Search Results for: NRA

Uncategorized

2025 NRA Elected Committees And Appointees

April 30, 2025 by 2 Comments

One of the key agenda items on Monday’s Board of Directors meeting was the election of officers and election of members of various committees of the board. The latter is different from a regular committee because under New York Non-Profit Corporation Law, committees of the board have the delegated authority of the Board of Directors and can bind the Board. The committees elected during this meeting include the Executive Committee, the Nominating Committee, and the Audit Committee. Also elected were trustees for the Special Contribution Fund (aka Whittington Center) and the NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund.

NRA In Danger has covered the election of the officers so I would refer you there for more details. Suffice it to say, it was a good day there for NRA 2.0.

With the exception of the Audit Committee and the trustees of the NRA CRDF, all were highly contested and all involved multiple rounds of voting as each person elected must have achieved a majority during that round of voting. For example, if a round of voting had 64 ballots cast, only candidates who achieved 32 votes or more would have been elected. Thus, if the leading candidate got 31 votes, they were not elected. What usually happened is that the lower vote getters would voluntarily remove themselves from contention and we would have another round of voting.

Italics indicate ex officio and names in bold generally indicate they are and were part of NRA 2.0.

Executive Committee

  • Bill Bachenberg* – Chairman
  • Mark Vaughan*
  • Rocky Marshall*
  • Thomas Arvas
  • Bob Barr
  • Charles Beers III
  • Anthony Colandro
  • Todd Ellis
  • Al Hammond
  • Craig Haggard
  • Maria Heil
  • Charles Hiltunen
  • Robert Mansell
  • Buz Mills
  • Janet Nyce
  • James Porter II
  • David Raney
  • Barbara Rumpel
  • Amanda Suffecool
  • Craig Swartz
  • Linda Walker
  • Bruce Widener
  • Robert Wos

The Nominating Committee is composed of six Board members and three Non-Board members. All seats on the Nominating Committee were won by those proposed by the NRA 2.0 side. Italics indicate Non-Board members.

Nominating Committee

  • Cam Edwards 
  • Al Hammond
  • Maria Heil
  • Robbie Love
  • Mitzy McCorvey
  • Buz Mills
  • Janet Nyce
  • Susan Springhorn
  • Robert Wos

Special Contribution Fund (Whittington Center) Trustees for Terms Ending in 2028

  • Al Hammond 
  • Robert Mansell
  • Barbara Rumpel
  • Craig Swartz

NRA Civil Rights Defense Fund Trustees for Terms Ending in 2028

Finally, there is the Audit Committee which is now a committee of the board as specified by Item 7 in the Final Order of the New York trial. Each member of the committee was proposed, one by one, by President Bill Bachenberg. After each proposed member was named, the Board had the opportunity to accept or reject the candidate. No one was rejected. Once all five were seated, the Audit Committee officially became an elected committee of the board.

Audit Committee

  1. Charlie Beers
  2. Rocky Marshall
  3. Jonathan Goldstein
  4. Theresa Inacker
  5. John Richardson

Obviously, you will notice that I was elected to the Audit Committee. The best way I can put it is that I wasn’t looking for the Audit Committee but the Audit Committee was looking for me. I would also like to point out that while Charlie Beers has not usually been associated with “the reformers”, his was the first name proposed for this committee at a caucus of the NRA 2.0 team given the exemplary job he has done on the committee previously.

The reformers are firmly in charge and it is up to us to revitalize, reinvigorate, and reform the NRA. You saw it at the Meeting of Members and you can see the results from the Board meeting. It isn’t perfect but it is more than a good start. Last year was the start and now we are moving into the next stage where we solidified the leadership changes begun in 2024. We still have a long road in front of us and need, as Frank Tait has written, to show members and potential members that there is a value in being a NRA member again. I think there is or I would haven’t bothered running.

Uncategorized

Trump’s Message To NRA Meeting Of Members

April 27, 2025 by 1 Comment

As I noted in my report on the Meeting of Members, President Trump sent a video message. He was in Italy for the funeral of Pope Francis.

Thanks to John Petrolino of Bearing Arms who sent me this link, you can now see the roughly 2 minute message.

Uncategorized

NRA Election Results In Order

April 11, 2025 by 13 Comments

I received this in an email from John Frazer just a few minutes ago. It is the unofficial (but almost official) order of finish. I have marked those on the NRA 2.0 ticket in bold. The official official results with vote totals will be announced at the Meeting of Members.

I don’t know who each side will be pushing for the 76th Director yet. When I know, I’ll post it.

The incorporation amendment was fairly noncontroversial once people understood it and passed with a 97% affirmative vote.

ELECTED FOR THREE-YEAR TERMS ENDING IN 2028

  1. Mitzy McCorvey
  2. Jack Hagan
  3. Howard L. Massingill Jr.
  4. Willes K. Lee
  5. Sharon Callan
  6. Sandra S. Froman
  7. James Fotis
  8. Cathy Wright
  9. Bob Barr
  10. Larry E. Craig
  11. Theresa Inacker
  12. Carol Frampton
  13. Todd Ellis
  14. Jason Wilson
  15. Jonathan S. Goldstein
  16. Dwight D. Van Horn
  17. Al Hammond
  18. Blaine Wade
  19. John Richardson
  20. James A. Sheckels
  21. Philip Gray
  22. Knox Williams
  23. Anthony P. Colandro
  24. Lawrence Finder
  25. Robert Scott Emslie

ELECTED FOR A TWO-YEAR TERM ENDING IN 2027

  1. Joel Friedman

ELECTED FOR A ONE-YEAR TERM ENDING IN 2026

  1. Richard Fairburn
  2. James W. Porter II
  3. Danny Stowers

NOT ELECTED — ELIGIBLE TO RUN FOR 76TH DIRECTOR

  1. John C. Sigler*
  2. Gene T. Roach
  3. Frank Tait
  4. Charles T. Hiltunen III
  5. Regis Synan
  6. Todd Vandermyde
  7. Tom King
  8. Jeffrey Fleetham
  9. Ronald L. Schmeits
  10. David Mitten
  11. Richard Todd Figard
  12. Kim Rhode
  13. James L. Wallace
  14. Charles Rowe
  15. Lucretia Hughes Klucken
  16. Isaac Demarest
  17. Steven Dulan
  18. Lane Ruhland
  19. Greer Johnson
  20. Mark Shuell

(* At Mr. Sigler’s request, his name will not be included on the 76th Director ballot.)

As an additional reminder,  Board member Ken Blackwell has submitted his resignation, to take effect after the Board meeting on April 30 (and after the results of the 76th Director election are announced on April 26).  After the Board meeting, Mr. Blackwell’s resignation will take effect and create a new vacancy. The top remaining runner-up from the mail ballot will complete the final year of Mr. Blackwell’s term. 

SPECIAL BALLOT RESULT

Finally, the Board-recommended amendment to the certificate of incorporation (changing the NRA to a “non-charitable” not-for-profit corporation under New York law) was approved by a 97% to 3% margin. 

Uncategorized

Ticking Time Bombs For The NRA

April 8, 2025 by 2 Comments

When Bill Brewer and his crew resigned from legal representation of the NRA they left behind some ticking time bombs that could have a severe financial impact. I will take them in order and you can make your own judgment as to the financial impact upon the NRA. As it is, I cannot for the life of me see why an attempt to settle some or all has not been attempted.

First, we have the case of Under Wild Skies v. National Rifle Association. This is a Virginia state court case in which a jury awarded Under Wild Skies approximately $550,000 for breach of contract. Both sides appealed the award and verdict to the Virginia Court of Appeals. Under Wild Skies argued that the circuit court had erred by rejecting a proposed jury instruction regarding anticipatory breach of contract. In other words, they are arguing the NRA had an obligation to pay for all the contracted episodes regardless of whether they had yet been produced or not. Meanwhile, the NRA argued the court should have set aside the verdict in favor of Under Wild Skies given its affirmative defense of fraudulent billing and should have allowed the NRA to recoup its losses. The Court of Appeals rejected both sides arguments and affirmed the circuit court’s verdict.

Here is where it now gets interesting. Both sides again appeal and the Virginia Supreme Court decided that they will take the case. The case is on the docket for the court’s April session and arguments will be heard on April 15th. Brewer along with the Virginia firm of Briglia Hundley had handled the NRA’s side up through the Court of Appeals. Brewer is gone and Robert Cox of Whiteford, Taylor, and Preston is the new co-counsel. One reason the court may have taken the appeal is to rule on the doctrine of reasonable assurances which no Virginia court has done. The granted appeal summary seems to indicate the court may be favoring Under Wild Skies’ arguments. If Under Wild Skies wins on appeal, the cost to the NRA could range upwards of $17 million.

The second case is Dell’Aquila v. NRA which recently was allowed to go forward and for which Dell’Aquila can begin discovery. As noted in the earlier post, while Brewer attorneys had produced all the motions filed on behalf of the NRA in this case which Judge Campbell denied, they have been replaced by a Nashville firm. That this case even reached discovery is somewhat remarkable when one considers that it was originally filed pro se and then David Dell’Aquila had to switch attorneys midstream. According to the Third Amended Complaint, damages are greater than $5 million which could be tripled if RICO fraud is proved. I really don’t think this case was taken that seriously for a long time and now suddenly it is. Imagine how much cheaper it would have been if Bill Brewer had said to Wayne, “Just give the guy his money back, pay his attorney’s fees, and be done with it.”

The third case was brought by the NRA against Ackerman McQueen and Mercury Group for breach of contract for disclosing the Confidential Settlement Agreement in which the NRA agreed to pay AckMac $12,250,000 to settle an earlier case. This case has been going on since September 2022. If memory serves, this agreement was kept from the NRA Board of Directors and they were not allowed to see it. However, the CSA is out in the public domain now and has been due to an inadvertent filing of it as an exhibit by attorneys from Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors. Attorneys from that firm withdrew effective February 27, 2025 and have been replaced by the Dallas firm of Foley and Lardner. The NRA is still attempting to keep the signatories to the agreement agreement under court seal even though it is now in the public domain. The question has to asked why the heck hasn’t the NRA moved to dismiss the case and why are they even bothering to bother to keep the signatories under seal. The signatures are out there and it seems that it is a waste of money to keep them under seal. Doug Hamlin, NRA General Counsel Michael Blaz, and the Legal Affairs Committee of the Board ought to cut our losses and move on.

CLARIFICATION: After I wrote this post, I had a long conversation with a reform director. He explained the rationale for keeping the CSA and other proceedings under seal even though it had been made public earlier was that it was always meant to be under seal, that the breach of confidentiality was in error, and that the NRA contends that Tony Makris and Under Wild Skies are inseparable. I do note the the judge in this case did approve an order on April 1st to keep it under seal. He went on to say that discussions were ongoing to resolve all three of the above cases. As he has always been upfront with me, I will take him at his word.

Finally, there is the anticipated lawsuit from Oliver North for malicious prosecution. To my knowledge it has not been filed yet but I do keep looking. However, the reputational damage along with the accusations of “greed”, “extortion”, and “blackmail” contained in Tom King’s ethics complaint when added to the whistleblower retaliation that the jury found in the AG’s case could induce Col. North to ask for millions.

All four of these pending or potential lawsuits could end up costing the NRA millions of dollars that it really doesn’t have to waste. An attorney who was working in the best interest of his client should have urged settlement in the early stages rather than to let the issues fester so that the billings could increase. These cases need to go away and the NRA’s leadership needs to take the necessary steps to conclude them.

Uncategorized

Ollie North To Sue NRA For Malicious Prosecution

April 4, 2025 by 6 Comments

An email went out yesterday from the NRA’s Office of General Counsel to staff and directors telling them to preserve documents. This was because former NRA President Lt. Col. Oliver North would be filing suit against the NRA for “malicious prosecution” tomorrow. While I have seen the email on document preservation, I have not seen the complaint from North’s intended lawsuit nor do I know in which court the case will be tried.

This motivated me to go back and read through the documents in the case the NRA filed against Oliver North in 2020 in Albany, New York. The NRA sought a declaratory judgment from the court that New York Non-Profit Corporation Law did not prevent the NRA from following its bylaw process for expelling Col. North if found guilty of an ethics complaint filed by Director Tom King. This case was dismissed on March 7, 2025 by mutual agreement of the NRA and Col. North.

Prior to the case being dismissed, Col. North had moved for summary judgment in his favor given the outcome of the New York Attorney General’s case against the NRA. In response, the NRA’s new lawyers from Baker & Hostetler LLP requested a pre-motion conference and permission of the court to voluntarily dismiss the case with prejudice.

The response from Col. North opposing the voluntary dismissal may give some indication as to what will come up in his new lawsuit.

The NRA intends to dismiss their case after the damage has been done to Col. North (and the NRA), and retreat as quietly as possible, whereas Col. North asks, in fairness, for a proper judgment so that a stake is placed into the heart of this protracted campaign by the NRA to use its power and its members’ funds to retaliate against its former President for doing the right thing by reporting misconduct and seeking a proper course correction.

Col. North was seeking a judgment on the merits showing that he was a whistleblower who suffered retaliation from the NRA.

The NRA used an ethics complaint filed by Tom King against Col. North as the basis of its lawsuit. The complaint accused Col. North of a number of ethical and fiduciary breeches that came to a head at the 2019 NRA Annual Meeting when King accuses North of trying to “extort” Wayne LaPierre in order to keep his position as President of the NRA. He contends that North’s desire to investigate the billings of the Brewer law firm were motivated by greed and to keep his multi-million dollar contract with Ackerman-McQueen. Bear in mind that it did come out later that not only was the NRA aware of the contract, the Audit Committee approved it and Wayne himself help negotiate it on North’s behalf. King called the request to examine Brewer’s billings “not only unwarranted but unprecedented.”

I could go on but you can read it for yourself below. If anyone should be the target of an ethics complaint it should be the author of this complaint for its baseless allegations of “extortion”, “greed”, and “blackmail.” One can only hope the voting members of the NRA see through King and do not return him to the Board of Directors. We will find that out next week when the 2025 Board of Directors’ election results are released. The sad reality is that it will be left to the reformers to clean up the mess left by the departed parties including Wayne, Brewer, and the rest.

King ethics complaintDownload

Uncategorized

NRA Loses In Court In Tennessee

March 27, 2025 by 3 Comments

US District Court Judge William Campbell, Jr., issued an order today denying the NRA’s motions to dismiss the case brought against it by David Dell’Aquila and others. The case, Dell’Aquila et al v. National Rifle Association, is being heard in the Middle District of Tennessee was originally filed in August 2019. The case originally also included Wayne LaPierre and the NRA Foundation as defendants but they were dropped from the case in 2020. This case has had numerous delays due to the NRA’s abortive filing for bankruptcy, changes of attorneys, and numerous extensions of time. It was revived in August 2022 when Dell’Aquila engaged the Chicago firm of Loevy & Loevy and the Nashville office of Stites & Harbison.

As I reported earlier this month, William Brewer and Brewer, Attorneys and Counselors, withdrew from the case as of March 5th and were replaced with the Nashville firm of Neal and Harwell PLC. However, it should be noted that all the motions filed on behalf of the NRA that were denied today came from the Brewer firm.

The NRA had moved to dismiss the Third Amended Complaint which had been filed in June 2024. They had also moved for oral argument and for a stay on discovery pending the outcome of their motion to dismiss. As noted above, Judge Campbell denied the motion to dismiss. He also denied the motion for oral argument on the motion to dismiss and said the motion to stay discovery was now moot.

The Third Amended Complaint accused the NRA of the following and the NRA had moved to dismiss all allegations.

In the Third Amended Complaint, Plaintiffs bring claims against the NRA for fraud, breach of contract, tortious interference with contract, violation of the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”), 18 U.S.C. § 1961, et seq., and RICO conspiracy. The NRA seeks to dismiss all claims under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

Judge Campbell noted that the standard for review of a motion to dismiss is that a court must take all factual allegations as true. He found that Dell’Aquila had sufficiently alleged the facts for fraud. The amended complaint had added the claims of breach of contract and tortious interference. He found there was sufficient factual allegations made earlier in the case to support the relation back of amendments. The NRA had contended they were not on notice to argue breach of contract or tortious interference because Dell’Aquila didn’t say earlier there was a contract with the NRA or the NRA Foundation.

Plaintiffs argue they have adequately alleged a claim for breach of contract. Plaintiffs point to allegations that the NRA mails a dues renewal notification to all members that includes a “Uniform Disclosure Statement” which states that “Contributions raised will be used to advance the mission of the NRA.”The NRA also solicits donations through its website, which contains the same statement. Plaintiffs contend this statement sets forth a contractual promise to use donated funds to advance the mission of the NRA, that Plaintiffs and other donors accepted this offer by sending donations, and that the NRA breached the promise by using the solicited funds for purposes not in furtherance of the NRA’s mission….

Plaintiffs have plausibly alleged a claim for breach of contract based on the NRA’s
solicitation of donations with the express promise that any donations would be used to further its
mission and its use of donated funds for purposes unrelated to that mission.

We have heard in the past that significant loans were made by the NRA Foundation to the NRA itself. We also heard in the New York case how significant personal expenditures were disguised through the use of credit cards issued by Ackerman McQueen. This has come back to bite the NRA and has allowed Dell’Aquila’s claim of tortious interference to stand.

Finally, there are the charges of RICO and RICO conspiracy.

As discussed above, Plaintiffs have sufficiently alleged a RICO claim. With regard to
Defendant’s second argument, Plaintiffs point to allegations that the NRA “agree[d] to participate
in the conduct of the affairs of the NRA Foundation enterprise through a pattern of racketeering
activity,” specifically, that NRA had a “decades-long arrangement pursuant to which the NRA
solicited funds through the [NRA Foundation] under false pretenses, transferred those funds to the
NRA, and laundered them through Ackerman [McQueen] to support Mr. LaPierre’s extravagance.” For purposes of the motion to dismiss, these allegations are sufficient to plausibly allege that the NRA “objectively manifested an agreement to participate” in the RICO enterprise.

It should be pointed out that none of Dell’Aquila’s charges have been proven but there is enough there that the case goes on. More importantly, Dell’Aquila and his fellow plaintiffs will be allowed to engage in discovery which, to be honest, could prove very embarrassing to the NRA. While Wayne is gone as is Tyler Schropp and Doug Hamlin has started to clean house at the NRA, the NRA Foundation is still dominated by the old guard. They were put in place to do Wayne’s bidding including the sweetheart loans between the NRA and the NRA Foundation. These loans were sufficiently problematic that the Attorney General of the District of Columbia brought suit and the Foundation eventually entered into a consent decree.

Judge Campbell’s memorandum is embedded below:

Dell’Aquila v NRA opinionDownload
Uncategorized

20 Days To Go In NRA Board Race

March 17, 2025 by

With only 20 days to go before all ballots must be received by the NRA’s tabulating firm, this last factoid from the Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association is an interesting note. With 49 candidates on the ballot plus another two write-in candidates, I think this number may drop even with people voting the full slate of NRA 2.0 candidates.

Now that we know that a total of 30 candidates will be elected, it is critical to remember that your ballot can only contain 28 selections including the two write-ins. Any more than that and it will be trashed as invalid. The passing of Walt Walter and the pending resignation of Ken Blackwell are what have opened up the extra two slots on the board.

Falls Township made this observation about the implications of the post above.

Reformers can win! In previous elections, the difference between popular insider candidates and the ones who barely got elected was a huge.

In recent years, the races have narrowed dramatically. Members are spreading their votes out and not voting for insider candidates as frequently.

Uncategorized

NRA Annual Membership Deal

March 11, 2025 by

Doug Hamlin has announced a reduced cost annual membership deal that is only good until April 20, 2025. You can get a NRA Annual Membership for only $18.71. The amount commemorates the NRA’s founding in 1871.

To take advantage of this deal, go to this link: https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR047188

Frankly, I know many (MANY!) people dropped their membership as a result of the issues of the last few years. The issues include Wayne’s grifting, too many directors looking the other way, insider deals, the New York trial, and the list goes on. The way I see it is that this deal allows one to take a chance on NRA 2.0 and the team of reformers that I sincerely expect to get elected for less than the cost of a box of ammo. If we don’t live up to your expectations, you can walk away having spent less than the cost of a ticket, popcorn, and a soda at most local movie theaters.

I want to be clear. This annual membership will not make you eligible to vote in this year’s Board of Directors election. You would still need to be either a life member or an annual member with five years of continuous, unbroken membership by March 7th to have been eligible to vote.

Uncategorized

Monday’s NRA Voting Factoid

March 10, 2025 by 3 Comments

In what should not surprise anyone, voting participation in the NRA Board of Directors election has dropped by almost half since 2019. That year the percentage of members voting was 5.95% which is not that great in and of itself. In 2024, it was 3.16%. Over that same time period membership in the NRA has dropped by almost two million members.

We have 27 days left in which to reverse this trend and to elect the NRA 2.0 slate of candidates. Ballots must be received by April 6th. Given that April 6th is a Sunday, I’m am thinking a day or so earlier is the absolute cut-off for your ballot to be received.

Given everything that has been revealed since the 2019 Annual Meeting in Indianapolis, it is no wonder that members have left and voting has dropped off. This year is our chance to reverse the voting trend, clean house, and give the NRA a chance to regain its strength. By cleaning house, I mean defeating those who stood by while Wayne and company were merrily grifting away. The old guard, the Friends of Wayne, the cabal, or whatever you want to call them have stood in the way of change and are trying to get elected on the basis of old, sometimes very old, accomplishments. Their time is past.

Now it is time to elect those who stand for accountability, integrity, and, most of all, transparency.

Thanks to the Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association for creating the NRA Voting Facts series.

Uncategorized

NRA Voting Facts Revisited

March 3, 2025 by

In another illustration of how so few eligible NRA voting members actually vote is this factoid from the Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association.

Thanks to Bitter and the Falls Township Rifle and Pistol Association for compiling these numbers. Imagine a NRA if a million members voted for change, reform, and NRA 2.0. Nothing could stop us!