New York Attorney General Letitia James issued another subpoena to the National Rifle Association on Monday, seeking financial and compliance-related records for more than 90 current and former members of the group’s board.
Hooray!
Too bad they can’t claim “executive privilege.”
Such a request was expected and, as we have said many times, the NRA will cooperate with any
reasonable, good faithlawful request for information given the organization’s commitment to good governance.
FIFY. Back to law school - you don’t get to decide whether a subpoena is “reasonable” or has been issued “in good faith.”
Setting sights and taking aim… good on you Madam AG
thoughts and prayers for the AG
Let’s hope Ms James has an alert and active security detail.
She’s going to take them down!
Exactly. And since it’s a state subpoena designed to investigate compliance with state law, they won’t be in federal court when they refuse to comply, so they won’t have even the chance of getting a Trump appointed judge.
Hmmmmm…what has the NRA DONE???
We are almost there.
Talk about a target-rich environment. Kinda ironic for ammosexuals…
The F.B.I. said it had opened a domestic terrorism investigation into the Gilroy shooting, and that the Dayton gunman had been exploring “violent ideologies.”
By Mitch Smith, Rick Rojas and Campbell Robertson
RIGHT NOW
The F.B.I. said it was investigating the Dayton shooting after evidence suggested the gunman had explored “violent ideologies.”
seeking financial and compliance-related records for more than 90 current and former members of the group’s board.
I can think of three recently resigned board members who will be complying most gleefully, though no one’s day is improved by having to talk to their attorney.
Here is where things may get interesting, depending on how the NRA board is legally constituted. In general (IANAL, but some family members have been on small corporate boards) a board member is an officer of a corporation. They have a fiduciary duty to the organization and its charter. And if the NRA has not purchases and maintained adequate directors’ insurance policies for them (and possibly even if they have) all those dozens of purely for show directors have all their personal assets hanging out in the wind.
How many of them will do the omerta thing?
I’m sure the NRA purchased the appropriate E&O insurance, but I’ll bet it doesn’t cover fraud, which is one of the things alleged here.
I just voted in that TPM poll about gun control laws and noticed that “no action will be taken” is far in the lead. I voted for “it might happen”, and here’s why. As this piece about the NY AG points out, and as other stories about internal NRA strife have shown, that particular organization is in serious trouble right now. If any more proof about their Russian funding comes out during this, we might finally be able to put a proverbial stake through the NRA’s dark political heart, and THEN perhaps something gets accomplished.
The GOP’s being cut to pieces and it still doesn’t appear to fully get it. This isn’t just about Trump, but about the party that spawned and has now been taken over by him. He is their monster and now he’s killing them. Not that they haven’t done a great job of it themselves. On so many fronts, they’re being attacked. It might not always be headline-worthy, but it’s happening. Guns, the environment, health care, women’s rights, civil rights, infrastructure, green energy–corruption–they’re taking a beating and collectively I don’t think they can survive it, like being stung by 500 bees. Even if you’re not allergic, it’ll kill you in the end. They delude themselves into thinking that no worries, Uncle Vlad’s got this. No, he don’t got this. He’s got other plans and using them was only an interim part of it.
What unmitigated scumbuckets, taking the side of gun makers over little children and innocent people. Their demise can’t come too soon. I hope it hurts. I want to see Mass Murder Mitch literally cry.
Outstanding Post
I think the stat was that 70-80% of all sitting judges had been through programs offered by the Federalist Society. That was in the '90s, IIRC. That’s not to say that 70-80% of all judges are Federalist judges. But they’ve all had to sink-or-swim in propaganda-filled waters, and emerge having picked up some career speed.
“Trump judges” judges are just the least-normally-confirmable Federalists. The ones whose histories of gang rape, financial improprieties, or congenital inability to avoid lying while under oath, would be deal-breaking problems under any but the most-extremist legislatures.