search
top

The Key Questions

So it turns out that people who have hated NRA and/or Wayne LaPierre for years… you might want to sit down for this, as it’s a shocking revelation… still hate NRA and Wayne LaPierre. So if I seem a little tired of this, that’s why.

There are no good guys in any of this, I’m increasingly convinced. But here’s the key issues as I see it:

  • Why did Pete Brownell step down and make way for Ollie North? North wasn’t in line for President.
  • What was North’s angle in all of this? The problem in this whole thing is I don’t trust any of the players.
  • Was Ack-Mac trying to peddle influence on the Board to shore up its position for the the post-Wayne era, which is coming soon (he’s 70, half a decade past typical retirement age) whether or not the Board’s circled wagons succeed in fending off the Indians.
  • Why did Wayne’s expenses go through Ackerman-McQueen instead of NRA?
  • Why are Bill Brewer’s legal fees so high? I’ve had attorney friends tell me the fees do indeed look high, but not out of the realm of possibility for handling several pieces of complex federal litigation.

I agree NRA needs to hire an independent auditor to get to the bottom of some of these questions. But understand that if they do, none of us are ever going to see the results. Because the purpose of an external auditor is to tell you what you’re doing wrong off-the-record before a real auditor shows up and it counts.

I’m a lot less concerned about the travel and clothes, other than if they went through the PR firm to conceal them from auditing.

But it’s pretty clear the Board isn’t prepared to remove Wayne, so those wanting to depose him have more work to do. There’s a way to handle these things, and leaking shit to our enemies isn’t one of them. This is not new. Anyone who’s been following the Trace’s (admittedly good) journalism on this issue for any time knows someone or someones have been leaking shit to them for a while. Who? And Why?

I’d be a lot more willing to join a movement to push Wayne along to retirement if I could be convinced that the movement is realistic, focused on improving NRA, and isn’t just settling old scores and trying to drive NRA to a disastrous hard-line position.

53 Responses to “The Key Questions”

  1. Ian Argent says:

    These are deep waters. And Maxim 29 applies.

  2. HappyWarrior6 says:

    Yes. Because taking an actual hard line is above all our biggest concern here of course……….

    • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

      Seriously.

      We need to take a hard line against BOTH AckMac and the leadership who has excessive spending.

      • HSR47 says:

        Exactly.

        There have been serious indications for decades that Wayne, his in-group of cronies, and Ack-Mac, ALL have their hands in the proverbial cookie jar.

        We need to get all of their hands out of that cookie jar.

        • 399 says:

          “There have been serious indications for decades that Wayne, his in-group of cronies, and Ack-Mac, ALL have their hands in the proverbial cookie jar.”

          And nothing would get you a new asshole reamed faster than suggesting that in hearing of the NRA Faithful.

          Sebastian’s opening statement was “So it turns out that people who have hated NRA and/or Wayne LaPierre for years… you might want to sit down for this, as it’s a shocking revelation… still hate NRA and Wayne LaPierre. So if I seem a little tired of this. . .” It’s not perfectly clear where he was coming from with that, but I could add that the fatigue flows in both directions. A lot of people got tired of endless excuses for endemic corruption, which continue even now that the corruption has become completely public.

    • Patrick says:

      My only question is, “if not Wayne, then who?”

      Wayne made this mess. But I have not heard of any credible person to replace him, and that’s more important than getting rid of the current boss.

      Is anyone even asking what qualities we need to run this thing for the next decade?

      No more wannabe rock stars. Let’s try someone who has fought in the trenches at the state level (not just lobbying, but really fighting), and preferably someone who has significant time outside NRA. The insiders are probably all skunked up. The Board will need to be strong here (laughable, perhaps).

      We are going to need someone who can roll up their cuffs and honestly work the details. That means nobody who has ever had a paid “commentator” gig at Fox, or been elected to Congress.

      Wayne’s gotta go, but not until we have the right person.

      • Charlie Foxtrot says:

        Very good question! First of all, fixing this mess requires a person with integrity and with some knowledge of the business of running a nonprofit, knowledge of the NRA and its core mission, and knowledge of the current gun culture.

        You are asking for someone to lead the NRA for the next decade. I am telling you that you are just asking to be betrayed, once again. Why should the NRA be lead by a king? It is already the case today! Why continue the practice that has gotten us into this mess in the first place?

        NRA officers and board members should have term limits! The person replacing Wayne LaPierre should be an interim CEO that works together with the Board on reforming the NRA bylaws. Then, this CEO should step aside. Otherwise, there will be just a Wayne LaPierre 2.0.

        All of this is obviously just wishful thinking. The NRA is seriously broken. It has been for a while. We could rename it to Wayne LaPierre Inc., because it is all about him. Its core mission seems to be to keep Wayne LaPierre employed at +$1M salary. Only 2 out of the 76 Board members have spoken up. What I describe above requires 2/3 of the Board (51 Directors). This is simply not going to happen!

        What is more likely going to happen is that certain people within the NRA will oust Wayne LaPierre, do some minor reforms, and then continue with the business as usual. I am pretty sure that was Oliver North’s plan.

      • HSR47 says:

        First and foremost, the fact that there is no obvious successor groomed to replace figures like Wayne or his cronies is a strong indicator of the sort of toxic leadership that needs to be removed. If that’s the case here, it’s likely that the best long-term strategy will be to surgically remove the cancer first, and worry about other aspects of care as a secondary priority — We need to focus first on keeping the orginization alive, and if Wayne et. al. are as toxic as they appear to be, getting rid of them should be our primary goal. In short, get rid of the peculators first, and worry about finding suitable replacements once they’re gone.

        Next, as for the replacement, one of the suggestions I’ve heard that I like is the idea of splitting Wayne’s job into two separate jobs: He is both the public face of the origination, and the guy in charge of day-to-day operations. In practice, I’d say that the EVP should be the behind-the-scenes person responsible for the day-to-day operations of the org, and the President of the org/board should be the public face of the organization. The fact that Wayne has long filled both of these roles is certainly a large part of why he’s stayed in his current position for so long, which in turn shows why the two functions should be split: It makes him harder to remove, which means he can be all the more brazen in his raids on the proverbial cookie jar.

        “Is anyone even asking what qualities we need for the next decade?”

        That’s why it’s so important to split the duties of handling the NRA’s day-to-day operations apart from the duties of being the public face of the org: I’m not convinced that there’s a good candidate within the professional side of the org to replace Wayne as the public face of the org, but there are plenty of people on the board who have the knowledge, skill, and attitude required to be successful in that role. Likewise, I’m sure it wouldn’t be too difficult to find someone to run the day-to-day operations of the NRA.

        • Charlie Foxtrot says:

          Splitting these responsibilities is an excellent idea. Have the NRA President represent the organization and its members in the public, while the NRA Executive Vice President runs the operation of the organization.

          Both should be reporting back to the Board and being held accountable by the Board, which is the reason why the NRA should reduce its Board size to 9. That would be in line with similar-sized organizations.

        • Alpheus says:

          I can’t help but wonder what the point of having a President is, if the President isn’t the one person who’s out there being a face of the NRA.

          This is what weirded me out about Oliver North becoming President of the NRA. Sure, he’s a controversial figure. But what did he even do as President? No one seems to know. But then, what did the previous President do? And the one before that? Who are these people, anyway?

          Meanwhile, why does everyone know who the Executive Vice President is?

          You’d think that it would be opposite. No one would know who the Executive Vice President is (all they would know is that this is the person who does the day-to-day operations), but everyone would stand up and take notice when the President cleared their throat to say something.

  3. Erin Palette says:

    Best I can tell, Brownell was incredibly busy with his full-time job as CEO of the family business and the part-time job as NRA president. He had to choose one, so he chose the family business. I can’t say I blame him.

    Why did the Board elect North? Beats the hell out of me. I thought it was a terrible decision and told them as much.

    • Charlie Foxtrot says:

      Why did LaPierre select North? That’s a rather easy answer. The NRA was losing a lot of members. North appealed to those that would follow the call of the “Clenched Fist of Truth”. Making North the NRA President was simply just lining up the NRA with he GOP base.

      By now, we should all know that the term “election” has no meaning at the NRA. Officers are selected by the current leadership!

  4. Charlie Foxtrot says:

    This isn’t about pushing Wayne LaPierre out and putting Oliver North into the driver seat of the same corrupt organization. This is about changing the organization and removing all corruption. That would require an interim CEO that facilitates the transition and house cleaning. It would require a significant resizing of the board and term limits. Stop being part of the problem and argue for maintaining the corrupt status quo! Start being part of a solution!

    One thing is sure, if the NRA doesn’t change, it will die, rather fast. Many in the 2A community have already abandoned the NRA. Wayne LaPierre and Co. want to bridge the gap until the 2020 election cycle, where they think they can fund raise again using fear mongering. By then, however, the NRA will have become a total laughing stock.

    You fear a disastrous hard-line position? What does that even mean?

    • Roberta X says:

      Personally, I fear an excessive allegiance to outdated SoCon positions that have nothing to do with gun rights and which few people under 60 agree with. There, Charlie, do you feel better now?

      • Charlie Foxtrot says:

        My question was for Sebastian, who, I believe, meant something completely different.

        By SoCon, you mean the Southern Conference?: http://www.soconsports.com.

        How about you try engaging in a meaningful discussion?

        I would say the NRA has TODAY an excessive allegiance to outdated political positions that have nothing to do with gun rights and which few people under 60 agree with. The current push for change in the NRA is, in part, motivated to stop that. There, Roberta X, do you feel better now?

        • The_Jack says:

          Meaningful discussion?

          You consist of the majority of the comments in this thread.

          And then you get snippy when someone dares to reply to you?

          And for a bonus you get all bitter and angry about a concern that you /share/ with the person who dared to reply to you.

          But I’m sure you’ve got other abilities to help convince people of the merits of your views.

          Heck this isn’t the only part in this very post where someone replies to you with a “Huh, I found this out that’s pretty supporting of your statement” and you savage them for /daring/ to not fully agree with you.

          Or daring to agree with you /now/ and not by your presumption at some past date.

          Heck it looks like you have more ire for someone who has some agreement with you than someone who is being utterly dismissive of you.

          • Charlie Foxtrot says:

            Interesting reply! I got snippy, because Roberta X made completely false assumptions and made it immediately a personal attack: “There, Charlie, do you feel better now?”

            That’s why I was asking for a meaningful discussion, instead of personal attacks. Your post is void of any meaningful discussion and a pure personal attack. Do you have anything to contribute to the discussion?

            As I said, I don’t fear that the NRA will develop an excessive allegiance to outdated political positions, instead I believe that the NRA already today has that excessive allegiance. That has to change for the NRA to survive!

            I also believe that this is not what Sebastian meant by his post. Sebastian had prior discussions on such issues and I “assume” that he fears that the NRA will become a no-compromise gun rights organization. As I said, I “assume”. It is up to Sebastian to clarify that. That’s why I asked.

            • Roberta X says:

              You know, Charlie, if you think being asked if you feel better is a personal attack, there’s not much point in continuing the discussion.

              Of course, paranoid speculations about the internal workings of NRA weren’t adding much in the way of actual information anyway.

              NRA had serious PR problems *going* *into* this mess. None of their moves so far have made things any better. I’m not sure they will be able to recover.

              • Charlie Foxtrot says:

                I agree with your assessment of the NRA’s serious PR problems and the impact of their actions. I do think, however, that there is a chance for the NRA to recover from this, providing a change in leadership, bylaws and PR. The problem is that the NRA leadership seems to be unwilling to change their beloved NRA. They want to keep it they way it is and just ride out the storm.

          • Patrick Henry, the 2nd says:

            Bang on comment. Especially this:

            Or daring to agree with you /now/ and not by your presumption at some past date.

            Been there, done that.

  5. Charlie Foxtrot says:

    By the way, you missed one question. Why is the NRA a client of Bill Brewer’s firm in the first place, given that it donated to Beto O’Rourke in 2018 and Hillary Clinton in 2007, 2008 and 2016?

    link

    • Joe says:

      I made posts about the hypothetical possibility that the NRA was being subverted by Ack-Mack, and that $Money was being laundered to antigun splinter factions.

      Ohio Gun Owners has done Facebook Live-Podcasts about this, and they talked about Open-Secrets exposing this.

      Very sad that my suspicions were correct.

      • Charlie Foxtrot says:

        You may want to start reading a little bit of NRA history. For starters, I would recommend Neal Knox’s book – The Gun Rights War (https://www.amazon.com/dp/0976863308). Ackerman McQueen has worked for the NRA since the 1980s. Wayne LaPierre has been the NRA’s CEO since 1991. The corruption between both organizations has a long history. I don’t need someone telling me a whacky conspiracy theory about leftists suddenly subverting the NRA, when this corrupt relationship has been going on for decades and is now just blowing up due to disagreements on who gets how much money.

        The donations by Bill Brewer’s firm are quite typical of any company that wants to play both sides. Benchmade also donated to Democrats for the same reason, playing both sides. The NRA should obviously do a proper vetting of is business relationships. They did not do so here, because Bill Brewer is a McQueen in-law, i.e., part of the corrupt family.

  6. Richard says:

    Couple of thoughts about your point.
    1. Erin Pallett is probably right about Brownell.
    2. I don’t have a clue what North is doing unless it is angling to replace WLP.
    3. You are probably right about AckMac though they appear to have overplayed their hand. 70 is not old in DC. How old is RBG. They may also be in for the money.
    4. Running WLP expenses outside the NRA accounts is a pretty standard ploy in those circles. Keeps people from asking too many questions. I saw lots of this in my career. Of course, you have to be able to trust the laundry.
    5. This is the 800 lb gorilla in the room. I have paid the bills for some pretty big lawsuits and I have never seen anything like this.

    • HSR47 says:

      2/3: It’s not clear what North’s angle in all of this is, but he seems to have taken the position that he was shot for being the messenger (i.e. “Ack-Mac said they were going to do X unless Y, and I told WLP about it because I thought X would be more destructive than Y.”) while WLP seems to have taken the position that North acted as Ack-Mac’s agent in an extortion plot.

      As far as where the truth lies on that spectrum, your guess is as good as mine.

      • Richard says:

        I read the North letter and couldn’t make up my mind as to whether it was a warning or a CYA. Didn’t feel like extortion but I am not close to the situation.

  7. Dave says:

    “There’s a way to handle these things, and leaking shit to our enemies isn’t one of them.”

    Ok, what’s your way of “handling” this situation. You’ve done a great, stand up job and championing the status quo. What’s your solution here?

    Independent auditor?
    as you’ve pointed out, nobody on the outside sees what they come up with.

    Principals who did wrong walk away with golden parachutes.

    Air the dirty laundry?
    Principals who did wrong become less likely to get golden parachutes because there could be legal implications. Also, principals who did wrong have to engage personal counsel to defend themselves against potential civil liability and potentially criminal charges depending on the severity of their misdeeds. I don’t see criminal yet, but others more familiar may.

    What other way are you going to stop the ship from sinking; it is sinking, you do know that right Seb?

    Do nothing?

    Nothing changes. In fact, in light current developments, I would expect the bilking to increase substantially because the principals who have done wrong know this is coming to an end, so they need to hoard what they can, while they can.

    Gun rights groups are very clique-ish, particularly the boards. NRA is no exception. As was pointed out above, the “elections” are really selections. Popularity contests by another name that only allows those “loyal” to the leader advance. But they can only advance so far because if they go too far, they suddenly get less popular. A whisper here, email there, and boards are easily kept in check.

    “I’d be a lot more willing to join a movement to push Wayne along to retirement if I could be convinced that the movement is realistic, focused on improving NRA, and isn’t just settling old scores and trying to drive NRA to a disastrous hard-line position.”

    I don’t believe this and I don’t believe that you believe it either. Even if you personally knew the persons who were trying right the NRA and knew with absolute certainty that good was in their hearts, you know that deep down inside you would still oppose them.
    You see score settling but a great many of us see relief that this is out in the open and hope that they realize this isn’t right, do something to correct this and move on.

    correcting this is diametrically opposed to keeping current BOD and NRA leadership.

    • Roberta X says:

      “Principals who did wrong walk away with golden parachutes.”
      As long as they’re going away and they leave a functioning/rebuildable organization behind, I don’t care. That horse has done fled the barn already, loaded with cash.

      • Dave says:

        but in that scenario, they don’t walk away –right now– they hang on to the bitter end. Sure, they will eventually leave and will leave before they die of old age, but not long before, just a little sooner. The audit results may affect how much more bilking can be done and keep things from getting worse, but otherwise little will probably change as a result.

        The new model of scandal management is to not acknowledge the scandal. Say minimal things that acknowledge or allude to it. Minimally express regret, say some things with a lot of words but very little meaning, virtue signal and don’t do or say anything more on the subject.

        If Ralph “coonman” Northam can use this strategy, so can the bad actors within NRA. If you look at those in our community who were punked by sasha cohen, they handled it not much differently.

        The Northam strategy is working for him and for NRA. If you change the 3 letters from NRA to ATF, whomever leaked the dirt would be called a “whistleblower” like the gunwalker scandal. But since this is NRA and a great many who deify NRA take the issues raised by the disclosures way too personally, it’s affecting our objectivity as a group.

        • Joe says:

          You live in Virginia, right?

          Anyway, the “Ralph Northam Strategy” you bring up works for Northam for one reason…..He’s a Democrat. If he were a Republican, he’d have resigned and “fell off the face of the Earth” afterward, so to speak.

          That being said, Virginia has been infected with the terminal cancer of “Progressivism”. Filthy, Goose-Stepping, Useful Idiot, Down-Ballot, Democrat Voting Sheeple Transplants from New Jersey, Maryland, New York, Connecticut, and Massachusetts are keeping Northam and Virginia Democrats well above water in terms of holding office.

          There’s a 70% chance that the Virginia Democrat Party will take control of at least 1 Chamber of the Virginia State Legislature. If they get both, Ralph Northam will do to Virginia what Jim Florio did to NJ in the early 1990’s.

          • HappyWarrior6 says:

            Never fails… and what I entirely expect. Joe! will swoop in to tell you how hard the state will give it to you, with Joe! not far behind in doing the giving as well (methinks).

            • Joe says:

              Until SCOTUS strikes down an Assault Weapons Ban in any State that already has it, or shall soon have one, it’s only gonna get worse as Assault Weapons Bans, and worse, spread to more and more States. State Preemption is also under attack.

              Mock me all you want, because it’s just crass, vapid, and outright petty of you to do so. Do I need to vote examples of what’s going on?

              • HappyWarrior6 says:

                It’s nice to see the anti-gunners have their our own Tokyo Rose who is alive and well in this forum.

                • Joe says:

                  The anti’s HAD that with “National Observer” trolling us up until the conclusion of the 2018 Midterms. You know what’s really driving me nuts my good friend? People like yourself who mock those that understand the situation we’re all in.

                  Here in the State of Ohio (ya know? America’s Bellwether), we have, on paper, the “Most Pro-Gun Situation” we’ve ever had, with the State Supreme Court, Governorship, and State Legislature (Veto-Proof Majorities there) and all other State Offices being on our side.

                  Still, we are fighting tooth and nail with uncertainty to get Constitutional Carry passed, as well now having to fight off our NRA A-Rated Governor and State Supreme Court from possibly, outside of Legislative Legality, imposing Red-Flag Laws.

                  The NRA is wallowing in self-immolating s***-fest style rut, which also correlates with us in Ohio getting no help from them whatsoever in getting Constitutional Carry passed which it already should’ve been, as far back as after the 2014 Midterms….

                  Same thing goes for States like Michigan, Wisconsin, Iowa, Texas, and dare I say, even Florida. Instead, there are feckless GOP Trifectas, and Split-Governments with Democrats controlling Statewide Offices stopping Constitutional Carry and flirting with Bloomberg’s Pigs.

                  Shout-Out however to the Gunowners of Maine (Including those here at the blog) for beating back your Democrat Controlled State Legislature from trying to get a High Capacity Magazine Ban and 3-Day Waiting Period passed in your State. You guys are the model and inspiration for keeping up and winning the good fight.

                  • Charlie Foxtrot says:

                    Same situation here in Tennessee. Instead of constitutional carry, like in Kentucky, we got a secondary, concealed-only carry permit that nobody wants. The NRA pushed for it. The Tennessee Firearms Association opposed it.

                    Maybe next year? The NRA Annual Meeting 2020 is in Nashville, assuming that the NRA still exists at that point.

                    • Joe says:

                      When Constitutional Carry here in Ohio gets it’s “Floor Hearings”, Bloomberg’s Banshee Pigs are going to ensure that the State Legislature Buildings are gonna be a total Flop-House Style, Fiasco.

                      It’s gonna be ugly, and with DeWine and his Red-Flag BULL****, I’m very nervous it won’t pass.

                      Horrible for you guys in Tennessee too. You guys should’ve had Constitutional Carry 8 years ago in 2011 with your State’s Tea Party State Level Trifecta.

      • Richard says:

        This is the eternal dilemma with regime change or firing people in general. Giving them a golden parachute has the virtue of getting them gone without having them wreck the place resisting. On the other hand, it just encourages the next one. Lawyers always want to settle but I am not sure it is the best long-term solution.

  8. Kermit says:

    Is the NRA the leadership, headed by Wayne? Or is it the rank and file members? Those 5 million gun owners?
    If it’s the leadership, then protect that leadership. If it’s the members, protect them.
    How much influence would LaPierre have without the members? How much could he affect policy, what politicians would give him the time of day, much less listen to his concerns?
    None.
    Wayne is NOT the NRA, and attempts to protect him and others are actually harmful to the organization and its goals at this point. He’s clouded in scandal (has been for a while; the clouds are now simply visible from without as well as within). The NRA’s influence, the members’ influence through it, is now damaged and sullied, its mission diverted. The Iron Law of Bureaucracy has come to roost.
    I’m not hanging up my Life Membership. But I am also not going to support LaPierre, or the likes of Charles Cotton, one of the men who attempted to kill Open Carry in Texas, and did help prevent Constitutional Carry, and now is apparently and unsurprisingly firmly in the Wayne World (because he was afraid pushing the issue would lead to a total ban on carry in Texas, and because it could cost CCW instructors money). They are men who have allowed their purpose to be sidelined to personal aggrandizement and cowardice years ago.
    This is not airing dirty laundry. This is laundry that has been allowed to fester so long the neighbors can smell it from inside our house. It is not publicizing personal disagreements; it is a domestic fight that neighbors three blocks over can hear. Pretending it is minor, attempting to keep it quiet, only draws further suspicion at this point, and further discredits the organization.
    Next ballot for NRA, my prime concern will be, “Is this person a current Board member?” and if the answer is affirmative, precludes any vote for them. After that, it’s issue based.
    If the Board won’t clean itself, it’s time for the whole bathwater tub to be overturned.

    • Will says:

      How does one vote for people that AREN’T BOD members? IIRC, there is only a couple token spots for a write-in candidate.

      From my perspective, the BOD needs to get together and toss all of WLaP’s group, along with Ack-Mac. Then work on getting the financials in order. Failure to do this, now that they have been put on notice of what THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO BY LAW, may increase the penalties that they can be hit with. Being proactive would be the smart thing to do. Are they smart enough? Consider it an IQ test. A really expensive one to fail. Tick-Tock…

    • Sprocket says:

      You hit it out of the park Kermit. The NRA is the membership. The current leadership has not effectively served the membership or staff of the NRA for some time. I would even go so far as to say the current leadership believes the membership and staff exist to serve them. When you hang giant banners with your image on them at the convention, the message is pretty clear.

  9. Chris says:

    Why do we need to retain Wayne to ditch Ack-Mack?

    Is the thought that without the votes of Wayne and his inner circle on the Executive Board, the remaining Executive Board members will be unwilling to muster the votes to terminate Ack Mack? And the rest of the Board is hopelessly in Ack Mack’s pocket?

    If that’s the case, then the NRA has been captured by Ack Mack and deserves to lose its non-profit status.

    • Sebastian says:

      Because the votes to get rid of him aren’t there.

      • Chris says:

        Don’t be surprised if people decide it is more effective and ethical to spend their money and time supporting other organizations then.

        There’s plenty of effective state-level orgs, and effective organizations like SAF, that appear to have a significantly lower level of self-dealing and corruption.

        If you give money to NRA’s 501C4 right now, it seems like it will be spent on:
        1) Ack Mack
        2) Fundraising expenses
        3) Brewer’s (antigun) lawfirm
        4) Wayne’s suits and travel
        5) Whatever is left will be fines to the NY AG or IRS, or seized if things go really south

  10. David says:

    Good post Sebastian. People seem to forget that not that long ago NRA was a million member organization. It grew to 5 million over the last 20 years with Wayne at the helm, not so much because of Wayne, but because of the actual threats to our right, the grassroots activism, and yes the messaging, which until the last 10 years or so, was focused on gun rights. AckMc did that messaging. They are also responsible for the non-gun related crap that we are seeing now. They still do some good stuff – Cam Edwards’ program and the Love at First Shot series with Julie Golob which targets new women shooters, to name a couple. If NRA can move that kind of stuff in house, do it and I’m all for cutting the AckMc umbilical cord. What I don’t want to do though is throw the baby out with the bath water so to speak and cut off everything no matter the value is has just because AckMc or Wayne has something to do with it.

    • Sebastian says:

      The big issue is there aren’t the votes to get rid of Wayne on the Board. If you want to be rid of Wayne, you need to win elections. So far anti-Wayne candidates aren’t doing all that well. Especially if they also embrace a hard-line. People have asked “What’s the right way,” and that’s a good question I’ll have more to say about later.

      • Charlie Foxtrot says:

        I think you are misunderstanding the dire situation the NRA is in. The NRA is NEVER going to be changed from within by Board of Directors elections. The system has been rigged to make sure of that. They just added new restrictions at the last Board meeting to prevent the “Bloombergian candidate”. LOL.

        Instead, what is happening is that the NRA is losing members and spending money that they don’t have like there is no tomorrow. The NRA is dying, unless the CURRENT Directors make the decision to change that, rather fast. My fear is that they don’t and just let the NRA organization go bankrupt or dissolved by regulators.

        Only 2 out of 76 NRA Directors have publicly spoken up about the current situation. The other NRA Directors stay either quiet or make a fool out of themselves by telling the NRA membership to “knock it off”.

        This is going to end badly and the current NRA leadership will do what every con artist does, blame the train wreck on someone else. There will be no accountability and no transparency, unless Wayne LaPierre goes and all involved in this farce with him.

        • HSR47 says:

          Thus far I’ve seen statements from Knight and West. Are those the two board members you’re talking about, or do you have others in mind?

          • Charlie Foxtrot says:

            Correct, Timothy Knight and Allen West are the only 2 NRA Directors that have publicly spoken up without telling everyone to fall in line behind Wayne LaPierre. Allen West’s latest statement is less clear, though, and could be seen as a call to members to “knock it off” OR and a call to the Board to stop sleeping at the wheel and take action: https://theoldschoolpatriot.com/need-stronger-focused-reformed-nra/.

            Note that the phrase, “knock it off”, came from NRA Director Carrie Lightfoot (The Well Armed Woman LLC): https://www.ammoland.com/2019/05/knock-it-off-and-protect-the-nra-wall/.

            I believe that there is only a small number of NRA Directors that are truly loyal to Wayne LaPierre and they hold the key committee memberships. I believe that the rest of the NRA Directors are either completely inept, are capable but inexperienced in this type of hardball politics/corruption, or just know that they are powerless.

    • Richard says:

      Agreed. Self defense is virtually the only front on which conservatives have been winning the culture war. It is pretty clear that the NRA is a big part of this and burning it down would be a huge win for our enemies.

Leave a Reply

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

top