Extortion? Oh, Puhleeze! UPDATED

Adam Kraut had an opinion piece published in Ammoland.com on Monday. It was entitled “When the Levee Breaks – NRA’s Untenable Position”. It discussed much of the ongoing controversy surrounding the leadership and executive staff of the NRA. At the end, it has this mislabeled comment regarding Adam’s candidacy for the board and Anthony Colandro. Adam considered the statement as an assertion and not a “challenge”.

With that out of the way, there is one more issue to attend to. Numerous individuals have asked if I’d be running for the 76th Board Seat at the NRA Annual Meeting. Others have asked if I would endorse or support Anthony Colandro (who is now being supported by Wayne LaPierre, among others!?). I’ve decided to keep my options open. My name will appear on the ballot, however, if Mr. Colandro will join me in demanding that Wayne and the Board Members who failed to exercise their fiduciary responsibilities immediately resign, I will consider stepping aside and offering my endorsement. Without that commitment though, I could not in good conscience endorse any candidate.

For those attending the NRA Annual Meeting this year, I’ll see you there. I hope you’ll join me in demanding accountability from the Officers and the Board.

Mr. Colandro responded in the comments saying it reeked of extortion.

I’m independent and I will make my own decisions. Anyone who knows me will tell you that I won’t be intimidated by ANYONE to make ANY decision. In New Jersey, we’re all too familiar with corruption and Mr. Kraut’s so-called “challenge” reeks of extortion. This infighting has to stop! We all have a common goal in the 2A community. If we stand strong and stand together, we stand a chance.

Extortion? I didn’t realize the self-described tough guy with pit-bull tendencies was such a snowflake.

Mr. Colandro makes much of the fact that he serves as a non-director member of three NRA committees. As Bitter at Shall Not Be Questioned noted, “Those appointments don’t come without the blessing of the leadership and support of the incumbent board.”

Therein lies the problem in my eyes. Mr. Colandro was 33rd out of 35 candidates and had existing board members in the runner-up position ahead of him. I have a feeling – and it is only a feeling – that some sort of deal or commitment was made between Mr. Colandro and the powers that be. The NRA Board doesn’t need any more people beholden to the executive staff. Indeed that is where many of the internal troubles have originated.

As for me, I plan to vote for the second runner-up aka Adam. I have a level of trust that Adam Kraut will do the right thing whereas I don’t trust Mr. Colandro in the least to do what’s right for the organization and its future.

This is my last post before Indy. I will try to post from the NRA Annual Meeting when I have time.

UPDATE: Rob Pincus has a post on Facebook expressing much of the same misgivings about a deal between Mr. Colandro and the existing executive leadership.

Anthony Colandro has been endorsed by the NRA. Nothing about the NRA suggests they would support him unless a clear deal was in place for him to support the current regime.

Read the whole thing. If you are here and want change, then vote for Adam Kraut. If you are satisfied with the status quo and don’t care if the NRA goes down the tubes, then by all means vote for Mr. Colandro.

Head In The Sand Approach Doesn’t Help Gun Rights – Or Gun Rights Organizations

The Illinois State Rifle Association has always been at the forefront in the fight for gun rights. They are the NRA affiliate in the Prairie State but have often paired with the Second Amendment Foundation on lawsuits. I’ve met their executive director Richard Pearson at a number of Gun Rights Policy Conferences. I respect the work he does in a state with so many challenges to the Second Amendment.

Sometimes, however, you have to disagree with people respect and call out a head in the sand attitude. Thus is the case with something Richard wrote in today’s ISRA Thursday Bulletin.

The NRA is under constant attack these days. These attacks come in a couple of ways. First, of course, is just a straightforward attack on the Second Amendment and law-abiding gun owners. That is you and me folks. The second part of the attack is a propaganda campaign to make members doubt their own organization. Don’t fall for it. This whole propaganda attack is funded by Bloomberg and others like him. Bloomberg and company are trying to erode the loyal NRA base and prevent potential new members from joining. Has the NRA ever made any mistakes? Probably, but so has every other organization. If the NRA did, it was with the best intentions in trying to defend our Second Amendment. I have no qualms about that.

He is correct that the NRA is under attack from the gun prohibitionists.  However, I take exception to what Richard characterizes as the second part of the attack. Yes, The Trace is a Bloomberg funded organization and yes it contributed to the reporting in The New Yorker. However, as a NRA Board Member said to me, facts don’t lie. What was printed in The New Yorker is an expose’ of the NRA but that doesn’t make it wrong or incorrect. Moreover, self-dealing and feathering one’s own nest through insider deals is not “with the best intentions in trying to defend our Second Amendment.” What those involved have done is put the future of the organization at risk through their personal avarice.

I have plenty of qualms about that.

This Is Pretty Weak — Even For The Violence Policy Center

Josh  “I invented the term Assault Weapon” Sugarmann’s Violence Policy Center is taking note that the NRA Annual Meeting starts on Friday. They have come up with a graphic asserting the Annual Meeting is showcasing “manufacturers of mass shooter’s weapon of choice”.

Normally, I appreciate a good infographic. This is just weak stuff.

More interesting is what they fail to show. I believe the terrorists who killed 130 concert goers at the Bataclan Theater in Paris used AK-47s. Likewise, I believe the Islamic terrorists that attacked the Taj Hotel in Mumbai and killed 165 and wounded over 300 used AKs. This does not even begin to approach the total number of people who have been killed in mass murders with bombs and arson.

More importantly, this graphic fails to take in account the number of defensive gun uses using the firearms produced by these manufacturers. I’ll be gracious and even include Hi-Point in that list.

The graphic also fails to specify which of these locations was an officially gun-free zone. Just glancing over the list I see that most of them qualify.

They put this graphic under their “Investigating the Gun Lobby” banner which is devoted to the National Rifle Association. The actual official gun lobby is the National Shooting Sports Foundation which represents manufacturers. Moreover, if you want to get more expansive, every one of us who supports gun rights is the gun lobby. It isn’t only an organization in Fairfax, VA.

Jeff Knox – Two Options

Jeff Knox, son of the late Neal Knox, is a person I like and respect. We’ve met at various NRA Annual Meetings and Gun Rights Policy Conferences over the years. I’ve come to appreciate his great love for the NRA and what it could be as well as his extensive institutional memory. He has been fighting a long but so-far losing battle to reform the NRA in an effort to recapture what the Cincinnati Revolt of 1977 was supposed to institutionalize. Some may have seen his efforts as quixotic as he has been a lone voice in the wilderness arguing that change was needed for lo these many years. Nonetheless, he was right and the recent revelations regarding the NRA are providing him some vindication.

Things are coming to a head. As I wrote yesterday, Everytown for Gun Safety has filed a formal complaint with the Internal Revenue Service. This shot across the bow from the gun prohibitionists may only be the first step. Moreover, Attorney General Letitia James (D-NY) could well move to dissolve the NRA for being in violation of New York’s stringent non-profit laws as the organization is chartered in the State of New York.

Jeff, in an opinion piece published late yesterday in Ammoland, posits there are now only two options going forward to save the NRA.

Option 1. A majority of the Board circles the wagons in defense of Wayne LaPierre and his pals and tries to weather the storm. (They’ll fail, and the whole ship will sink.)

or

Option 2. A majority of the Board fires LaPierre and other executives (or accepts their resignations) and nullifies their contracts, suspends all vendor contracts pending thorough review and renegotiation, and purges culpable members of their own body – demonstrating a commitment to safeguarding NRA assets on behalf of the membership. (Plugging the holes and possibly saving the ship.)

The days of muddling through are in the past. The enemies of the Second Amendment are seeing to that.

Jeff goes on to write:

The current NRA Board of Directors have a slim chance of saving the NRA from total ruin, but they must act swiftly and decisively.

They must expunge everyone involved in even the appearance of corruption. Including board members who failed in their oversight obligations and individuals like Josh Powell the genius behind many of the NRA’s recent disasters like Carry Guard and a known manipulator of Wayne LaPierre’s decision making. They must halt all outside contracts until they can be thoroughly reviewed and either canceled or renegotiated. As much as possible needs to be brought in-house and run under the direct oversight of the board. This action may mean the end of things like Ackerman McQueen run NRA-TV, so do not be surprised if they pack up shop one day soon.

All of the significant, life-threatening issues facing NRA revolve around just three operational areas: PR, fundraising, and political spending. Suspending operations in those three areas, and bringing them under tight, in-house control for the immediate future, would put the association back on stable ground and allow it to continue operating effectively.

There will undoubtedly be repercussions from all of this, including fines, sanctions, lawsuits, and possibly criminal indictments, but all of those repercussions are on their way, regardless of what the board does now. The difference is whether those consequences will be levied against an organization that still has the people who created those problems at the helm – people who will be using NRA resources to cover their tails – or an organization that has policed itself and taken corrective action to address its problems.

If I may use the analogy of the stages of cancer, we are well beyond Stage 1 where the cancer is small and only in one area. The only question we are facing is whether it is Stage 3 where the cancer is much larger and has spread into adjacent tissues or is it Stage 4 where the cancer has metastasized to other areas of the body and survival is in doubt. Both Stage 3 and Stage 4 are bad. Treating either stage requires strong, even radical, measures if long-term survival is to have any probability of success.

This unfortunately is what we are facing. I would love to have been writing about all the new products coming out or the seminars and presentations I anticipated attending this weekend. Events of the past week dictate otherwise.

Everytown Files Complaint With IRS Against NRA



As originally reported by The Hill on Friday, Everytown for Gun Safety has filed a complaint with the Internal Revenue Service asking for an investigation into the National Rifle Association and their 501(c)(4) status. Specifically, the complaint alleges that the directors, officers, and others are using income and/or assets for personal gain and that the NRA is engaged in commercial, for-profit, activities.

The letter that accompanies the IRS Form 13909 Tax-Exempt Organization Complaint (Referral) accuses the NRA of related party transactions, financial mismanagement, and lack of transparency. It ask that the IRS begin an investigation to see whether the NRA has violated Section 501(c)(4) laws and regulations. It further asks that if violations are found that the IRS consider what would be appropriate remedies including revocation of the NRA’s 501(c)(4) status.

This complaint follows the publication of the expose’ of the NRA in The New Yorker by Mike Spies that was published on Wednesday. It relies heavily on the accusations leveled in that article as well as an earlier article that appeared in the New York Times.

Some of the items specified in the accompanying letter include:

  • Payments to former NRA Managing Director Michael Marcellin from Lockton Affinity while being paid by the NRA.
  • Payment of $1.395 million to HWS Consulting whose owner Wayne Sheets served as Executive Director of the NRA foundation.
  • Payments of over $3 million to Crow Shooting Supply since 2008 which has been owned by Brownells since 2011. Some of these payments were while Pete Brownell served as President of the NRA.
  • Issues related to Josh Powell who serves as Chief of Staff to Wayne LaPierre.
  • Transfer of monies from the NRA Foundation to the NRA itself.

I could only imagine the damage this complaint might have done if it had been filed during the Obama Administration. As it is,  it still isn’t good. You can read the entire letter here and make your own estimate of how harmful it is to the NRA.

Great Twitter Thread On April 19th

I didn’t get to post this on April 19th as I was helping take care of my granddaughters while their parents were away. If you turn your head on a one year old who has learned to crawl, they are into everything!

April 19th was the 244th anniversary of the “shot heard ’round the world” or the Battle of Lexington and Concord. We should never forget that the battle began when authorities tried to confiscate firearms from men who decided they’d rather be citizens than subjects.

Anyway, this Twitter thread is brilliant. I’ll only excerpt a part of it but I’d encourage you to read the whole thing.

NRA Annual Meeting – Where Can You Carry?

The Indy Star published an article on Friday detailing where you can and can’t carry at the NRA Annual Meeting which starts on Friday. The biggest event you cannot carry is at the NRA Leadership Forum on Friday. It’s not because Wayne and Company is scared but because the Secret Service forbids any weapons in any place where the President will be speaking or appearing. Given that both President Donald Trump and VP Mike Pence will be speaking at the event, I’m sure it goes double.

What is prohibited instead the Leadership Forum?

Here’s a complete list of items that won’t be allowed inside the stadium when Trump speaks:
  • Aerosols
  • Ammunition
  • Backpacks
  • Bags larger than 18″x13″x7″
  • Drones and other unmanned aircraft systems
  • Firearms
  • Glass, thermal, or metal containers
  • Gun parts, holsters, magazines, etc.
  • Knives
  • Laser pointers
  • Mace/pepper spray
  • Selfie sticks
  • Signs
  • Toy guns
  • Umbrellas
  • Weapons of any kind
  • Any other item determine to be potential safety hazards 
However,  a group called Knife Rights will provide complimentary storage for knives and other prohibited items at the North Gate entrance.

If you are attending the Leadership Forum, be prepared to get in line early if last year was any indication. I remember a long line snaking through the Dallas Convention Center as people had to go through the Secret Service checkpoint to be admitted.

Firearms will also not be allowed at the Alan Jackson concert to be held at the Lucas Oil Stadium.

 However, you will be able to carry in the convention hall provided you have a valid carry permit. Carrying outside the home requires a permit under Indiana law according to the article.

For the most up-to-date information on carry laws in Indiana, go to www.handgunlaw.us

UPDATE: I checked with a friend in Indy. She said you can carry in establishments that serve alcohol. Unlike in North Carolina, Indiana allows you to consume alcoholic beverages while carrying. However, public intoxication is illegal so moderation is the key. Personally, and this is just me, I don’t carry when I plan to consume alcohol.

More From The New Yorker

On my way home this afternoon from visiting my granddaughters, I chanced across The New Yorker Radio Hour. The lead story was on the NRA and Mike Spies article that ran this past week. It goes over much of what was written in the article but it also had excerpts from Spies’s interview with Aaron Davis who formerly worked in the NRA’s major gifts fundraising unit.

Bearing in mind that any interview that is broadcast is made up of excerpts and that those excerpts are chosen to make a point or enhance the story, the interview with Davis seems to illustrate how the aims of Ackerman McQueen and the aims of preserving and protecting the Second Amendment are at odds. Davis notes that many of those he worked with at Ack-Mac were, as he put it, “New York or Austin types” who were PR professionals first, foremost, and always. Unlike Davis, they were not believers in the NRA or the Second Amendment.

The other thing this audio broadcast illustrated is that Spies’ reporting depended on a lot of inside information from presumably disgruntled staff at the NRA including handwritten memos and other documents. I am not disappointed in the staff for spilling the beans. Rather, I’m disappointed that it took an article from an outsider with an anti-NRA agenda to illustrate the major internal problems that can and may put the organization itself at risk. By extension, it also puts the battle for the Second Amendment and gun rights at risk. Bloomberg himself couldn’t have done more damage than those tasked with supposedly advancing gun rights have done through their own avarice and self-dealing.

The New Yorker Radio Hour broadcasts on many public radio stations. Rather than have you have to search for a rebroadcast of it, I have embedded it here. The NRA portion of the episode runs approximately 20 minutes.

Dont Shoot The Messenger

In the last couple of days since the lawsuit against Ackerman McQueen I’ve spoken to a former lobbyist for the NRA and two serving NRA Board Members. The conversations were off the record and not for attribution. Then I read this article in The New Yorker thanks to a link to it posted on Facebook by Prof. David Yamane.

The article is entitled “Secrecy, Self-Dealing, and Greed at the N.R.A.” Mike Spies article has a subhead saying “The organization’s leadership is focussed on external threats, but the real crisis may be internal.” I hate to say this given all the attacks on the NRA from every Democrat running for President, the State of New York, and the media but from what I’ve gathered Spies is correct. Just because we don’t like the source doesn’t mean they are wrong.

Last August, the N.R.A., in desperate need of funds, raised its dues for the second time in two years. To cut costs, it has eliminated free coffee and water coolers at its headquarters and has frozen its employees’ pension plan. Carry Guard, which was meant to save the organization, has proved disastrous. According to the memos, in 2017, the year that Carry Guard was introduced, Ackerman McQueen received some six million dollars for its work on the product, which included the creation of a Web site and media productions featuring celebrity firearms trainers. The lawsuit against New York State has created an additional burden. Sources familiar with the N.R.A.’s financial commitments say that it is paying Brewer’s firm an average of a million and a half dollars a month.


An official assessment performed by Cummins last summer dryly describes the N.R.A.’s decision-making during the previous year as “management’s shift in risk appetite.” The document analyzes the organization’s executive-liability exposures and discusses insurance policies that “protect NRA directors and officers from claims by third parties that they have breached their duties, such as by mismanagement of association assets.” From 2018 to 2019, it says, insurance costs increased by three hundred and forty-one per cent. “To say this is a major increase would be an understatement,” Peter Kochenburger, the deputy director of the Insurance Law Center at the University of Connecticut, told me. “This seems to be pretty direct evidence that the N.R.A.’s problems are not due to New York but rather to how the organization conducts itself.”


The memos urged the audit committee to “step up + fulfill its duties!,” but it’s not clear what the board has done to root out malfeasance. James Fishman, a co-author of “New York Nonprofit Law and Practice: With Tax Analysis,” a leading text on nonprofit law, told me, “There is no such thing as a director who doesn’t direct. You’re responsible to make yourself aware of what’s going on. If the board doesn’t know, they’ve breached their duty of care, which is against the law in New York,” where the N.R.A. is chartered. According to Owens, the former I.R.S. official, New York State “could sanction board members, remove board members, disband the board, or close down the organization entirely.”

Read that last line again. New York State could close down the NRA entirely by moving for dissolution. You have a governor and attorney general in New York that hate the National Rifle Association. You have a Board of Directors which is too large to be effective. You have Ackerman McQueen trying to preserve its position and an outside counsel trying to take their position for himself. And then you have internal civil war going on within the organization between loyalists to one executive and friends of another leader.

The bottom line is that there are tremendous troubles within the NRA just when you need it to be steadfast in the face of outside attacks.

How bad are these troubles? A reliable source told me that Marion Hammer who hasn’t attended a Board of Directors meeting since hell froze over the last time will be in Indianapolis to attend the Board meeting. It’s that bad.

UPDATE:  Jeff Knox, son of Neal Knox, and co-head of The Firearm Coalition published an opinion piece of the issue in response to The New Yorker’s article. It is well worth a read. He makes some good points in it and calls for the resignation of Board members on the Audit, Finance, and Executive Committee for not doing their jobs.

Ackerman McQueen’s Statement On NRA Lawsuit

Ackerman McQueen is the largest and oldest ad agency in Oklahoma City. An Oklahoma City news, politics, and entertainment website, The Lost Ogle, refers to them as “OKC’s most revered and reviled ad agency.” Not living in Oklahoma, I can speak to the veracity of that comment. However, their article was useful in pointing me to the complete statement from Ack-Mac on the NRA lawsuit.

From The Oklahoman:

“During a three-week review, an NRA forensic auditing firm received every single piece of information they (the NRA) requested.

Further, the NRA has had consistent access to any and all documents regarding NRATV analytics.

Despite the representation set forth in their lawsuit, the NRA had the personnel contract they claim AM (Ackerman McQueen) withheld last week before they filed their lawsuit. It was provided by the Williams & Connolly law firm. The transfer occurred as a result of a process for delivery of such highly confidential information.

This flagrant misrepresentation, along with other false claims, serve as the foundation of malicious intent exemplified by this lawsuit.

Months ago, legal counsel informed the NRA that “Mr. Brewer himself has an irreconcilable conflict of interest. Mr. Brewer is the son-in-law of Angus McQueen and brother-in-law of Ackerman McQueen’s CEO, Revan McQueen. Mr. Brewer has demonstrated, in words and deeds, his animus for Ackerman McQueen and these family members and that animus pervades the Brewer firm’s dealings with Ackerman McQueen, whether dealing directly with Ackerman McQueen or through other members of his firm.”

Ackerman McQueen has served the NRA and its members with great pride and dedication for the last 38 years. The NRA’s action is frivolous, inaccurate and intended to cause harm to the reputation of our company and the future of that 38-year relationship.

This lawsuit affects not only Ackerman McQueen, but the members of the organization whose dedication to the Second Amendment is shared equally with the defendants in this case. Much like we have done for the NRA and the Second Amendment over the past 38 years, we too will defend our position and performance aggressively.”

You can tell this was written by a PR person. That last paragraph is evidence of that.  As to their lawfirm, Williams and Connolly is pretty fancy. Reports say their first year associates start at $200 grand. You have to bill a lot to be able to pay that.