floyd was a piece of shit but didn’t deserve a knee on his neck.

                    4. When half your argument consists of calling me someone else, I know you’re not serious.

                    5. Translation:
                      Jesse agrees with Chipper, but since Chipper is in Jesse’s outgroup, Jesse must concoct some ridiculous reason to disagree with Chipper so that he can remain in good standing with the mean grrlz club.

                    6. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work on my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home.JBf Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and follow instructions on this page…….Click here

                  2. ABC is the NRA corrupt or are possibly a few board members corrupt?

          2. While other gun rights groups are more hard-line, the NRA has an actual track record of accomplishments. That is why I remains member (and that I’ve paid off my lifetime membership long ago). I am not always a fan of their actions but they are by far the most visible and most powerful of the gun right organizations. Losing them would actually set the gun rights movement back, as gun control proponents would see it as a huge win, and most Americans would see it as a huge loss for gun rights. Additionally, no other group has the political power that the NRA has, nor the membership advantage that the NRA has.

            1. I hope you feel good about paying for Wayne LaPierre’s Bahama vacations.

              1. You are free to not donate to the NRA.

              2. .000000000023/10

              3. Just for perspective, vacationing in the Bahamas when you live in Virginia, is not that exotic. I see flights from DCA for $86. This is how the court of public opinion is used to condemn people with innuendo. I’ll wait for the accounting.

                1. How about his mansion, then?

                  1. The one he never got?

                    You’re terrible at this.

                    At least Jeff thinks you’re smart.

                  2. The mansion they never bought, so now we prosecute people for stuff they thought about but decided against?

                    1. And to those who are defending Chipper, it does seem he just doubled down with his Bahama vacation remark and false mansion remark.

                  3. Eunuch appears to be begging for prog approval here

              4. Why should I care where he vacations? I want him to win for gun rights, he has a history of doing just that. He may not be hard core but he gets results. That is better than being hard core but being ignored in my book.

                1. Mea culpa on my hypocrisy here, because I admit I do vote LP despite the lack of results.

      2. Their criminals. Why bother with a trial?

        1. Whose criminals?

          1. The ones that stole the preview option.

      3. Man, stupid response by you.

      4. Didn’t take long for someone to want to excuse prosecuting criminals.

        Now do union bosses.

        1. The Clinton Foundation

          planned Parenthood.

          Hell, The United Way and the American Cancer Society

      5. First they aren’t prosecuting the ones accused of misconduct, they are trying to dissolve a national organization with 8+ million voters. NRA has reported that since April they are a avereging over 1000 new member sign ups a day. As pointed out Union officials are convicted of fraud frequently but they don’t try to punish the unions by dissolving them. Planned Parenthood has also had high ranking officials accused of malfeasance without anyone suing to disband them. This is a blatantly political driven prosecution, especially as the AG specifically stated that one of the reasons she ran for office was to “get the NRA”. This is authoritarianism at its best. This is fascism, not faux fascism but the real deal, using political power to destroy your political opponents. She should charge LaPierre and others if it was a crime, but punishing 8-10 million members from every state in the Union, and most territories is just her abusing her power. I doubt you’d be saying the same thing if Barr announced the DoJ was going to sue to dissolve SPLC because members of it’s board were accused of fraud.

        1. Not only that do they even have that authority? As part of a plea agreement they could force these people to stop associating with the NRA but to force them to dissolve it? only if LaPierre actually owned the NRA but since it is a group of people who have decided to associate within a group and through that group lobby for specific rights then no, doesn’t sound like they do.

          1. Yeah, I think they could dissolve it in New York (possibly) but then the NRA just reincorporates in a different state. And most organizational activity is actually down by local associated groups. I wonder if the New York Rifle and Pistol Association is named as a co-defendant?

      6. This is a civil suit, not a criminal prosecution.

      7. It’s a lawsuit, not a prosecution. What does that tell you?

      8. If NRA members were bringing suit against leaders they believed were corrupt, that would be one thing. But when the AG of notoriously anti-gun NY is leading the charge, it’s really hard not to smell something a little fishy. Throw in the fact that they’re not merely seeking to prosecute corrupt leaders, but to dissolve the entire organization, and it stinks like an entire trawler.

      9. You’re missing the main point, the lawsuits are “civil”, not “criminal.”
        If what the NRA execs did violated any laws they they would have been charged with statutory crimes.
        The civil suits are just showboating, they’ll never get to court.

    2. They’re never going to go after the Southern Poverty Lie Center.

      1. They don’t want to end up on their list.

  2. …she accuses the leaders of the nation’s largest gun rights group of a long pattern of fraud.

    That they’re actually for gun rights?

    1. what’s hilarious isn’t that she’s going after the heads for fraud, but seeking to break down the whole organization, to dissolve it.

      Didn’t the big union just have 3 of its leaders indicted for theft of funds? Don’t see anyone asking to dissolve the unions.

      1. If you make threats like that to the Teamsters, you have to be careful going through toll booths.

      2. (Raises Hand) I’ll ask to dissolve the unions.

    2. Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job. Click For Full Detail.

    3. Heh, yeah. Cognitive struggle! Don’t know who to hate more!

      The New York Attorney General is almost certainly a shit-gargling dumpster fire, but I also hate the NRA.

      *sends another check to the JPFO*

      1. Why would you “hate the NRA”? Why not just say you disagree with their politics, their goals, who/what they support, how they spend the money their members pay in dues? But Hate? Are you really saying you Hate millions of law abiding Americans exercising their rights to associate with whoever they want? And their right to petition their government?

        1. Organization =/= Individual Members

          1. But 2 + 2 = 5 right jeff?

          2. Except when it comes to blaming the right while giving cover to the left (and that is what you do when you argue that the left is better than the right on every single issue, like you do below on corruption).

        2. Why would you “hate the NRA”?

          Because they’re the biggest gun control org in the entire country?

          You seem to have gotten the wrong impression about the direction I’m approaching this from. I don’t despise the NRA because they support gun rights, I despise them because they don’t support them hard enough.

          And, as Jeff said, there’s a huge difference between hating the org, and hating the members. I think the members are misguided for not joining GOA, SAF, or JPFO instead. I don’t hate them.

  3. So a governmental attack on the nation’s oldest civil rights organization during an election year, and nothing is said relative to the pros/cons of it?

    Nice way to be a hack.

    1. I’m wondering if the AG has put together his exploratory committee for his presidential run in 2024.

      1. Wait, I’m an idiot. This IS is exploratory committee.

      2. *her.

        “If Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters…”

        1. i dated a couple Lehman sisters.

          1. Twins? At the same time? I might have seen your video.

            1. Twins are nice, but unrelated lasses are better. Though, maybe that just means I need to find an even kinkier set of twins.

            2. older sis then younger.

              >>unrelated lasses are better

              for one-offs definitely

    2. No, she said teh NRA was divisive. it the new cool term people are using to denigrate those they disagree with. I’d like to know what is divisive about the NRA protecting gun rights. The only divisiveness i see is by those who try to smear and destroy the NRA

  4. ” . . . Democratic officials against one of the most divisive advocacy organizations in the country . . . ”

    I nominate Planned Parenthood.
    I nominate BLM (as in .org).
    I nominate SPLC.
    I nominate the democratic party.

    1. teachers unions?

    2. You don’t even have to designate BLM as .org
      The whole movement is based on division

      1. Who set up that division?

  5. LaPierre is is an Executive VP not “CEO”. One of several VPs. His job is to be the public face of the organization. We will have to see the justifications in his expense account, but his job is to look like the representative of a well-funded and powerful membership organization. That would require a decently sized expense account. Also, dissolving an organization of… how many million?… over alleged abuse of said expense account by one of the Executive VPs seems harsh.

    1. I’m guessing it’s not even a question of harsh, it probably has very little basis in law.

      1. How is it that a state official does such a thing and isn’t at the very least summarily disbarred?

    2. Yeah. The mansion on a golf course seems like a reasonable thing to be annoyed over, but $275k over 13 years on fancy clothes for a person who is supposed to be a spokesperson seems not all that outrageous. I’ve looked at prices for nice suits. And then gone and bought a significantly less nice one because holy fuck. And hell, if the golf course sited house was intended as a way to give him a place to schmooze politicians, even that might make sense.

      1. And they ended up not buying the mansion. So, she is accusing them of a thought crime. It would be a better point if they had bought the mansion.

        1. Wait til she finds out about Governors mansions or the white house. Sometimes jobs come with perks.

          1. Beat me by four minutes.

            1. I got lucky. Bored waiting on an xray.

          2. Also might astound her to discover the number of people who live in houses that they didn’t pay for with their own cash on the barrelhead.

            You don’t have to be at the top of a very big company before the company starts buying things “for” you.

            1. that reminds me Gov Newsom’s cousin business bought Newsom a mansion in California and Newsom did not declare it but its okay since its the right people getting gifts

              1. At least he got a non standard 90% appreciative low interest mortgage against his gifted property.

        2. That too.

      2. And hell, if the golf course sited house was intended as a way to give him a place to schmooze politicians, even that might make sense.

        One might even point to the number of high-ranking public officials whose compensation packages include lavish residences provided by the taxpayers. But this AG probably lives in a modest apartment befitting the humble income of a dedicated public servant.

    3. Plus, it gets really hazy as to what is really fraud here.

      Who is the fraud against? Donors? Maybe they know how the money is being spent and accept that? That’s the thing with charities – some money has to be spent on support functions, not all of it can be spent on activism. So how does one tell the difference between legitimate spending on support functions when that’s in the eye of the beholder.

      Anyone donating should be cognizant of this and check out their books – even a simple ratio of charity-spending-to-administrative-costs ratio is available. If the ratio is not to their liking – don’t donate. If it is, then they’re not defrauding anyone.

      1. As a lifetime member, I would be upset if the public face of my organization didn’t spend money on suits and makeup. Hell, well I could never expect to spend a little over $21,000 a year on suits, considering the costs of tailored, designer clothes, that doesn’t seem overly extravagant. Some of the other accusations have disturbed me. And I am not a huge LaPierre fan, but the guy is effective.

        1. It would be fascinating to see the clothing, hair & makeup budgets of all the congress people who need to be lobbied on behalf of– or against– the 2A. And what does Bloomberg spend for clothes and haircuts while attempting to demolish the 2A?

        2. Chris Cox was effective. LaPierre not so much.

          1. Yes, Cox was more effective. But compared to some of the other more hard line organizations, the NRA under LaPierre still has more wins than all the others combined.

    4. LaPierre is EVP and CEO according to their 1998 IRS 990 (The latest available).

      1. 2018. Dammit Reason. Restore to the masses a preview/edit option.

      2. yr right! He is.

      3. Yr right! He is. Man, that’s a lot of pages.

  6. New York Attorney General Seeks To Dissolve NRA

    How many divisions does she have?

      1. Ah. This is presumably happening under the “Social Justice” aegis, then?

        1. They’re probably the largest division.

    1. like tanks?

    2. obligatory: More than the Pope (1 – the 42nd Infantry Division) if you pull in the governor.

  7. No suit against the Clinton Foundation?

    How the hell does NY dissolve an organization that isn’t based there?

    1. Apparently it is incorporated in New York, even though the main offices are in Virginia, I think.

    2. The NRA is incorporated in NY

      1. own goal

      2. Yeah, there was their first mistake.

        1. I think Trump (I am not believing I am saying this) actually has the correct answer, dissolve their New York incorporation and incorporate in a more gun friendly state. It’s a win for the NRA, continue their lawsuit while moving to a more gun friendly state, where the taxes are likely lower, and New York loses their power and the taxes they collect.

          1. I don’t think they’re based in NY – I get the impression that like CA, if you want to business in NY as an out-of-state corporation, it’s much less of a headache to incorporate an entity especially in that state for purposes of operating there. So that would just be dissolving the NY office of the organization.

            I suspect the only real point of this is to tie up their funds and fundraising capabilities during election season:

            “The Washington Free Beacon reported yesterday that the NRA is planning to spend “tens of millions” in battleground states to reelect President Donald Trump. Jason Ouimet, the head of the NRA’s lobbying arm, told the Free Beacon that the NRA has added more than 1,000 new dues-paying members per day since June.”

            The slam dunk here would be an injunction on their fundraising and non-essential spending while all this gets sorted out, which could easily take until mid-November at the earliest.

            1. No, they were first organized in Delaware and their headquarters is in Fairfax, VA. I didn’t mean based, I just meant incorporate in another more gun friendly state, but you are right it is probably some protectionist bullshit that New York has that forces companies that want to do business in their states to incorporate there. Not sure how that doesn’t violate interstate commerce clause?

              1. Not sure how that doesn’t violate interstate commerce clause?


              2. The NRA says they were originally chartered in NY. US record searches (IRS, SAM) show NY as state of incorporation.

                1. Yeah.

        2. They incorporated in 1871. At the time, that wasn’t a mistake.

          1. Yeah, by Union officers who were appalled by the poor marksmanship of their troops and to protect the civil rights of newly freed blacks to own guns.

            1. And by 1892 they moved their range out of New York because of political opposition to promoting marksmanship.

              1. Yes. If you read Louis L’Amour and other historical fiction writers who write about 19th century NYC (many L’Amour novels are partially set in NYC) one of the surprising themes was how popular shooting ranges were in NYC. Coney Island had several.

    3. Dude, it’s the “Clinton Foundation”. What else do people think it’s for, besides giving money to the Clintons to use as they will? It’s right there on the tin. 😉

    4. Last I checked Clinton Foundation got 3 of 4 star rating from Charity Navigator. NRA is rate moderate for concerns.

        1. Why do you suggest Charity Navigator is biased? They base their assessment on facts and transparency. Your handing me a piece from an opinion group. There is a big difference here.

      1. Mainly because their work is considered politically taboo. When compared to similar organizations, the NRA actually uses more of it’s donations and membership fees for activities than most charitable organizations (last I checked it was around 90%).

      2. Oh, wait, I can do this to… ahem…

        Last I checked the Clinton Foundation got 7 out of 3 unicorn farts from I’m With HeRC magazine while the NRA got a rating of moderate-to-severe (ly racist) from the Gunzarbad Analyst Group.

  8. by the way… NRA or filed a counter suit based off the D.A.s political statements from 2018 about making her election to the role about destroying the NRA.

    We gave had quite a few dismissals on courts ablut Trumps animus made sans statements.. here we actually have political statements to on the record.

    1. based off the D.A.s political statements from 2018 about making her election to the role about destroying the NRA.

      Yeah, this is the kind of thing that didn’t go well for Akilah Hughes in her lawsuit against Carl Benjamin.

      1. The way she’s going, her post-trial behavior is going to get her smacked with a contempt charge.

        Love that the judge quoted Fogerty v. Fantasy Records in his judgement, too. Centerfield was a mediocre album, but the resulting USSC cases still get used.

        1. Yeah, she attacks the judge online with “Know Your Judge” posts after getting bitch-slapped in the courts.

          She suffers from Millennial Onset Influencer Derangement Syndrome. She literally can’t help herself. She can’t… keep her fucking mouth shut online.

          She files a lawsuit, then continuously tweets about her actual intentions of the lawsuit.
          She loses the lawsuit.
          Benjamin files for reimbursement of attorney fees and court costs. She loses that.
          She tweets about the racist judge.

          She really represents the dumbest aspect of the perpetually online generation.

          1. The great thing is that if she appeals and loses again, she’s automatically responsible for Benjamin’s additional legal costs.

          2. She really represents the dumbest aspect of the perpetually online generation.

            Yeah, well, she learned it from the POTUS, dammit. She learned it from the POTUS…

  9. Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job. Click For Detail.

  10. So because a few executives did stupid things, millions of NRA members have to see their organization “dissolved”? Seems like that’s a matter for the membership, not the NY AG.

    1. Novel legal theories make the political retribution world go ’round.

    1. whatabout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout, whatabout….

      Is that all you got? What a partisan douche you are. How about being happy laws are being applied?

      1. When the laws are being applied by another partisan douche it doesn’t help anyone (other than the partisan douche applying the law, that is)

      2. Didn’t you just complain about people defending criminals?

        I’m arguing the non merits of the suit. You’ve not actually made an argument yet.

        SPLC, millions unaccounted for with much of it moved off shore.

        Clinton foundation basically paid for Clinton staff and travel and did nothing useful for their foundation.

        Unions just had multiple indictments of leaders for stealing union funds.

        In not one case did anyone seek to dissolve the entity involved.

        We get you on care about politics.

      3. Speaking of partisan douche, you are excusing a politician abusing her power to take down an organization with 8+ million voters because some of its employees were accused of fraud. She didn’t even charge them. She instead decided to destroy the whole organization.

      4. By the way… dismissing any counter example from unequal treatment makes you the partisan douche. LOL.

        1. His partisanship does not define his doucheness.

          1. Wonder what he thinks 2+2 is.

            1. Has he been to a CCW Class

              1. *laughing*

                That dude was off his rocker.

          2. His doucheness goes far beyond the partisanship.

      5. How about being happy laws are being applied?

        And you say you’re not a libertarian!

      6. It’s a civil case, what law is being applied?

  11. I have many thoughts on this subject. But, I’d hate to be charged by this bitch like the wood chipper guys here a few years ago. Even though I’m not in NY I bet it wouldn’t matter.

    1. Well, it would certainly be a complete tragedy if she happened to completely accidentally catch on fire, fall into an open sewer while trying to put herself out, and then climb into a woodchipper while she struggled to escape. That would be horrible. I would cry.

      1. Are you saying she is LITERALLY HITLER?

  12. Is there a section 230 for the NRA that protects them from trolling litigation based on their members’ actions?

  13. The Washington Free Beacon reported yesterday that the NRA is planning to spend “tens of millions” in battleground states to reelect President Donald Trump.

    Whoops, found the real issue.

  14. Just a question, because I am not a lawyer, could Barr she the New York AG for 15A violations as there are plenty of examples of organization, even New York based ones, where members of the board were accused of fraud but New York didn’t sue to dissolve them?

    1. Sorry, correction, 14A. Also, I am sure this violates the 1A freedom of association clause.

      1. I don’t think it works that way, just like you can’t get out of a speeding ticket by pointing out that they don’t give tickets to everyone who speeds.

        That said, as much as I dislike the NRA I hope they win. They’re a private organization, if there’s some fuckery with the charitable aspect then there should be punishment for that. Dissolving the entire organization is ridiculous though, if the members have a problem with how their money is being spent they can elect new leadership or even leave the NRA altogether. To the extent that NRA leadership needs to be punished for lavish spending habits, the members should be the ones to handle it. They could even bring their own lawsuits!

        1. I think combined with her public statements from 2018, it demonstrates that she is selectively enforcing the law for political purposes. I also think the freedom of association still applies. Dissolving a member driven organization, for arguably political purposes, especially when she has not charged the accused, surely violates freedom of association.

          1. Should be fun when it comes to a Prosecutorial Misconduct charge.

        2. I don’t think it works that way, just like you can’t get out of a speeding ticket by pointing out that they don’t give tickets to everyone who speeds.

          See below though. It’s not like just she’s been pulling over speeders happened to get the NRA and lost the other ones, she specifically said ahead of time “I’m going to fuck up the NRA.”

          Imagine a local AG said, “I’m going to fuck up the NAACP.” and then proceeded to only press charges against them. Just like your analogy; if a local sheriff said “I’m going to fuck up negros.” and then proceeded to pull over and site the only black person in town for speeding. I don’t think Barr would be able to get involved fast enough.

          1. Oh I agree there’s enough here for a malicious prosecution case, I’m just saying I don’t think you have an equal protection case based on the “but look at all the other fraudsters you ignore!” argument.

            1. I admit prosecutorial misconduct is probably easier to win. I would like to see this argued though on the 14A simply because of the blatant political motive and the unprecedented steps the AG took. It would send a message to all AG’s that abusing your powers to take down political enemies will not be tolerated (if they won it, but Mr. Penalty-tax would somehow find this kind of political persecution okay, if it even made it to the USSC).

  15. Hi…..Making money online more than $15k just by doing simple work from home. I have received $18376 last month. Its an easy and simple job to do and its earnings are much better than regular office job and even a little child can do this and earns money. Everybody must try this job by just use the info on this page. … Click For Full Detail.

  16. And the timing is just a BIG coincidence, I’m sure.

  17. Letitia James, a week before she was elected New York Attorney General in the fall of 2018, said in an interview with Ebony that the National Rifle Association was a “terrorist organization.”

    “We came to the conclusion that we needed to step in and dissolve this organization, just as we did the Trump Foundation,” James said, when asked why she was pursuing an extreme and permanent course of action.

    The Q&A from 2018 [emphasis ours]:

    Q: What is the most important issue you’ve have heard from prospective voters?

    A: President Donald Trump and the threat to our democracy and our values. … The NRA holds [itself] out as a charitable organization, but in fact, [it] really [is] a terrorist organization.

  18. And because it is tangibly applicable. I have thought about how to reform DAs offices and to provide better public defenders. My proposal would be that we combine both offices, and require that all attorneys have equal time representing cases as the defense and prosecution. Also, that when the defendant cannot afford an attorney, that the office must focus equal resources on both prosecution and defense. It probably isn’t perfect but I think it would be a better system. And if an attorney is worried about their win-loss percentage they would have to focus equal energy into both the cases they prosecute and those they defend. It would also lower their incentive to protect cops, because in prosecutorial case the cops would be an ally, but in defense cases the cops would be more of an adversary. The DA would have to run on cases won as opposed to cases prosecuted.

    1. Also, that when the defendant cannot afford an attorney, that the office must focus equal resources on both prosecution and defense.

      I’ve been saying something similar for a while – at the very least we should fund public defenders as much as DAs. The current disparity between what a DA gets paid and what a public defender gets paid is obscene, and says something pretty ugly about the system.

    2. I think it’s a great idea

    3. Also, that when the defendant cannot afford an attorney, that the office must focus equal resources on both prosecution and defense.

      If the defense has no defense to speak of other than ‘not guilty” and does not cooperate his legal needs are limited; the prosecution though, must always spend : on evidence gathering and testing; materials preparation; investigating; crime scene visits; cross jurisdictional coordination and cooperation; maintaining an experienced team and more.

      I can see why the prosecution might need millions more to prosecute than the defense would need for their part. That would make it less injust not more. This equality crap is poisin… You can not force equality of outcome.

  19. New York Attorney General Seeks To Dissolve NRA

    That’s what Walter White tried, too.

  20. I understand the concern about second amendments but I think those commenting should also be concerned about what is happening to this organization. This is not coming out of the blue, the NRA has been in trouble for while now. If a white knight could come in and clean up the mess great, but that does not appear to be what is happening. Dissolution might be best and have people move their support to other organizations that reflect the interest they felt was represented by the NRA.

    1. Please list those organizations?

      1. SAF Second Amendment Foundation
        GOA Gun Owners of America
        FPC Firearms Policy Coalition
        NRA-ILA- the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. It’s separate.
        and I think the good ‘ole JPFO is still limping along- Jews for Preservation of Firearms Ownership
        There are also many local groups working on laws specific to your state. Just Google. Join them all!

        1. Join them all is good advice.

        2. Thanks for the assist. The NRA seems to be a mess. I really have no stake in this as I am not a gun owner. But if a friend asked I recommend cutting bait and moving on.

          1. I really have no stake in this as I am not a gun owner.

            Since you are planning to rely on those who do own guns, I’d suggest that you do have an extremely high stake in this.

        3. And then there’s the Zelman Partisans, who are like the JPFO, only really serious about it… 😀

    2. the NRA has been in trouble for while now. If a white knight could come in and clean up the mess great, but that does not appear to be what is happening. Dissolution might be best and have people move their support to other organizations that reflect the interest they felt was represented by the NRA.

      One could say the exact same thing about Greenpeace, but weirdly no one is.

      1. If you were an anti-2A politician or wealthy leftist, could you think of a better plan than to try to tear apart the NRA from the inside? Every president, manager, CEO, board member, chief dog-catcher or parent has people trying to depose them for “doing it wrong.” I believe the “trouble” in the NRA is mainly an attempt to divide and conquor. It’s probable that some funds were used in ways I wouldn’t personally select, and probable that I’d consider some misused. Am I overly worried about it? Nope. The numbers I’ve seen bandied about sound like chump change in the scheme of things. In order to keep the threat of the NRA looming over Washington DC, I’ll stick with them.

        1. (This was more a response to @Moderation. )

    3. Dissolution might be best if the members decide, instead of the NY AG.

    4. Isn’t it up to membership to decide that? And the NRA hasn’t really been in trouble, membership did decline when Trump was elected (it did the same when Bush won in 2000 and after Heller, but increased after Obama was inaugurated). However, membership has been increasing dramatically since April of this year, 1000+ new members a day. That doesn’t seem like an organization in trouble. Also, membership tends to go up after mass shootings and discussion of new gun control. Many non-paying members still claim membership but tend not to pay fees until they feel threatened by political forces, e.g. Democrats winning elections, new gun control pushes, etc. If anything, Heller and McDonald may have hurt the NRA but only temporarily, as members have seen that the courts basically ignore those rulings. Also, at the local level the NRA continues to rack up victories. The number of Constitutional carry states continues to increase, the number of open carry states continues to increase, the number of shall issue states continues to decrease. The number of states that ban Sunday hunting (which the NRA has worked decades to eliminate these laws, though it isn’t as widely publicized in the media) has decreased, with only three states with any remaining bans (and generally those bans are not statewide) with complete bans on hunting on Sundays. 11 states continue to have some restrictions on Sunday hunting but this is an improvement. Gun ownership is up, NRA membership is growing by leaps and bounds, they continue to have numerous local victories (most draconian gun laws remain local). What is your definition of in trouble?

      1. 1000 new members a day…. 1000 covid deaths a day…. it all makes sense now.

        1. I made a mistake it’s 1000 new members a day since June not April.

          1. Uhm, I think we are at 2000 Covid deaths a day. 1000 is so last week

    5. the NRA has been in trouble for while now

      For almost 150 yrs. as a matter of fact.

    6. Who doesn’t believe the far left has the best interests of the NRA membership at heart?

    7. Really, this isn’t a zero sum game… if you believe in the 2A, you can belong to more than one outfit dedicated to preserving it. The NRA has a deffinite advantage in certain cases because it has such a huge, voluntary membership, and all the funds associated with that. It is big enough to have more than one division: education, lobbying, litigation, etc. That’s huge. GOA (Gun Owners of America) also brings excellent cases to court, but they are an example of a group working in relative obscurity… they just can’t strike fear into anti-2A politicians like the NRA can. That fear factor is part of what you are buying with the NRA. Worth every penny, I think.

      1. Yes, this is my argument as to why I maintain my membership. The NRA wins but I wish they were more hard-line (when leftist, antigun point out even gun owners are souring on the NRA, they forget to mention it is mainly because we wish they were more hard-line, not because we want them to compronise anymore than they already do!). However, they have power because of size, history and relationships. The GOA and others are less compromising but don’t have the weight of the NRA.

    8. Yea, the NRA having shitty leadership is totes just as threatening to freedom as the left (again) selectively applying the law and using the full power of the state to pursue totalitarian governance.
      Good call

  21. I am sure the NYS AG and the DC AG are deeply concerned about NRA members being defrauded and this is not lawfare to destroy a thorn in their Party’s side.

    1. LOL, comment of the day!

  22. >>divisive advocacy organizations

    need bucket for overflow of pompous … and not really – the list of gun rights believers is long and distinguished and includes criminals and all the armed leftists yes we know you exist

  23. I’m sure if there really is fraud it could be found and the perpetrators targeted. But we know this is a political hatchet job by the NY mafia aka government. Nobody is fooled. What is clear is the governor and AG of NY state are using their political power to dissolve a voluntary organization of like minded people who wish to protect their civil rights enshrined in the constitution. That is a violation of both NY and US constitutions and I would suggest that impeachment of both governor and AG begin immediately. Of course that won’t happen because they are both protected by democrat majority rule and far left media support. Despite wailings of abuse of power against Trump it’s truly the democrat left wing stalinist mafia that holds the cards and abuses those it wishes.

    1. The fact that you’re actively calling punishing corruption to be “Stalinist” is nothing short of ironic.

      1. Punishing political opponents isn’t stalinist? Also, punishing corporations is pretty consistent with communism.

  24. Based on her logic, shouldn’t she be working on shutting down the and dissolving the NY state government and the NY city government? There’s surely a lot more fraud going on in both of those “institutions” than is being claimed for the NRA.

    1. The former speaker of the NYS Assembly defended himself at trial by saying corruption is how NYS government does business and therefore it was not fair to single him out for prosecution.

  25. I am a member of the 2nd Amendment Foundation because the NRA is actually the nation’s largest gun control group – they made a deal with the devil when they backed the Brasy Bill as “reasonable, common-sense gun control” and now that it’s bitten them in the ass, the way so many of us told them it would, I have little sympathy for them. Nevertheless, NRA members do have millions of guns and all I can say is this bitch better watch her back if she thinks she can break the rules and expect the other side to continue abiding by the rules. At some point, we’re going to stop following the rules, too. She has no call to try dissolving the entire organization, especially not on such blatantly political grounds and this close to the election.

    1. The NRA has admitted it was a bad move and have vowed that that was the last line in the sand. Yes, I wish they were better, but size, money and history gives them more power than other groups. So, I still see value in maintaining my membership. I don’t think Heller or McDonald would have happened without the NRA.

      1. The NRA has admitted it was a bad move and have vowed that that was the last line in the sand.


        1. Never said they were perfect, just more effective than all the others combined.

          1. I’m just saying that for a “last line in the sand”, they kinda stepped right over it.

    2. no call to try dissolving the entire organization

      Like Lois Lerner, all she needs to do is to tie-up the funds and effort that would otherwise be used for campaigning up and down the ticket until November 4.

  26. I was on the NRA Board for 3 terms until purged. She has the facts and the power. The Clean Up the NRA Board of Directors ITSELF should have started in 1997 (instead of purging the Reformers over the next 3 years) is coming with a vengeance. And there is no organization in the Bullpen.

    1. The board is elected, right? Can you get fired? Or were you just not re-elected?

      1. Yeah members can vote. Most don’t care about this because it isn’t unusual for any other group either and the NRA remains pretty effective. And the left fears them.

  27. And the comment section right here is how the grifters get away with their grift.

    Grifter: It’s an outrage! Team Red/Blue wants to kill babies! Give me money and I will stop the evildoers from killing babies!
    Outraged citizens: I’m outraged too! Here let us give you lots of money so that you can save the babies!
    Grifter: *spends money on his own lifestyle and more outrage-generating fundraising appeals*
    A curious citizen: Hey, I thought you were going to spend that money on saving babies, not on luxury crap for yourself.
    Grifter: Look at this guy! How dare he question my motives or my intention! He must hate babies! Give me more money so that I can not only save the babies but defend our organization against these evildoers who want to destroy us and our good work saving babies!

    Etc., etc., etc.

    Of course the grifting machine is not unique to the right but it sure does seem like it’s found a big foothold among rightwing politics. Wasn’t there an article a while back that analyzed what all of those various Tea Party organizations actually spent their money on, and it was primarily just more fundraising and bennies for the leadership, and very little went towards advocacy?

    1. The officers of the NRA may be terrible and the Democrat AGs of two of the local government’s most hostile to 2nd Amendment rights might be abusing their positions to usethat as an excuse to remove an important ideological opponent group. Those things can both be true.

      1. We know for a fact one thing is true: The New York AG is abusing her position to remove an ideological opponent. It’s yet to be determined if the leadership of the NRA is terrible.

      2. I think you are likely right.

    2. Of course the grifting machine is not unique to the right but it sure does seem like it’s found a big foothold among rightwing politics.

      The party of Al Sharpton and the SPLC thinks there’s a particular problem with others. Too funny.

      1. Well of course Team Blue is going to point fingers at Team Red, and vice-versa, but there are grifters all over the place, monetizing outrage.

        1. No its your assertion that the right is worse on everything than the left. No matter what the issue. The right is always worse. LaPierre spent on average $21,000 per year on tailored, designer clothes. This is nothing really, in DC. They mentioned a house they thought about buying but then didn’t. They mentioned travel, pretty sure that charge was made against Obama and The Clinton Foundation numerous times, as well. Nothing in this story isn’t replicated by the left. Or even worse. So trying to use this story to try and imply the right is worse is just disingenuous. Or willful ignorance.

        2. And when it comes to non profits, even with this information, the NRA spends more of it’s dues and donations on activities than most non-profits. 90% on average. The best estimate of membership is 8 million, average membership dues are $25. That means a budget of around $200 million in dues alone each year. Again $21000 a year is a drop in the bucket.

        3. Remember when you used the neutral Mikey sock and everyone started laughing at you?

        4. You didn’t say they were all over the place. You’re pretending there is a particular problem on the right when the reverse is true.

      2. It’s ChemJeff. He ignores or excuses the left malfeasance by believing the right is always worse. He ignores or downplays Democrats using race as fearmongering while stating the right has nothing but fearmongering anymore. He states the right has no platform other than fear and paranoia while ignoring that Biden’s campaign has not articulated a clear vision other than “not Trump, and I was Obama’s VP wasn’t that great”. I mean even a number of left wing media sites are complaining about the Biden campaign’s lack of message.

    3. Do you find it odd your first impulse was to deride the right instead of condemning a political prosecution.

      But you have no team right?

  28. And I think the NRA helped Bush defeat Gore, and Bush was better by leaps and bounds than Gore in gun control (but just as bad on many other issues). Under Bush we saw the sunsetting of the stupid assault weapons ban (NRA was vital in making sure that this law had an automatic sunset, even if they couldn’t defeat it outright), the protection of gun manufacturers from nuisance lawsuits (NRA backed bill), the background check reform bill that cut the wait time down dramatically. They have successfully resisted using the arbitrary no fly list to ban people from gun ownership. And while they initially in favor of red flag laws, they are on the right side of the issue now.

  29. I love how all the comments can basically be summed up as “This -Insert other organization here- didn’t get charged/dissolved which means none of them are allowed to do that!”

    It makes as much sense as claiming “They didn’t convict that guy with murder! So they shouldn’t convict ANYONE of murder!”

    This is why Libertarians won’t get ahead in politics: You guys cannot compromise. It’s either all or nothing.

    1. No, that isn’t at all a true equivalency. First the no charges have been filed. Second the AGs actions are politically motivated by her own admission in 2018. Third, she isn’t targeting those accused of malfeasance but a national organization of 8 million plus members. That she openly admits she disagrees with and that she vowed to destroy because of their politics. The pointing out how she isn’t targeting other organizations is pointing out how selective she is, and how blatantly transparent her authoritarian motives are. Anyone who is defending her actions are defending the idea that a state AG can decide to destroy a political rival organization with no repercussions. You are arguing a straw man, not accurately portraying what posters are actually stating.

      1. Imm just quote this:

        “The lawsuit claims that in 2018, the NRA nearly doubled the fee it charged the Foundation, demanding an immediate “catch-up fee” of $4 million on top of an increase of $5.8 million.
        When part of the Foundation’s investment committee began to ask questions like “how the fees were determined, including who the employees were that supposedly worked for the Foundation and what benefit they added to the Foundation,” NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre showed up at the next scheduled committee meeting, in January 2019.

        “[LaPierre] and other NRA members told the Investment Committee that it was not a good time to hire any sort of outside auditor or conduct any of the requested research,” Racine alleged. “After that meeting, the Foundation Board took no formal action to investigate the management fees.”

        Gun-owners have a legal right to an organization that looks out for their rights. But the entire NRA edifice is demonstrably corrupt. Both the NRA Foundation and the NRA national organization are pretty irredeemably compromised.

        The NY AG’s office is doing gun owners a favor, frankly.

        1. No, we as members can make these decisions. The NRA has the most power, destroying them would set back gun rights organization. Your quote doesn’t prove any reason to destroy a national organization, because LaPierre was accused (but she felt it best not to charge him?) of misconduct. Sorry, especially as she stated in 2018 that she promised if elected AG she would destroy the NRA because she felt their political activity “was terrorism”. Also, your quote seems LaPierre opposed outside audits, and the board agreed not to pursue outside auditing. Maybe this proves malfeasance, but maybe it doesn’t. This isn’t proof of anything. The NRA has a number of victories since 2018. And a number of victories before that. That is the whole reason she is going after them. She wants to destroy them by her own admission. And by her own admission, her sole reason to destroy them is because they are the most powerful gun rights groups and she favors strict gun control. Her own words shows her motive. She isn’t charging any criminal charges against anyone, instead, she wants to destroy a whole organization because she accuses a couple board members of malfeasance. Let me repeat she has decided instead of charging LaPierre et al with criminal charges (which she has to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt and all 12 have to agree) she has instead decided to make this a civil case and destroy the whole organization (civil court only requires she convince the majority of the jury). This is blatant prosecutorial misconduct. And frankly fascist (literal sense) using her powers to destroy what she sees as a political enemy. By her own admissions.

          1. Hate to break it to you dude, but no one’s stopping you from forming your own, brand new, uncorrupt Gun Rights group.

            1. No, never said they were. Fuck what a stupid statement. The NRA is effective, the left fears them, but yeah, some new group formed by someone in po-dunk Northeast Montana will be just as effective. Also, this doesn’t counter a single argument I made. It really doesn’t even address any of my points. It wasn’t even clever.

              1. The only thing the NRA is “effective” at is lobbying republicans, being corrupt, and being massive hypocrites when it comes to black people carrying firearms.

                1. The NRA sued Texas because they were unconstitutionally denying blacks CCW, the plaintiff in the NRA backed McDonald case was black, Karl Malone served on their board of directors. I have listed a number of their victories over the past two decades in a number of posts. Your fact free, attack post just proves how much you and your lefty buddies fear the NRA. And there are only accusations of corruption (the first in 150 years of existence) that haven’t been proven in a court of law, so even the corruption, if true would be limited to a few board members and an abnormality. Your accusations are boiler plate left wing talking points. Especially the false charge of racism. There is no proof of this and plenty of proof of the exact opposite. I mean one of the very first missions of the NRA after it’s founding was to fight for the right of freed slaves to own guns. They have fought for a number of black plaintiffs to secure their gun rights. They still help represent black plaintiffs. They’ve sued to insure a black man in Chicago can own a gun, and they continue to sue Chicago to insure blacks and Hispanics in the city can practice their 2A rights, which Chicago continues to try to infringe.

                  1. The NRA has been nothing but a lobby for giving money to republicans and boosting sales for the Gun industry ever since the infamous coup at Cincinnati in 1977.

                    1. Wrong again. But keep parroting your long disproven leftist talking points. Your kind hate the 2A and hate the NRA has kept you from destroying it. We know.

                    2. a lobby for giving money to republicans

                      Perhaps your issue is with the corrupt politicians; they should be indicted. No?

                2. Then why do Libs shit their pants over them? Why?

    2. Except for all of the comments discussing the merits of the AG prosecution and its political content. Sure.

  30. I gotta wonder just how much experience posters here have had with the NRA. I am an NRA member. It is required to join the local rifle and pistol club and membership in the club is required to get the card used to open the gate at the local range. There is a different match every week at the range and you guessed it, NRA membership is required to enter the matches. In fact every match I know of every where in the US requires NRA membership. I shoot 3-gun, action pistol, high powered rifle, Rimfire Silhouette, steel challenge, and enjoy wandering over to the cowboy action matches and watching. The range officers who run the matches are all NRA trained and enforce safety rules and since the local club is an NRA club there is insurance coverage. All in all it is a little less than $US200 a year for club and NRA membership and to me it would be cheap at twice the price.

    I have followed the infighting at the top level of the NRA and quite frankly could care less what they do. I am happy with a safe well run facility with seven different ranges including one that goes out to 300 yards with covered shooting stands and fans; not to mention air conditioned rest rooms. I definitely get my money’s worth in addition to meeting lots of helpful people.

    Legally I have no idea what will happen but I also have no doubt that an organization like the NRA that promotes safe local rifle and pistol clubs will be around no matter what it is called.

    1. Lifetime member, because while I don’t agree with the NRA on everything they are by far the most effective group defending gun rights. This is her whole reason for going after them. She even admitted it in 2018.

      1. The left fears the NRA. And for all those arguing that other groups are better so this doesn’t matter, if she wins do you think her and other leftist won’t go after the 2AF, GOA etc next? She wants to set a precedence.

    2. .0000017/10

  31. Next up , the NY DA looks into the Nine hundred million dollars that went missing under Weezie DeBlasio. Right?

  32. The lawsuit is frivolous and will be dismissed as soon as the election is over with. There is no way it will be heard in 3 months.

    That being said, as a Patron member of the NRA, I believe Mr. LaPierre’s time needs to come to an end. He has done a remarkable job but he has become more of a liability than an asset these last few years.

    I would like to see the Association set limits on the number of years people in these positions can serve.

    1. The NRA should have realized the left would seize on this to attack the NRA. Wayne should have stepped aside for the good of the organization.

  33. how does this have any effect?? NRA was originally founded in NY, but is headquartered and registered in VA, if I understand it correctly. how can the AG of NY act to dissolve a corporation that is not registered in her state??

  34. I guess this all means Oliver North was correct?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.