Discussion: How The New York Attorney General's Probe Threatens The NRA's Future

TPM Article Topics
42

They want to give bullets to people.

3 Likes
43

Meanwhile, John Bolton, Marco Rubio, and Mike Pompeo are all knocking themselves out on Twitter trying to manage the next coup attempt in Venezuela.

Just marvel at Rubio’s timeline. THAT is what “meddling” looks like.

https://twitter.com/marcorubio

1 Like
44

A deep dive into the NRA corruption: https://www.thetrace.org/features/nra-financial-misconduct-ackerman-mcqueen/

4 Likes
45

CAN. NOT. WAIT. for NRA to go all “cold dead hands”


10 Likes
46

It is closer to Glenn Beck than the Flintstones. The idea of a pregnant Glenn Beck is amusing. Thanks for the laugh.

1 Like
47

In the waning years they always introduce a baby, assuring the demise of the run. Pebbles and Bamm-Bamm ruined the Flinstones, same for Tabitha and Bewitched. Preggy Jennifer Aniston did nothing for Friends. So, Melania gets knocked-up?
[/quote]

So who gets to be the father?

3 Likes
48

Letitia James is my new hero. I just hope she’s got bodyguards because it’s just a matter of time until the NRA unleashes the crazies on her. Terrorist organizations tend not to handle existential threats in a law-abiding manner.

4 Likes
49


if James finds evidence that the NRA “has morphed into some kind of lobbying or political group and not necessarily a charity as New York law would define it,”
 This is still a question? Jesus.

3 Likes
50

The NRA is a 501 c4, which means that it doesn’t have to pay income tax. That part can do some political activity. It also runs a bunch of 501 c3 organizations, to which contributions are deductible. Those are strictly limited in their political actiivties. Really strictly.

My bet is that some of the self-dealing has involved payments from the c3 organizations to the parent in ways that violate tax law. (For example, if the c3’s pay inflated fees for use of the name or for office infrastructure or whatever, they’re potentially laundering deductible dollars into nondeductible spending, the same way Abramov did with his “charities”.)

5 Likes
51

That was my first thought, too. Great minds
 Or, maybe, dirty minds


2 Likes
52

But even as a 501©(4), per the IRS, the “
organization must 
 be operated exclusively to promote social welfare.” Tough row to hoe.

4 Likes
53

John Cassavetes

1 Like
54

Alas, “social welfare” is an elastic term. If your view of social welfare includes lots more dead bodies in the streets as a sacrifice to the sanctity of the second amendment, that could well be OK. One of the few things that “social welfare” absolutely doesn’t include is the enhanced bank accounts and lifestyles of managers, officers and their friends. So if you can show it’s being operated in large part to enrich the operators then you can shut it the heck down.

6 Likes
55

As always, follow the money.

7 Likes
56

At least the NRA didn’t take the final step into pure grift. That would be to do everything possible to elect Democrats thus raising the chance of gun control laws. Nothing gets the money flowing into the NRA and sales like that.

1 Like
57

I think it’s going to be revealing to find out what percentage of their cash flow has been from oligarchs and billionaires. They could reup every current member but if they can’t reestablish the dark money flows they won’t have enough to do more than run some gun safety classes and publish a paper magazine most of the members will need bifocals and a magnifying glass to read


7 Likes
58

“if James finds evidence that the NRA “has morphed into some kind of lobbying or political group and not necessarily a charity as New York law would define it,” that could give the attorney general more leeway to move from allegations around the misuse of money to the existence of the NRA itself.”

No lawyer, but I’m thinking funding Trump’s GOTV effort in 2016 might just qualify here


5 Likes
59

The NRA is a political organization pure and simple. The gun part is a cover.

3 Likes
60

“too early to get flamed by lawyers”
It seems to me that when us non-lawyer types ask a question politely the lawyers here seem happy to provide the answer flame-free. (Which i really appreciate - thanks!) Flaming seems to ensue mostly when people dont acknowledge that they don’t know what they’re talking about


9 Likes
61

As with the Trump Foundation, it mystifies me why taking money from a charitable organization for personal use is not a felony.

It would be if the bookkeeper did it, so why not when the officers or directors do?

7 Likes