Going Deeper Into Judge Cohen’s Interim Decision, Part 1

Judge Joel Cohen issued an interim decision on July 29th in the New York trial of the NRA. Beyond deciding that a special monitor was not warranted, he specified six items of relief that he was considering. He ordered both parties, the NY Attorney General’s Office and the NRA, to do a post-trial briefing and negotiation on the six items. This post will examine items one through three while a second post will look at the remaining three items.

The first item was that some or all of the “NRA Compliance Commitment to Members” be incorporated into a court order. Included in that document were a number of items that would be reported to members on an annual basis. These included, in part, a compliance officer and internal audit annual report on travel and entertainment expenses, contracts, related party transactions, and business ethics. In addition, a report from the independent auditor would be published annually, the IRS Form 990 would be signed by both the CEO and CFO, a bylaw change making the Audit Committee elected by the whole board, adoption of a policy forbidding related party transactions unless approved by the whole board, and mandatory disclosures by any candidate for the Board of Directors. There would also be a secure online portal for board and committee members to access documents prior to meeting. This was over a concern about “leaks”.

Most of these are good ideas and were developed by the entire Audit Committee. I do have misgivings about a policy to “stop leaks” as it seems counter-intuitive to their professed concern about being open with members. I will also say that as a candidate for the board myself I have not yet been asked to consent to a background check or any of the other items. This may be because it will only apply to those actually individuals whose names will appear on the ballot.

Judge Cohen’s second item goes directly to the election of members of the Board of Directors. He wants to make it easier for people to run for the Board for at least the next three years. He took note indirectly of the election of the Four for Reform as well as the Nominating Committee’s continual re-nomination of sitting directors every three years. He found the past work of the Nominating Committee “led to significant and unhealthy entrenchment of both management and the board” which made it very hard for new members to have any impact. As such, he is strongly suggesting that for the next three years that anyone who meets the minimal qualifications for election to the board be allowed to run if they so desire. The current minimal qualifications are that candidates have been a life member for at least five years. He goes on to add that there would be no need to go through the petition process.

The nominating process has already started. The time period for submission of names to the Nominating Committee has closed and documentation from candidates needed to be received by the Office of the Secretary by August 8th. The committee will meet on August 24th to review the potential nominees and make their decision. Petition candidates have until October 8th to have their petition signature sheets returned to the Office of the Secretary. Judge Cohen’s final order on this item could toss all of this. The replacement would be a long ballot consisting of those whose names have been submitted along with anyone else who wanted to run. We shall see.

Item number three on the list is a requirement that the NRA retain an independent compliance consultant of their choice for at least a three year period. This person would work with the Chief Compliance Officer “and staff to make recommendations to the board.” More importantly from the NRA’s perspective, this person would not be reporting to either the Court or the NYAG. The goal of this consultant would be to provide an independent perspective to the board and to help them implement best practices to carry out Judge Cohen’s final directives.

This item makes perfect sense to me. My primary hope is that the selection of this compliance consultant be made by Doug Hamlin without the interference of Bill Brewer or any of the Cabal. As the Chief Compliance Officer cannot be replaced by the EVP and Robert Mensinger was pushed to the NRA by Bill Brewer, any compliance consultant must be truly independent and without taint. Mr. Mensinger may be worth every bit of his $400,000 salary and be cleaner than the driven snow. However, I have a hard time trusting anything or anyone connected to Bill Brewer or Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors. The damage that Brewer has done to the NRA, financial and otherwise, is incalculable. Even Mike Bloomberg and his billions could not have done as much damage.

Part 2 will now look at the final three items in Judge Cohen’s interim decision.

NRA Legal Affairs Committee Meeting?

I saw a comment on NRA In Danger that the NRA’s Legal Affairs Committee is meeting today in Fairfax. It seems to have been confirmed by a response to an email sent to NRA EVP Doug Hamlin.

Supposedly, according to both the comment and a private email I’ve received, the topic of discussion will be on terminating the services of Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors. The word is that both Sandy Froman and Bill Barr will be there.

If that is true and Brewer is terminated, hallelujah!

UPDATE: I have not heard any thing reported as a result of this meeting. In retrospect, there could be one other topic that might have been discussed. That is what is to be discussed in the face-to-face meeting tomorrow between the NYAG’s attorneys and the NRA’s attorneys as they hammer out a joint submission that addresses Judge Cohen’s six items in his interim decision.

Ouch!

If you haven’t heard by now, Kamala Harris has chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz (DFL-MN) has her running mate. The one-time Blue Dog Demcrat who traded his previously held NRA A-rating for all gun control, all the time in order to be elected governor was probably the most left of the finalists. Indeed, he had the support of Bernie Sanders even before being named.

This tweet hits the target better than any editorial could hope to do.

I can feel the flames all the way over here! If that isn’t the tweet of the day, I don’t know what is.

Holy Crap!

The transcript from Monday’s hearing in the New York trial of the NRA has been posted online thanks to the Firearms Coalition. It contains a lot more detail than what has been reported in the media or in tweets online. NRA In Danger took notice of this and goes into some detail about the ruling. They also pointed out that their blog was mentioned in the questioning of John Frazer.

I started reading the transcript at that point. Frazer was being questioned by Stephen Thompson of the Attorney General’s Office. Then I saw this at p. 2210:

Q Would you agree with me that there was public reporting or public commenting on your removal as general counsel on May 21st?
A Yes, apparently. I haven’t seen this post before.
Q And then are you familiar with the blog “Only Guns and Money”?
A I am.
Q And do you know if “Only Guns and Money” reported on your removal as general counsel?
A I recall that they did, yes.
MR. THOMPSON: Can we bring up, Jesse, PX-8047.
Q I’ll represent to you, Mr. Frazer, that this is an article from only “No Lawyers Only Guns and Money” that was posted on May 21st, 2024. And do you know whether or not this article — Or have you seen this article before, Mr. Frazer?
A I have.
Q And do you know if this article reported on your removal as general counsel?
A It did.

Thompson then moved to introduce the report from my blog as well as that from NRA In Danger into evidence. Frazer’s attorney William Fleming objected and Judge Cohen sustained the objection concluding it was “hearsay”.

Holy crap! I’m shocked and amazed that my reporting on NRA affairs actually was discussed in the trial. I have been told that my blog was being read by some within the NRA and even perhaps was being noticed by the Attorney General’s Office.

That being said, I’ve always seen my blog as being a modest effort that allows me to engage in what David Codrea calls “citizen journalism.” I do it for enjoyment and, to be honest, sometimes a sense of obligation to bring out things that need it. The blog probably also serves as a safety valve allowing me to vent and not drive the Complementary Spouse totally nuts with my ranting and raving. I just don’t consider myself a big deal so when I see something I wrote being brought up in court like this I am blown away.

Really? A Democracy? Tell Me Another One

Stephen Gutowski’s The Reload has an excellent summation of the conclusion of the NRA’s trial in New York. It includes Judge Cohen’s ruling, some of the history of the case, the reaction to the ruling by the various parties, and a bit on the closing arguments.

What caught my eye was attorney Sarah Rogers’ closing arguments on behalf of the NRA. After accusing the New York Attorney General’s Office of interfering with NRA operations, she went on to say this.

“The NRA is a democracy,” she said in her closing. “Like American democracy, it sometimes errs. It contains imperfections, factions, century-old habits, and traditions. The NRA has done more- for its members, mission, stakeholders, its governance, its controls, its future – than any lawyer could cover in an hour. It can do more, and it will, on its own.

My first response to this nonsensical statement that the NRA is a democracy.

My second response is that Ms. Rogers ought to know better the difference between a democracy and an oligarchy. She does after all have a degree in International Relations from Dartmouth College according to her firm biography. Her first introductory course in IR or PoliSci would have covered it.

I can’t speak for how the NRA was governed in its distant past but it has always been an oligarchy since I’ve been a member. Power in the NRA has never rested with the members but rather with a small group of influential insiders. I and others would not write about the Old Guard or the Cabal if this was not the case.

It was moreover this same insulated group that ignored the problems that led to the lawsuit against the NRA in the first place. If they had called Wayne to task early on, if they had done their fiduciary duties with diligence, and if they hadn’t ignored the grifting, self-dealing, and other corruption, Tish James would have had no grounds to sue the NRA. So while Barr, Cotton, Coy, Brewer, and the rest of the Cabal would like to blame the downturn in both revenues and membership on the NY Attorney General, the reality is that they themselves are to blame and most of us know it.

New York Trial Ends With A Whimper And Not A Bang

First, here is the verdict:

Judge Cohen goes on to add that he wants some “targeted relief”.

Frankly, I’m still digesting this and am more than angry. I’m angry that the NRA wasted $182 million just to avoid a monitor when a settlement could have been reached years ago. I’m angry that a monitor wasn’t imposed on the NRA as I really believe that was the only way to restore trust. I’m angry that John Frazer walked away with no punishment even though the jury found he breached his fiduciary duties.

As to Wayne’s punishment, a 10-year ban is in all reality the equivalent of a lifetime ban. Meh!

Going over the list for “targeted relief”, number two is not clear. I think it means that the 5-year Life Member requirement for Board candidacy will be waived or reduced. Numbers 4 and 6 are the real meat of what he wants in targeted relief. It could mean that Charles Cotton will be bounced from the Audit Committee. The question on that remains will it be done by court order or by the Board. If the Board, I’ll believe it when I see it. Reducing the size of the Board has always been a good idea and I think most members will be in favor of it.

I’ve read the post-trial statements of both the NYAG’s Office and the NRA. They both are posturing statements and both are claiming victory. Yeah, whatever.

I just hope that there will not be an appeal and that the Special Litigation Committee whose only rationale for being was this trial is dissolved. Then maybe we can cut the tentacles from Brewer choking the financial life out of the NRA.

Personal Defense And Family Firearms Seminars

If you live in western North Carolina or the Upstate of South Carolina this is for you. Avidity Arms will be hosting three seminars on family firearms safety, home defense fundamentals, and concealed carry tactics. The seminars will be taught by Rob Pincus and all proceeds will go to Safelight which provides assistance to victims of violence and abuse. The seminars are $25 each or $60 for all three.

Following each seminar will be a tour of the AlphaTech factory led by Avidity Arms co-owner Joe Worley. If you have never seen what a modern firearms factory looks like, you are in for a treat.

AlphaTech is located in Fletcher, North Carolina at 388 Cane Creek Road.

Still In Denial

NRA President Bob Barr sent out an email to the Board of Directors this afternoon. It noted that the bench portion of the New York trial was coming to a close on Monday, July 29th. The gist of the email which is below is that there is no need for a special monitor, it is invasive and detrimental to the NRA, and that since 2018 the NRA has cleaned up its act. Barr went on to say he was not fully quoted with regard to recouping the $4 million plus owed to the NRA by Wayne LaPierre. In that, he may be correct.

I said in late May that Barr had the ability to regain the trust of members and to reassure the court that a special monitor was not needed through his committee appointments. I said it needed to be transparent and that Mssrs. Cotton and Coy must never be allowed to remain on the Audit and Finance Committees. I also suggested that members of the Four for Reform ought to be considered for important committee assignments.

Disappointingly, Barr all but assured that Judge Cohen will feel that he has no option but to appoint a special monitor with his committee assignments. First, not only was Charles Cotton allowed to remain as chair of the Audit Committee but was added to the Ethics Committee as the chair. Second, David Coy remains as chair of the Finance Committee. Third, the anti-reform Cabal holds all the chair and vice-chair positions on the major committees for whom appointments have been made public. Only Rocky Marshall of the Four for Reform was given a major committee assignment and “Gang of 12” reformers are in a minority on all the committees. Barr had a chance but in my opinion he blew it.

Barr and, by extension, the Board are still in denial. They can say they have made changes and point to the hiring of a Chief Compliance Officer among other things. They can say their expert witnesses all testified to improvements, to not needing a special compliance monitor, and that this is the “new” NRA. The NRA publications can write about the NRA’s “new direction” and run headlines saying “the future of the NRA is bright.”

What they fail to understand is that the rank and file members of the NRA don’t trust them. Trust, once lost, is hard to regain. Hopes were raised at the last Board meeting with the election of ostensible reformers to major positions and then the committee assignments dashed that hope. We see that the people that allowed Wayne and his pack of grifters to get away with it for years are still running things. We read that the NRA has paid at least $182 million in legal fees to Bill Brewer and his minions all the while thinking what that money could have done for the Second Amendment. We know the members voted for a Chief Compliance Officer but then hear it whispered about how he has blown off serious whistleblower complaints. And the list goes on.

I could go on but I think I’ll just post the email and let you, the reader, come to your own conclusion.

From Bob Barr as sent out by John Frazer:

Dear Board of Directors,

As you know, the NRA is nearing the end of “phase two” of the trial proceedings versus the New York Attorney General (NYAG). The bench trial began on July 15, and will conclude on Monday, July 29. As reported to the board on July 4, a focal point of the proceedings is the NYAG’s pursuit of a court-appointed monitor with sweeping powers. On behalf of the Special Litigation Committee (SLC), please note that the NYAG’s court filing, Exhibit O, reflects an invasive measure that we believe is absolutely detrimental to the Association and its mission.

Of course, it is no surprise that the NYAG, who filed suit to dissolve the NRA, is peddling its “version” of the story. However, the trial testimony has shown that, beginning in 2018, the NRA undertook to prevent any override of its financial controls. Extensive testimony has clearly established the NRA’s commitment to good governance. Importantly, there has been no evidence that the NRA is not appropriately managing its assets; and there is no ongoing or persistent violation of its internal controls – all alleged by the NYAG.

Our senior staff members, board members, and experts offered powerful testimony regarding our heightened commitment to compliance training, and the important role played by our Chief Compliance Officer and our Internal Auditor. As such, we believe there is no need for the court to impose invasive equitable relief. Doing so would have a chilling effect on our organization’s ability to fulfill its mission and cultivate grassroots support, donations, and public goodwill. For these many reasons, I am optimistic we will achieve a positive outcome for the NRA and its millions of members.

On Thursday, the court heard testimony from Daniel Kurtz, the former New York State Assistant Attorney General-in-Charge of the Charities Bureau. He testified that he sees “New York State both persecuting and prosecuting the NRA,” and noted the NYAG’s pursuit of a monitor is “crazy, unprecedented.” He added, “There’s never been a situation, to my knowledge, in which a monitor has been appointed to reform the nonprofit governance of an organization” – equating New York’s pursuit of the NRA to McCarthyism and the Second Red Scare of the 1940s and 1950s.

In closing, know that no board officer, including myself, has ever suggested the NRA would not seek to recover any final awards owed to the NRA by individual defendants. At trial, I testified that I assumed the NRA was still finalizing its plans in this regard. My full testimony (conveniently not publicized via “X” and other social media platforms) explained this is because no final awards have yet been confirmed, and the NYAG bears the responsibility to pursue the recoveries in question. The NYAG is responsible for securing the awards because of her standing as the plaintiff in these proceedings. The NRA, of course, is committed to holding the NYAG’s feet to the fire and pursuing every dollar to which it is entitled, period. 

The bottom line is, I remain optimistic that despite attempts to distort the NRA’s commitment to good governance, the court appreciates and understands our record. The NRA and its many witnesses have presented a true picture of the Association – one that is dedicated now and in the future to achieving the best interests of our members in all we do.

Thanks,

Bob Barr, President 

The Most Brutal Tweet About The NRA

The Firearms Policy Coalition attracted the attention of The Trace for calling out Kamala Harris as being authoritarian. Given that the FPC has it roots in California I think they know of what they speak. The Trace said the FPC was “even more strident than the NRA” which is correct in my opinion. I think The Trace’s writer was horrified that someone would drop the F-bomb when speaking of the selected (not elected) Democratic candidate for President.

This led to someone who goes by Factotum leaving this comment:

That has got to be the most brutal tweet I’ve ever seen about the NRA. I don’t necessarily agree with it but I can see why someone would write it given the NRA’s long history of accommodation. One need only look to the NRA’s role in the recently overturned bump stock ban to see that.

Quote Of The Day

The quote of the day comes from Don Surber. He started in journalism when journalists reported the facts and left opinions to the editorial writers. Sadly today every so-called journalist on TV or in the press wants to add their own slant to every story.

From Don on how the press covered Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu‘s address to Congress and how it virtually ignored the violent pro-Palestinian demonstrations in DC which made January 6th look like a picnic:

Today’s journalists do not write news stories. They write press releases.

Unlike Winston Smith who had doubts about the Party, today’s journalists are busy rewriting history so that it matches the narrative of the day. If they aren’t rewriting history, they are erasing it.