NRA Board of Directors

Uncategorized

The NRA’s Outside Counsel – Ethical And Billing Concerns

July 31, 2019 by 4 Comments

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.

Uncategorized

Save The Second’s Petition Drive

July 29, 2019 by

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.

Uncategorized

Buz Mills’ Open Letter

July 29, 2019 by 2 Comments

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

Uncategorized

The Letter

July 23, 2019 by

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.)

Uncategorized

Substitute “NRA” For “Military” In This Article

July 21, 2019 by 3 Comments

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.

Uncategorized

Even CNN Gets It Even If Wayne Doesn’t

July 21, 2019 by 1 Comment

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.

Uncategorized

The Old Guard Is Not Happy And Marion Wants Us To Know It

July 15, 2019 by 4 Comments

Marion Hammer, former NRA president and WLP supporter extraordinaire, sent out a public email today that was posted to Facebook. She takes the position that the purges are the prerogative of the president and that those who got purged were “not professional”. What an utter crock of bullshit.

Those purged – and especially those whose purge hasn’t been made public yet – are, on the whole, some of the most professional, most responsible, most cognizant of their fiduciary responsibility, and most serious about the Second Amendment on the whole board. That they are not toadies to Wayne and his posse says something about their dedication to the mission of the NRA which is the Second Amendment and not the preservation of Wayne’s job.

Since Ms. Hammer chooses to include bloggers as those that have suspect motives, let me tell you mine with regard to the NRA. As an Endowment Life member I want to see a stronger, more pro-active advocate for the Second Amendment. Moreover, while I am a conservative/libertarian, I want the NRA to focus exclusively on the Second Amendment and gun rights. I don’t care what your position is on abortion, I don’t care whether you approve or disapprove of the LGBTQ community, and I don’t care about hundreds of extraneous issues not related to the Second Amendment. I care about the Second Amendment. Period. Finally, as someone who has served as both an officer and on the Board of Directors of a non-profit organization, I want to see a Board of Directors taking their fiduciary responsibility seriously and making the hired management subservient to them and not vice-versa. Unfortunately, it seems that the Board is subservient to Wayne and not the other way around.

Read Ms. Hammer’s entire missive and make up your own mind. I’ve reprinted it below.

—–Original Message—–
From: mphammer1
To: MPHammer1
Sent: Sun, Jul 14, 2019 12:06 pm
Subject: Committee Assignments

DATE: July 14, 2019
TO: NRA Board Members and Friends
FROM: Marion P. Hammer, NRA Past President
RE: Committee Assignments

Committee assignments are the prerogative of the President of the National Rifle Association of America. The assignment process is taken very seriously with meetings in person and even more meetings over teleconferences. I don’t know of any NRA President who hasn’t consulted with other officers and leaders before making the final selections.

This year the process took longer because there were numerous discussions. To say that this year is unlike any other would be an understatement. The NRA finds itself under attack. These attacks are well funded. They are well coordinated. They come from noteworthy and powerful gun control advocates.

But, they are not the only ones attacking the NRA. We are also under attack by one of our former vendors. These attacks have been particularly nasty and have played out in the press.

And, it doesn’t stop there. Some within our ranks – members of the NRA Board of Directors – have joined in these attacks. There have been leaks of proprietary and confidential information to the front pages of newspapers, websites and social media pages.

Members of the board have a fiduciary responsibility to act in the best interests of our Association. Yet, some have chosen not to do so. When given the opportunity to speak their minds, silence was chosen. And now, after the time to be heard in an appropriate setting has passed, the agitation continues. That is truly unfortunate.

We must now move on. Those who truly care about the Second Amendment and Freedom will move on. The NRA has real work to do. We have significant challenges – the 2019 elections and of course the pivotal 2020 elections. Let’s not forget, we must get through these politically motivated witch hunts in New York and now the District of Columbia.

Some board members were, in fact, stripped of their committee assignments. I know that was a hard decision. But, we stand behind it. I went through it myself in 1997 and it was the right thing to do. Some have made reference to a “naughty” and a “nice” list. But it’s actually more of a “professional” and “not professional” list. There are 76 of us. We don’t expect all of us to march lockstep. But, we must will hold steadfast that board members must act in a professional manner. That is a non-negotiable.

To those who are seeking facts, it is recommended that you review our legal documents – including the attachments – all available in the public arena. If you have trouble accessing these documents, simply request them and they will be emailed to you. Using news stories, a blog or social media post or relying on leaks to form your judgements only means that you’re forming your opinions based on the viewpoint of the author. Who knows what their motives may be?

There are also numerous well-informed board members who have taken the time and made the effort to learn the facts rather than rely on falsehoods and gossip. Reach out to them – it is your duty and in the NRA’s best interests that you inform yourself of what the NRA is really facing and what the NRA is really doing about it.

As I said earlier, these committee assignments are – and always have been – the prerogative of the President. Those who didn’t get an assignment might want to consider whether or not they want to help us save the Second Amendment or continue on a course detrimental to NRA and our mission. The decision is ultimately theirs.”

Uncategorized

The Purges Continue, Part IV

July 14, 2019 by 1 Comment

In my Facebook feed this morning I saw another member of the NRA Board of Directors got cut off from his committees. This time it is LTC Robert Brown who has been a board member for a long time and has been outspoken about things including AckMac for years. Brown is the founder and publisher of Soldier of Fortune magazine.

From his Facebook post:

FYI, all SoF’ers… I also have been dropped off “Grassroots Development Committee,” “Veteran’s Affairs,” and “Legislative Policy.” No body in the NRA power structure has the guts to explain to me why this was done. NRA leadership lacks any moral character and basically falls under the label of loathsome toads.

I don’t know if this represent all committees that Col. Brown served on or not. I do have a message into him asking about that.

UPDATE: Col. Brown was reappointed to the Publications Committee and the Special Contributions Committee but dropped from those mentioned above. He was kind enough to respond to my Facebook messenger question.

Uncategorized

The Purges Continue, Part III

July 12, 2019 by 1 Comment

Another day and another NRA Board member reports that he has been removed from all his committees. In this case, it is Sean Maloney of Ohio. He, along with Tim Knight, are two of the stalwarts of the grass roots in the NRA. When the recall campaign began in Colorado a few years ago, both he and Tim answered the call and went to Colorado to help in the successful effort.

You may also recall that when CarryGuard was introduced, a number of companies that offered legal protection services for concealed carriers were summarily disinvited to the NRA Annual Meeting and Expo in Atlanta. Sean Maloney’s Second Call Defense was one of those organizations.

Below is the form letter that Sean received from NRA President Carolyn Meadows.

Sean responded to Mrs. Meadows with this letter:

July 12, 2019


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


RE: NRA Committee Assignments for 2019-2020


Dear Madam President,


I recently received notification from you, that you removed me from all my NRA Board of Directors Committee Assignments, with no explanation. Even after repeated phone calls to you, which resulted in voicemails asking for a return call, I still have not received a return phone call, letter or email of explanation.


Shockingly, you even removed me from the NRA-ILA Grassroots Development Committee, after many years of serving on that committee with perfect attendance. After years of volunteer grassroots activism, I was recognized in 2010 with the NRA-ILA Jay M. Littlefield Volunteer of the Year Award and recognized on the floor of the Ohio House of Representatives for my work as an Election Volunteer Coordinator for NRA-ILA in Ohio.


In 2012, I was inducted into the NRA-ILA Election Volunteer Coordinator Hall of Fame, resulting from my time and dedication to the Grassroots Division as an Election Volunteer Coordinator.


Over the years, as a Volunteer for the NRA, paying my own way for travel expenses, and receiving no compensation from the NRA, I have continued to dedicate myself to grassroots activism.


In 2013, I traveled to Colorado to participate in the successful recall election effort of two anti-gun Senators. Again, in 2013, I traveled to Virginia under the direction of NRA-ILA Grassroots Division to campaign on behalf of pro-gun Gubernatorial, Senate of Virginia and Virginia House of Delegates Candidates.


In 2014, I traveled to Connecticut, Iowa and Ohio, under the direction of NRA-ILA Grassroots Division and campaigned on behalf of Federal State and Local pro-gun candidates during Primary and General Elections.


In 2015, I traveled to Virginia under the direction of NRA-ILA Grassroots Division to campaign on behalf of Senate of Virginia and Virginia House of Delegates pro-gun Candidates.


In 2016, I traveled to Florida to assist in the General Election; that same election cycle I returned to Ohio where I volunteered for the top NRA-ILA Campaign Field Office in the Country, in support of Donald Trump, and other Federal, State and Local candidates.


In 2018, I campaigned in Ohio under the direction of NRA-ILA Grassroots Division on behalf of Federal, State, and Local candidates. I also hosted a pro-gun meet and greet Ohio Candidate Forum for all Federal, State, and Local pro-gun candidates up for election in Ohio. In Ohio, under the direction of the NRA-ILA, I assisted in successfully electing a 100% pro-gun Executive Slate.


Earlier this year, in May, I co-hosted a shooting event for my pro-gun Congressman Warren Davidson. Most recently, I traveled to Sandusky County, Ohio, and spoke to a “100 NRA Club” considering ending its affiliation with the NRA, because of recent concerns. I successfully persuaded them to remain an NRA Club.


Yet, after all I have done in support of the Grassroots Development Committee, and all the other NRA Committees of which I faithfully served, I was blacklisted. I can only surmise, that I was blacklisted for taking actions to obey my oath as an NRA Board Member, and follow the Code of Ethics for Directors of Nonprofit Corporations; which required me to exercise my fiduciary duty of care; which caused me to question management decisions within the NRA, and to further investigate matters of which I was made aware.


I respectfully request that you reconsider your decision to remove me from all Committees, particularly the Grassroots Development Committee, and reappoint me to the Grassroots Development Committee, and further communicate to me your rational for removing me from all my Committee assignments.


Very truly yours,


/s/ Sean Maloney


Sean Maloney


enclosure

Sean is only the latest Board member to acknowledge his removal from committees. There will be more to come. Of that you can be sure.

Uncategorized

Another AG Gets Into The Act (Against The NRA)

July 12, 2019 by 2 Comments

First it was NY Attorney General Letitia James who issued subpoenas to the National Rifle Association as part of an investigation to see whether they are violating New York’s non-profit organization laws. Now it seems that Karl Racine, Attorney General for the District of Columbia, wants to get into the action.

From the Washington Post which first reported it:

The office of Attorney General Karl A. Racine is seeking financial documents from the NRA and its foundation. The NRA Foundation is chartered in the District and the NRA is registered as a nonprofit and does business there.

“The Office of the Attorney General for the District of Columbia has issued subpoenas to the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) and the NRA Foundation, Inc., as part of an investigation into whether these entities violated the District’s Nonprofit Act,” Racine said in a statement.

He continued: “We are seeking documents from these two nonprofits detailing, among other things, their financial records, payments to vendors, and payments to officers and directors.”

The Code of the District of Columbia gives the Attorney General significant powers when it comes to non-profit corporations. The Attorney General can seek the dissolution of a non-profit, can impose “a constructive trust” on compensation for directors, officers, and managers, and can seek other equitable or injunctive relief as the courts deem necessary. The language of the code gives him great leeway in bringing such actions. For example, if he deems that the corporation has “continued to act contrary to its nonprofit purposes”, this give his office grounds to bring actions in court. That language is so wide open that virtually any non-profit could be taken to court if the Attorney General has an axe to grind. Racine has used these laws against the Trump inaugural committee and the Catholic Church.

How many more of these type actions will it take for the Wayne LaPierre loyalists on the NRA Board of Directors to realize that they have a serious problem on their hands? I fear that unfortunately all we will get is another “ignore the man behind the curtain, all is OK” statement from the Meadows-Cotton-Lee cabal as opposed to the concrete actions needed to shore up the NRA.