Interesting Times

David Codrea published the following tweet earlier today. As he was out of town and wouldn't be available to respond, he said he wouldn't name names. If it turns out to be false, he said it would be on him. That said, remember he was one of the people who broke open Project Gunwalker aka Operation Fast and Furious.

I am away from internet and unable to verify but this is important if it pans out. A credible Source says a highly placed NRA exec has been offered immunity by the New York AG. @aarmark

— dcodrea (@dcodrea) July 31, 2019

This will be very interesting so I plan to keep checking Twitter and doing Google searches over the next few days.

Does Anyone In Fairfax Believe In Due Diligence?

I swear this was not meant to be "Dump on the NRA Day". It really wasn't but I just got sent some stuff that needs to be out there as questions must be raised.

If you attended the Meeting of Members at the NRA Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, you might remember a short Filipino lady seeking out the youngest and oldest Life Member for recognition. That was Mille Hallow who has served as Wayne LaPierre's right hand since 1996. According to her bio with the National Foundation for Women Legislators where she serves as Secretary, she is the Managing Director, Executive Operations. Earlier according to the same bio, she served as the Executive Director of the DC Commission on the Arts and Humanities. She went by Mildred Bautista then.

Here is where it gets interesting and, frankly, a bit disturbing.

From the Washington Post, March 24, 1984:

THE D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities is facing its toughest test. Eight weeks ago, the city's corporation counsel, followed by the U.S. attorney; began investigating possible misuse of $16,00: in commission funds by its executive director, Mildred Bautista.

When the probe began, the arts community in Washington was shocked. Then it was learned that Bautista, a $45,000-a-year appointee who also served as the mayor's cultural adviser, had left another job in Michigan 12 years ago after officials there discovered she had falsified a resume'.

Bautista resigned her post here, saying: "I have done wrong. I have misused public funds and betrayed the public trust. I feel regret and sadness about my sins, particularly to the many people, friends and associates who have placed their faith in me."

If only it had just been padding the resume. You can read more about the resume issue in Ann Arbor, Michigan here.

From the Washington Post, August 18, 1984:

Mildred Bautista, former executive director of the D.C. Commission on the Arts and Humanities, yesterday was given a suspended prison sentence and placed on three years probation in connection with charges she stole more than $23,000 in commission funds.

In handing down the sentence, D.C. Superior Court Judge Joseph M. Ryan delivered a stinging commentary, blaming the city's government for not adequately monitoring the use of the District's money.

Bautista, 37, a $45,000-a-year mayoral appointee, pleaded guilty in June to a single charge of first-degree theft, for which she could have been sentenced to up to 10 years in prison.

While suspending a prison term of 20 months to five years for Bautista and placing her on unsupervised probation, Ryan also ordered her to reimburse $23,691 to the city.

A couple of years later, the then-Ms. Bautista was removed from an arts commission in Fairfield, California when it was discovered she had pleaded guilty to "felony theft in connection with the embezzlement charges."

Coming on the heels of the revelation that the previous CFO of the NRA, Wilson "Woody" Phillips, had embezzled funds in a prior job, you have to ask yourself who the hell is doing anything about due diligence in Fairfax. The answer is obviously no one.

The other question that should be asked is why a prohibited person is in a position of authority with a gun rights organization. While I believe in redemption for our sins, at the very least it is bad optics.

Given her past it is reasonable to assume that she may have been beholden to anyone who knew the details and kept quiet about it. People like her boss Wayne LaPierre and the NRA's outside counsel William Brewer who reportedly kept "burn books" on key NRA staff.

Now think back to Wayne LaPierre's letter to the Board of Directors of April 25th. The letter said that Oliver North had relayed to Millie Hallow what Wayne described as an extortion attempt by AckMac. If Wayne went quietly then nothing would be released. It was on the basis of this letter that Col. North was bounced as NRA President, a slate of new officers loyal to Wayne were installed, and the whole myth about a "coup" began. After serving Wayne for 23 years and having a blemished past, don't you think Ms. Hallow's notes might have been edited after the fact to say whatever her boss wanted it to say?

As they say in the military when a commander is removed from his or her post, the person was removed "due to a loss of confidence in his ability to lead and command." I have long lost confidence that Wayne LaPierre has the ability to lead and effectively manage (command) the NRA.

The NRA's Outside Counsel - Ethical And Billing Concerns

An article concerning William Brewer III, the NRA's outside counsel, written by Mike Spies appeared yesterday in the New Yorker and was contemporaneously published in ProPublica, and The Trace. I had been told a few weeks ago that rumors about such an article had been swirling amongst the lobbyists on "K Street". After reading the article, the rumors were true that it would report on his questionable ethics and tactics within the NRA.

Brewer has been the NRA's outside counsel for approximately the last year and a half. In that time, his firm has billed in the neighborhood of $24 million. He was hired initially to sue Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Department of Financial Services head Maria Vullo, and the NY Department of Financial Services over their warnings to financial services companies on the "reputational risk" of having dealings with the NRA. It was alleged that their actions had cost the NRA millions of dollars in damages. In May, US District Court Judge Thomas McAvoy dismissed the moneydamages  part of the lawsuit against DFS and against Cuomo and Vullo in their official capacities. He did allow the First Amendment part of the case to continue.

Brewer and his firm have recently represented the NRA in their lawsuit against Ollie North and are involved in the cases in Virginia dealing with Ackerman McQueen.

According to the article, senior accountants at the NRA were raising red flags regarding questionable expenditures including payments to Brewer's firm.

In 2018, accountants for the National Rifle Association began cataloguing for its board of directors questionable financial arrangements that had led to millions of dollars in payments to a group of the organization’s top executives and consultants. The N.R.A. was experiencing cash-flow problems, and the accountants were trying to address what they believed to be serious financial mismanagement.

For a year and a half, the N.R.A. has employed an outside counsel, William A. Brewer III, who represents the organization in high-profile legal disputes and is also deeply involved in its internal decision-making. The accountants believed that the financial dealings they had found could jeopardize the organization’s nonprofit standing with regulators. Yet, according to a former senior official in the N.R.A.’s treasurer’s office, Brewer tried to thwart their efforts to draw attention to the problematic payments.

The former senior employee, Emily Cummins, who worked for twelve years in the N.R.A.’s treasurer’s office, quietly resigned, in November, as the group’s internal strife escalated. Cummins, in a written statement that began circulating this month among N.R.A. leaders, including at least one board member, alleges that Brewer obstructed the work of N.R.A. accountants and vastly exacerbated the organization’s financial woes as he charged it hefty legal fees. Cummins confirmed that she had produced the statement, which was obtained by ProPublica, but declined to provide any additional comments. Brewer’s firm said its work was justified and of the highest quality.

The statement lays out a list of allegations regarding Brewer’s legal work and his treatment of N.R.A. staff as questions surfaced about his law firm’s billings, which totalled twenty-four million dollars in a thirteen month period. In the first quarter of 2019, Brewer’s firm charged over ninety-seven thousand dollars per day, according to internal N.R.A. documents posted anonymously online.

You may remember that then-NRA President Oliver North and 1st VP Richard Childress raised questions regarding the billings of Brewer's firm in a letter dated April 18th. They referenced advice from then NRA Board Counsel Steve Hart that it was part of their fiduciary duty to ensure the billings were accurate and reasonable. Prior to the Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, Mr. Hart was summarily dismissed by Wayne LaPierre even though he was the Board's counsel and not the NRA's counsel.

Here is where it gets really interesting. Brewer sought to intimidate NRA staff that questioned his billings, arranged to have his bills paid first, and reportedly threatened to ruin the professional reputations of those accountants using "burn books" or dossiers containing private information.

Cummins accuses Brewer of trying to intimidate, deceive, and silence N.R.A. staff who were processing his bills while growing increasingly troubled by the organization’s mismanagement, exorbitant spending, and questionable deals involving conflicts of interest. Former colleagues of Brewer’s, as well as written correspondence obtained by ProPublica, broadly supported her claims.

Cummins writes in her statement that Brewer “intimidated NRA staff and threatened our professional livelihoods.” She alleges that he used pressure tactics with staffers “to keep them acquiescent,” compiling what she called “burn books” filled with personal information that he could use against individuals.

“I witnessed what appeared to be unrealistic and duplicative billing from Bill Brewer,” Cummins writes. “I witnessed that Bill Brewer himself created a 2018 cash flow crunch by interfering with accounts payable to prioritize paying himself immediately versus other NRA vendors that had been providing goods or services for months without payment, also jeopardizing the NRA’s biweekly staff payroll.”

Ms. Cummins, I was told by a prominent Second Amendment attorney who is personal friends with her, was a true believer in the Second Amendment and gave up a lucrative position with what was then Wachovia Bank. Ms. Cummins is a Certfied Public Accountant, a Certified Internal Auditor, and holds advanced degrees from both George Washington University and George Mason University. She served the NRA as Manager of Tax and Risk Management and then Managing Director of Tax and Risk Management for over 11 years. This is not the type of person who would make unfounded and inaccurate charges. She impresses me as a sober individual who cared deeply about the organization and its mission.

As you can imagine, Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors, have denied compiling burn books as well as any improper or excessive billing on their part. They have built a reputation on being very aggressive in their tactics which also resulted in significant billings. A Dallas publication back in the 1990s referred to Brewer and his previous partner John Bickel as "high-priced, high-profile Rambo lawyers".

“Bill’s representation of the N.R.A. is a classic example of ‘servicing the client to death,’ ” Hal Marshall, a former Bickel & Brewer partner, told ProPublica. “We tried to leave no stone unturned in our cases, and it often yielded great results. On the other hand, the bills were hefty.”

Brewer and his firm bring with it ethical issues. Currently, Brewer is appealing a fine of $177,000 for attempting to influence potential jurors and witnesses by using a push poll in Lubbock. This fine and admonishment was affirmed by the Texas 7th Court of Appeals in 2018. They concluded that the trial court judge acted appropriately.

If the right to a civil jury trial, enshrined in both the Seventh Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I of the Texas Constitution, is going to signify anything at all, it must denote the right to trial by a fair and impartial jury. Any conduct that erodes that fundamental core principle erodes public confidence in the entire judicial process. Judges, attorneys, and litigants must never condone practices that undermine that principle if the right to a jury trial is to remain “inviolate.”

Here, the trial judge was faced with serious allegations that attorneys for one party had consciously attempted to preemptively tip the balance of a fair and impartial jury in favor of their clients. After diligently hearing testimony for several days, the Honorable Ruben G. Reyes reached the conclusion that counsel’s conduct was committed in bad faith, that it affected a core function of the court, and that it was sanctionable. He then set the monetary amount of those sanctions in a rational manner based on competent evidence before him. Under the record before this court, we cannot say the trial judge abused his discretion in imposing those sanctions. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Brewer has since appealed this decision to the Texas Supreme Court. The case appears to have been fully briefed and now awaits either an oral hearing or an order dismissing the appeal. However, his ethical problems in Texas did preclude him from representing the NRA in Virginia where he had applied for pro hac vice participation. US District Court Judge Liam O'Grady was none too pleased by Brewer's failure to mention that in his motion to appear.

If this were the only ethical case involving Brewer it would be one thing. However, as Spies points out, a number of former associates of Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors, were fired for raising questions about either billing or ethical issues.

In addition to Cummins’s statement, ProPublica obtained text messages and an e-mail composed by former Brewer employees in March, 2018, that alleged unethical behavior by the firm. Four former colleagues of Brewer’s—three of whom, like many firm employees, were abruptly fired during the past two years—described a pattern of disregard for ethical billing and conduct. The texts and e-mail were sent just before the N.R.A. began to heavily invest its dwindling resources in litigation by the firm.

In early March, an attorney who had worked as a Brewer associate sent an e-mail to another New York City-based law firm. The firm worked for a hedge fund that was locked in a legal fight against Eco-Bat, a lead-production company represented by Brewer’s firm. The e-mail warned, “A number of attorneys have recently left Brewer, concerned about the firm’s ethics violations.”

It went on to say that a Brewer attorney believed that he had been fired “for refusal to violate ethical rules.” The attorney thought that he had identified a disqualifiable conflict of interest involving an attorney on his team, the e-mail said. When the Brewer lawyer “confirmed his initial analysis,” the e-mail said, “he was told to drop the matter and terminated the following Monday.”

These allegations were denied by Brewer's firm. They went on to win the case for Eco-Bat referenced above and the client praised Brewer's work.

So where was the Board of Directors in this whole affair of questionable and excessive billing and threats to NRA staff. Even more importantly, where was the Audit Committee which was given a report with these concerns? I'll let Ms. Cummins have the final word on that.

According to Cummins’s statement, Brewer misled the N.R.A.’s board and “used information gathered by NRA staff to fit different purposes and to frame a different story to the board of directors.” It also says that Brewer “effectively silenced NRA staff who uncovered issues needing board of directors attention” and “influenced members of the board” by “selectively withholding information relevant to their decision making.”

Rogers, the Brewer partner, dismissed Cummins’s statement and said that it “may reflect a radical misunderstanding of certain work my firm performed.” Cotton, the N.R.A.’s first vice-president, said, “I am not aware of any concerns that would preclude the firm from representing the N.R.A., period.”

Cummins concludes her statement by saying that, while still an N.R.A. employee, she had tried to sound an alarm regarding the N.R.A.’s legal representation, writing, “I raised concerns about Bill Brewer internally and with the board audit committee.” According to Cummins, she was ignored.

The best you can say is that the Board of Directors was hoodwinked by Brewer and chose to believe him rather than a long-term loyal employee who was raising issues and asking difficult questions.

A New Cam & Co.

As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, Cam Edwards became the new editor of BearingArms.com. Today he announced he was getting back behind the microphone with the debut of the new BearingArms Cam & Co. The new show is a one man show coming from Cam's farm in Virginia.

He says about the show:

That means it’s time to add in a new component to what I’ll be doing here at BA, and to get back to doing what has been my passion for well over a decade now: a daily show focusing on the latest 2A news and information from around the country. Armed citizen stories, the latest on legislation, litigation, and regulations that impact our 2nd Amendment rights, interviews with newsmakers and experts, trips to the range, and maybe even a baby goat or two every now and then.

Cam & Co. was the one really decent thing on NRATV. It wasn't shrill like Dana and it wasn't angry like Stichfield. I'm glad he has found a way to do this again. However, though, I guess at next year's NRA Annual Meeting in Nashville, he won't be coming from a big stage in the middle of the convention center. And you know, that's OK too.




Welcome back, Cam!

Forgotten Weapons - A Virtual Tour Of The Renovated Cody Firearms Museum

When my family took our great Western trip during the Bicentennial, one place we visited was Cody, Wyoming. We took in the nightly rodeo and other sights. However, the highlight was the visit to what was then called the Winchester Museum and the Buffalo Bill Museum. They have since been renamed to the Cody Firearms Museum within the Buffalo Bill Center of the West.

The Cody Firearms Museum has just undergone an extensive (and expensive) renovation. Ian McCollum of Forgotten Weapons visits and gives us a virtual tour. He notes in his description of the video that it is now, in his opinion, the best firearms museum in the US.

Save The Second's Petition Drive

For those that haven't heard Save the Second is a grass roots organization calling for reforms in the National Rifle Association. They most certainly are not anti-NRA and their proposed reforms would, in my opinion, help shore up the organization and return the focus to fighting for the Second Amendment.

The Five Goals

1. Smaller board of directors 
2. Term limits
3. Minimum attendance requirements
4. Member engagement
5. Return the focus to the 2A exclusively (training, advocacy, safety, hunting, etc.)

The first goal that they are working on is attendance requirements for directors. To that end, they are collecting signatures from voting members on a petition to bring that up at the next Board of Directors meeting in September. It seeks to change the bylaws to impose an attendance requirement. If a board member misses two out of three meetings in a given year without good cause, they cannot be nominated by the Nominating Committee. They could run by petition. If they miss three consecutive meetings, they would be permanently disqualified from service on the Board of Directors at the end of their current term.

I have groused about this in the past and now it is it is time to act. If you are going to put your name up for election to the Board, it should be incumbent upon you to actually show up for the meetings. While the celebrities seem to be the worst offenders, they aren't the only ones.

Rob Pincus, one of the organizers and board members of Save the Second, explains more about it in the YouTube video below. I have downloaded, signed, and returned the petition myself. They need 250 signatures by the end of the week.

Buz Mills' Open Letter

I was out of town visiting the granddaughters from Thursday night on so didn't get a chance to put this up until tonight. On Friday, Buz Mills, owner of Gunsite and a NRA Director, released an open letter to NRA members and directors. In the letter, Mills says that much of the NRA's money issues are of its own making and that the only way to clear things up is through a thorough, independent audit. He goes further saying that he and fellow Board of Directors members have failed to provide the proper oversight and direction to staff and hired executives.

Mills' letter makes him the fifth director to openly call for an outside audit of the NRA. Tim Knight, Sean Maloney, Esther Schneider, and Robert Brown issued a call for it on July 22nd.

Mills' letter is below:

Owen Buz Mills
Gunsite Ranch, Arizona
26 July 2019

NRA Members / NRA Directors

I address this first to our NRA members; you are the reason for our existence. It is your money we are spending. Believe me; I know this. It is NOT our money; it is yours. Next, I address this to the Board of Directors; this is a call to action. You have a duty to act.

I have spent more than five decades as a supporting member of our organization as a life member. I have invested ten years serving as a member of your Board of Directors. I love Our NRA as I love my country. To me, Our NRA is synonymous with America, and I firmly believe that only Our NRA stands between America and the doom presented by the socialist progressives.

I can no longer bite my tongue and pray for the best to be done for me. I must now as I have done before for my country, take up the sword and the shield to ensure the continuance of our country, for if there is no NRA, there is no America.

As I testified on the floor of the Board of Directors in Indianapolis: Our current situation is the result of our own irresponsibility in not providing our staff and employees with adequate oversight and direction. While we have committees responsible for providing oversight, the reality is, they have not. I presented evidence of this abdication as demonstrated in previous Board of Directors meetings. There can be no doubt, the truth of the matter is spelled out in the minutes of these board and committee meetings.

Now we are the target of adventurous political opponents. All intent on securing their place in history as the one who took down Our NRA. The long knives are out, and we are the target. Our tender underbelly is exposed. How long can we last?

The quickest way to clear up all this superfluous innuendo, venom and invective clouding our lives is a professional, thorough and independent audit.

Surely one of the major firms involved daily in this science can accomplish this task and present to your Board the results in a timely fashion. Cost should always be a consideration, and since I am aware of costs we are currently incurring for legal work, this would be a pittance. President Oliver North recommended a similar course of action. I wholeheartedly agreed then and still believe this to be our only course to survival.

The results of this audit will be trusted and relied upon and set the standards for all not for profit membership organizations as Our NRA again leads the nation in setting the example all others only wish they could emulate.

Many board members have business dealings with our organization. I have been doing business with Our NRA for decades, my books are open, and I am proud of all the interactions Gunsite has had with Our NRA. I can not imagine any board member doing business with Our NRA not being willing to set the record straight. Why are we fighting this? It makes no sense.

It is incomprehensible to me that any member of our organization, from Mrs. Meadows, to past presidents, current officers, and board members cannot join me in demanding this action be taken immediately.

Yours for God, America and Our NRA

Apples To Associations

A friend sent me this today. It is a take-off on probably the most famous Super Bowl advertisement of all time. If you've never seen it, you can see the original on YouTube.

1984

Today, we celebrate the first glorious manifestation of the Information Purification Directives. We have created, for the first time in all history, a garden of pure greed—where any Officer, Director, Vendor, Consultant or other Snout-in-the-Trough may profit, secure from the vermin purveying contradictory truths. Our Unification of Thoughts is more powerful a weapon than any fleet or army on earth. We are one Official Family, with one will, one resolve, one cause. Our enemies shall talk themselves to death, and we will bury them with their own confusion. The Cult of the Personality shall prevail!

2019

BRING ON THE GIRL WITH THE SLEDGEHAMMER!

h/t Nathan K.

Nuns Meddling Again

You may remember that last year that a group of Catholic nuns sponsored shareholder resolutions at both Ruger and American Outdoor Brands (S&W). The resolutions passed and both companies were forced to issue reports on "gun violence" (sic). According to a letter sent out today by American Outdoor Brands Corporation, they are back again with a new resolution. This new proposal, couched in terms of a UN Human Rights policy, "seeks to impose an obligation for the company to assume liability for undefined “societal impacts” of violence committed with firearms."

Think about that: American Outdoor Brands would be liable for the criminal misuse of Smith & Wesson firearms. No company in its right mind would voluntarily assume such liability. It is as if Ford, GM, Toyota, etc. would now assume the liability for people driving their cars while drunk and injuring or killing someone. It's ludicrous!

Here is the proposal:

RESOLVED: Shareholders request that the Board of Directors of American Outdoor Brands adopt a comprehensive policy articulating our company’s commitment to respect human rights, and which includes a description of proposed due diligence processes to identify, assess, prevent and mitigate actual and potential adverse human rights impacts.

WHEREAS,

The UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights (hereinafter UNGPs) state:

The responsibility to respect human rights requires that business enterprises: (a) Avoid causing or contributing to adverse human rights impacts through their own activities, and address such impacts when they occur; [and] (b) Seek to prevent or mitigate adverse human rights impacts that are directly linked to their operations, products or services by their business relationships, even if they have not contributed to those impacts.

In order to meet their responsibility to respect human rights, business enterprises should have in place policies and processes appropriate to their size and circumstances, including . . . [a] policy commitment to meet their responsibility to respect human rights.

As investors, we seek to identify and assess human rights risks and impacts in portfolio companies as they have direct implications for shareholder value and, depending on whether and how they are managed, are a bellwether for a company’s long-term viability.

Given the lethality of firearms products and the potential for their misuse, in direct contradiction with the company’s stated objective of providing “next-generation guns for sport, recreation, protection and personal use”, the risk of adverse human rights impacts is especially elevated for all gun manufacturers, including American Outdoor Brands.

Companies exposed to human rights risks may incur significant legal, reputational and financial costs that are material to investors. A public-facing human rights policy that includes a human rights due diligence process is essential to managing these risks. For this reason, hundreds of global corporations have adopted human rights policies, including British American Tobacco, Exxon and Walmart.

The Board of Directors are not amused by the Sisters of the Holy Names of Jesus and Mary, U.S.-Ontario.

Proponent’s Resolution and supporting statement cites the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and uses vague terms that do not alert shareholders to the specific obligations the Resolution, if adopted, would impose on our company. The Proponent discusses a “human rights policy” and “human rights risks” but nowhere are those terms explained. Given that the Proponent is a signatory to a statement seeking the regulation of the private ownership of firearms, their failure to explain the specific application of their proposal to our company is, by itself, a significant deficiency in the proposal and reason for rejection. But even worse is that the Resolution requires our company to address all of what Proponent would claim are the societal impacts of violence committed with firearms, beyond any legal obligation to do so. Simply put, the Resolution if adopted could potentially hold our company responsible for the illegal misuse of firearms and the violence associated with such misuse.

Similarly, Proponent insists on “due diligence processes to identify, assess, prevent and mitigate actual and potential human rights impacts.” Again, not a single one of these terms is defined or explained by Proponent. The Proponent’s failure to explain and define their request makes it quite literally impossible for anyone to understand not only what Proponent would claim is the scope of the obligation, but also its costs.

The full letter and proposal can be found here.

While many investment companies voted with the nuns last year, I would hope that they have the good sense to realize the implications of the passage of such a dangerous proposal. It is nothing less than a call for the destruction of a company founded more than a century and a half ago. Though raised and still nominally a Catholic, I am having less than pious thoughts about this group of nuns and those that would vote with them.

The Response

The letter from Sean Maloney, Tim Knight, Esther Schneider, and Robert Brown provoked an almost immediate response from the NRA and NRA President Carolyn Meadows.

The official statement:

The response from Carolyn Meadows:

Both of these come courtesy of Stephen Gutowski of the Washington Free Beacon. He posted them on Twitter last night.

I seem to remember hearing or seeing a memo from Oliver North, Richard Childress, AND Carolyn Meadows which raised questions about the financial affairs. It seems that once she became president her views changed 180 degrees.

As to Brewer himself, if one were a conspiracy theorist, you would have a field day. Think about it: liberal Democrat lawyer, gives money to Beto and Hillary, AckMac son-in-law, worms his way into the confidence of the EVP of the NRA and starts a civil war within the organization in the run-up to the 2020 elections. Duplicity on this scale is worthy of a Vladimir Putin. Frankly, while some have suggested it, I don't think Michael Bloomberg could have conceived on creating a mole like this.

The Letter

Four members of the NRA Board of Directors have sent a letter to the Board and Officers calling for an independent investigation and review of the following:

1. Allegations of financial misconduct
2. Review of the billings of Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors
3. Creation of an outside, independent committee tasked for investigating the issues surrounding potential financial misconduct and the Brewer billing. This committee would then report back to the Board of Directors its findings.

The members who sent this letter were Sean Maloney, Tim Knight, Esther Schneider, and LtCol. Robert Brown. The issues raised mirror the letter from former NRA President Oliver North sent on April 25th to the Board where he announced the formation of a crisis management committee. They also correlate with the joint North-Childress letter of April 18th which questioned in detail the billings of the Brewer firm.

All four of these Board members had been purged from their committee assignments in whole or in part.

The full letter is below:

July 22, 2019

President Carolyn Meadows
The National Rifle Association of America
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA 22030

Secretary John Frazier
The National Rifle Association of America
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA 22030

The National Rifle Association of America Board of Directors
The National Rifle Association of America
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA 22030

Friends and Patriots of the NRA

RE: Independent investigations

Dear Folks,

Continued leaks, accusations, and counter accusations have left a haze of conjecture surrounding our Association. It is our duty as a duly elected Board of Directors to dispel this cloud, right the Association’s path and restore the trust of our members.

Because of our dedication and loyalty to the NRA, the Answer and Counterclaim filed on behalf of Oliver North, in the case of National Rifle Association v. Oliver North, compels us as Board Members – legally bound by our fiduciary duty of care – to act. To ensure that we are fully and accurately informed about the financial health of the Association, we must make the following requests.

First, that the NRA engage outside professionals to conduct an independent, internal investigation and confidential audit into the allegations of financial misconduct. Second, that the NRA conduct an outside, independent review of the millions of dollars in payments to Brewer, Attorneys & Counselors for legal fees. Third, pursuant to NRA Bylaw Article IV, Section 2, Board of Directors, Powers and Duties, that an Outside Independent Special Committee be formed, tasked with investigating and addressing the problems identified above, and required to report its findings and recommendations to the entire Board of Directors.

With this degree of scrutiny and transparency, the Board can fulfill our legal obligations, remove all doubt regarding our Association’s direction, and allow us to return to our mission of protecting our Second Amendment.

Yours for freedom,

/S/ Sean Maloney
/S/ Timothy Knight
/S/ Esther Schneider
/S/ Lt. Col. Robert K. Brown, USAR (Ret.)

Substitute "NRA" For "Military" In This Article

Lt. Col. M. L. "Matt" Cavanaugh, Ph.D.,  just published an article entitled "How the Military Murders Meritocracy". It was on the Modern War Institute at West Point's website. Col. Cavanaugh is an active duty US Army strategist and a professor of practice with Arizona State University's School of Politics and Global Studies.

Cavanaugh's article dealt with military bureaucracy and the hindrance of a real meritocracy within it. He notes that soldier, sailors, marines, and airmen "self-silence" real and legitimate criticism because they fear a swift and painful reprisal by those above them. Doesn't that sound like another large organization that I know and love?

Cavanaugh writes:

It’s under cover of that darkness that the rot in the system manifests in subtle ways. In a healthy meritocratic system, there would be a relatively free flow of honest feedback that enables the best idea, or the best person, to succeed—in respectful ways that improve organizational effectiveness. But that’s not the norm, as can be seen on any given day in any American military unit.

It’s the higher-ranking individual that ignores or denies or evades real problems flagged by a junior officer or noncommissioned officer. It’s the indirect, I-agree-with-you-completely-but-we-can’t-do-that-because-it-just-might-upset-someone-higher-up-the-chain conversation. It’s a subordinate’s quietly paralytic fear of confrontation with a senior.

Nobody talks about it, but it knocks military candor down at every turn, making us weaker all the time. Sometimes the emperor you serve isn’t wearing socks, or much of anything else, and as things stand in the US military, saying something about that nudity is so severely stifled it’s a wonder it ever happens. And our adversaries may be far from perfect, but they can certainly find the vulnerable chinks exposed by an emperor’s nudity.

Big, brittle systems with such weaknesses always get exploited. It’s a “when,” not an “if.”

If you were to substitute "NRA" for "military" and "manager" or "director" for "officer in these paragraphs, it could have been written about the National Rifle Association.

Ollie North and Richard Childress (and for a brief period, Carolyn Meadows) sought to get to the bottom of the some of the internal issues facing the NRA. Ollie and Richard are now in the wilderness and North is being sued by the NRA to avoid paying his rightful legal bills.

There are a number of board of directors members who are being quiet so as to avoid the further wrath of Wayne LaPierre and his henchmen (and women) in the Old Guard. Five directors have come out publicly saying they were removed from some or all of their committee assignments. There are more out there who have lost committee assignments yet have decided to not go public with it. The worst part about that is that Wayne is supposed to answer to the directors and not the other way around.

Our enemies who despise the Second Amendment as well as our freedoms know that the NRA is vulnerable. I get emails on a weekly - if not daily - basis from the Brady Campaign and the cult of personality known as Giffords saying the NRA is on its heels and please send us money. Attorneys General Letitia James (D-NY) and Karl Racine (D-DC) would not have issued subpoenas to the NRA if they didn't sense weakness. The NRA is a "big, brittle system" and is getting those weaknesses exploited.

One thing I hear frequently is why doesn't the Executive Committee or the entire Board of Directors just meet and vote Wayne out. If you've read the Bylaws you know it isn't that simple. First, while the Executive Committee does have the power to suspend the Executive VP, it requires a 3/4s vote. That works out to 18 votes needed (3 officers plus 20 members elected from the BOD). However, to have a vote would require an Executive Committee meeting which is called at the discretion of the President. Second, the entire Board of Directors will be meeting in September in Alaska. If they decide to remove Wayne, it would take 57 votes. It just isn't going to happen. I'm afraid the only way Wayne will leave is either in a hearse or if he gets a significantly large buyout to induce him to leave voluntarily. That is reality. Unfortunately.

Even CNN Gets It Even If Wayne Doesn't

I know CNN is the home of "fake news" and the rest of that nonsense. Still, even a blind squirrel can sometimes find an acorn. They had a story yesterday about the struggle of the NRA to maintain the political influence it had in 2016 in the 2020 elections. The lead for the story is the personal influence that former NRA-ILA director Chris Cox had with politicians. I mentioned the same thing in my post about Jason Ouimet being appointed the interim head of ILA.

From the CNN story:

The NRA accused Chris Cox -- the man who had controlled the organization's lobbying and political activities for more than 15 years -- of trying to overthrow Chief Executive Wayne LaPierre, according to a lawsuit filed last month.

Cox denied the charge to The New York Times, but quickly resigned. His unceremonious sacking stunned NRA board members, who saw Cox as a potential successor to LaPierre, and infuriated political staffers. Some started packing up their desks, unsure of whether they would be ousted too, multiple NRA sources said.

That's when the Washington power brokers really started to worry. Cox's departure, after months of turmoil at the NRA, only amplified the sense that the gun-rights group might not be the political powerhouse in 2020 that it has been for decades, including notably in 2016.

When President Donald Trump convened a meeting with bipartisan lawmakers and signaled and openness to some gun control measures in the wake of a shooting at a high school in Parkland, Florida, that left 17 dead, it was Cox who showed up at the White House the following evening.

Afterward, Cox tweeted that Trump didn't want gun control. For his part, Trump tweeted: "Good (Great) meeting in the Oval Office tonight with the NRA!"

The reservoir of goodwill toward Cox ran deep on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

"Every Republican senator who matters has Chris' cell phone number," one GOP operative who worked closely with Cox on the political side told CNN. "And vice versa."

The operative recounted one meeting between Cox and a senator, ostensibly about a policy issue, that instead was focused primarily on the senator's favorite hunting grounds in his home state. Cox knew them all in advance -- and had been to them himself.

Cox and his team held weekly calls with Republican committees to share tips about ongoing campaigns -- calls that increased in frequency in the lead-up to key primaries and Election Day, according to former officials. "Senators didn't call Wayne," the GOP operative said of LaPierre. "They called Chris."

That's partly because it was Cox's job to maintain those contacts, while LaPierre oversaw the organization. Cox has moved on to launch his own Washington consulting firm. But unease over his departure -- and LaPierre's efforts to consolidate power -- is fueling uncertainty about the direction of the organization overall.

 Honestly, from my conversations with others, I don't think Wayne LaPierre really understood the value of Chris to the campaign side of NRA-ILA. All he could see was a potential rival for power that had to be vanquished. As to the supposed "coup", I think it is a figment of his imagination as it has been played upon by the NRA's outside counsel William Brewer III. Witness the gratuitous mention of Chris in one paragraph of the NRA's lawsuit against Ollie North.

I am going to repeat what I wrote at the beginning of the month:  Wayne LaPierre's legacy will be as the guy who caused us to lose gun rights in order to preserve his perks if the Republicans fail to hold on to at least one House of Congress and the Presidency. His paranoia and arrogance caused him to listen to the wrong guy and we are all suffering as a result.

Adding to that statement, I would say that those NRA Board members and others who stand 100% behind Wayne will be complicit in this loss of gun rights. They will blame us, they will blame Bloomberg and Soros, they will blame anyone but themselves. The reality is that they did not want to excise what has become a cancer upon the National Rifle Association. Wayne did do good in the past but the past is past and, like with a championship football coach who no longer wins, it is time to move on.

Intended For Efficiency, Control, Or Both?

A memo went out today from Wayne LaPierre. Among the things in the memo was a consolidation of the public affairs function and digital networks, the production in-house of America's 1st Freedom, and news about NRA Women. This follows Wednesday's departure of Jennifer Baker from her position as Director of Public Affairs for NRA-ILA.

One wonders whether this consolidation is for cost savings and efficiency as suggested by the memo or is it a matter of consolidating power in the hands of trusted appartchiks? It could, of course, be the former with the latter being just a beneficial side effect if you are Wayne and the Old Guard.

The memo is reproduced below:

 

MEMORANDUM

TO:                             All NRA Staff and Associates

FROM:                        Wayne LaPierre, Executive Vice President/CEO     

DATE:                        July 19, 2019 

SUBJECT:                 NRA Communications Update

Today’s announcements are about positioning ourselves for prosperous long-term growth. We are announcing key restructuring initiatives that are expected to drive a momentous transformation to meet association demands logistically, financially, to efficiently compete in our markets, and most importantly to better serve our members.

Restructuring Initiatives:

NRA Public Affairs

NRA Public Affairs serves an important function as the voice of the NRA to our members, the news media, and key stakeholders. As an organization, it is critical that our public outreach is highly coordinated, our messaging is consistent, and our external communications are oriented toward our mission:  defense of the Second Amendment.

 

In support of these goals, I am pleased to announce a restructuring of the NRA Public Affairs Department. Effective immediately, I am consolidating all our media and communications functions under one department, NRA Public Affairs. This division will serve all of the NRA’s needs for public affairs, social media, and crisis communications. This department will coordinate official spokesperson duties for all of the NRA, including NRA-ILA and General Operations.

 

NRA Public Affairs will report directly to the Executive Vice President through the Managing Director of Public Affairs, Andrew Arulanandam. As you may know, Andrew has more than 18 years’ experience working in all phases of communications for the NRA and NRA-ILA. He has a strong background in media relations and executive communications and will continue to serve the NRA well.  

 

These changes will not only enhance our public advocacy, eliminate duplication of efforts, but also help us realize cost savings on behalf of our members.

NRA Digital Network

Effective immediately, Information Services will oversee all technical development and support for all NRA web properties. With the exception of Membership, NRA ILA, and NRA.org, NRA Publications will manage the editorial creation, review, and posting of online content.  Publications will also manage advertising sales for websites, e-newsletters, video, and social media.  General Operations will continue to use the same existing process submitting e-newsletters and content changes to their properties as supplied by program managers. This is a key initiative to generate new sources of revenue moving forward as well as providing a more unified digital package.

An announcement will be made shortly for a seminar to be scheduled with key stakeholders to clarify the updated procedures going forward.

America’s 1^st Freedom

America’s 1^st Freedom will be exclusively produced in-house by NRA Publications. A new Editor-in-Chief, Frank Miniter, has joined NRA Publications and reports to Editorial Director, John Zent. We are confident that under their leadership, we will maintain our commitment to quality journalism. Please join me in welcoming Frank Miniter to his new assignment.

NRA Women’s Digital Initiative

NRA Women will unify all of the NRA's online outreach to this growing segment of firearm owners while continuing to have General Operations, Advancement, and Membership operate their respective initiatives. We will have a destination site which merges all of our efforts into a more cohesive package optimized for search engines with fresh innovative content published on a daily basis. NRA Women will be an important component of the NRA Digital Network. Reporting to Editorial Director John Zent, Ann Y. Smith will serve as the Senior Executive Editor for NRA Women. With years of experience as a Senior Executive Editor for AmericanRifleman.org, Ann will lead our editorial efforts to grow and engage new audiences with a particular emphasis on mobile, social, and video features. 

A digital seminar will be announced at a future date to discuss specifics with stakeholders.

The restructuring efforts above are as a result of extensive research, reflection, and listening to the concerns and suggestions from staff and key stakeholders. We aim to utilize our innovation on an all-encompassing scale while unifying the underlying processes and sales/advertising opportunities critical to our organizational health and vitality. 

I know these changes will better position the NRA for the future and am confident that our new structure will enable us to benefit from the many extraordinary opportunities ahead.