saxdog

New York AG sues to dissolve the NRA

Recommended Posts

Citing systemic organizational fraud New York's attorney general filed to dissolve the NRA. Other non profits killed by New York for fraud include the now defunct Trump Foundation. 

 

From the Washington Post

 

New York attorney general seeks to dissolve NRA in suit accusing gun rights group of wide-ranging fraud and self-dealing

 
Default Mono Sans Mono Serif Sans Serif Comic Fancy Small Caps
Default X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large
Default Outline Dark Outline Light Outline Dark Bold Outline Light Bold Shadow Dark Shadow Light Shadow Dark Bold Shadow Light Bold
Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%
Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%
New York attorney general files civil suit, seeks to dissolve NRA
 
 
National Rifle Association leaders drained $64 million from the nonprofit, according to a civil suit filed New York Attorney General Letitia James. (NY attorney general)
August 6, 2020 at 2:38 p.m. EDT
Add to list

The chief executive of the National Rifle Association and several top lieutenants engaged in a decades-long pattern of fraud to raid the coffers of the powerful gun rights group for personal gain, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by the New York attorney general, draining $64 million from the nonprofit in just three years.

 

In her lawsuit, Attorney General Letitia James called for the dissolution of the NRA and the removal of CEO Wayne LaPierre from the leadership post he has held for the past 39 years, saying he and others used the group’s funds to finance a luxury lifestyle.

She also asked a New York court to force LaPierre and three key deputies to repay NRA members for the ill-gotten funds and inflated salaries that her investigation found they took.

 

James accused the NRA leaders of flouting state and federal laws and signing off on reports and statements they knew were fraudulent, while diverting millions of dollars away from the NRA’s charitable mission to benefit themselves and their allies.

 

The attorney general requested that the court bar the four men — LaPierre, general counsel John Frazer, former treasurer Woody Phillips and former chief of staff Joshua Powell — from ever serving in a leadership position for a New York charity in the future.

“The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets,” James, a Democrat, said in a statement.

 

Her investigation, which began in February 2019, found a “a culture of self-dealing, mismanagement, and negligent oversight at the NRA that was illegal, oppressive, and fraudulent,” according to a statement by the attorney general’s office.

The scope of the allegations by the New York attorney general come as a serious blow to the longtime political powerhouse and a top ally of President Trump, which is planning to again spend millions this fall on behalf of him and other Republican candidates.

AD

NRA officials lashed back in response, accusing James of a premeditated plan to take down the organization in a countersuit filed in federal court.

In a tweet, Trump accused the “Radical Left New York” of “trying to destroy the NRA.”

 

Meanwhile, D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine announced Thursday that his office filed a separate lawsuit against the NRA Foundation, which is based in Washington. Racine accused the organization of being a puppet of the NRA, despite legal requirements that it independently pursue charitable purposes. Instead, Racine said his office found, the foundation repeatedly loaned the NRA money to address its rising deficits.

James said at a news conference Thursday that she is seeking to dissolve the NRA because of the brazenness of the group’s violations of law.

“The corruption was so broad and because they have basically destroyed all the assets of the NRA,” she said. “Enough was enough … No one is above the law, not even the NRA.”

AD
 

Her office cited as a precedent its previous action against the Trump Foundation, which led Trump to shut down the charity in 2018 amid allegations that he used it for his personal benefit.

The New York lawsuit against the NRA paints a picture of widespread wrongdoing at the influential gun rights group, and a freewheeling atmosphere in which top officials repeatedly took advantage of their positions for their personal benefit.

In one new revelation, the attorney general said her investigation uncovered that LaPierre recently arranged a post-employment contract for himself with the NRA worth $17 million. He never sought board approval for the deal, the suit claims.

 

The lawsuit also claims LaPierre failed to report large sums of personal income to the IRS. James’s office said it found that the NRA chief funneled personal expenses through an outside public relations firm, allowing him to avoid reporting hundreds of thousands of dollars of personal income.

AD

James said Thursday that she was referring those findings to the IRS. She also said that if her office uncovers criminal activity, it will be referred to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

In response, the NRA said Thursday that it was filing its own lawsuit against James, alleging that the New York attorney general has violated the group’s free speech rights and has been unfairly targeting the gun rights lobby since she began campaigning for the office.

 

“This was a baseless, premeditated attack on our organization and the Second Amendment freedoms it fights to defend,” NRA President Carolyn Meadows said in a statement. “You could have set your watch by it: the investigation was going to reach its crescendo as we move into the 2020 election cycle.”

NRA officials said they believe James’s action was designed to disrupt the group’s momentum at a critical time in the 2020 election campaign. The NRA political action arm is planning on spending tens of millions of dollars this fall to mobilize its members to defeat Democratic candidates who seek gun restrictions, including putative Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, according to a person familiar with fundraising, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal strategy.

AD

“It’s a transparent attempt to score political points and attack the leading voice in opposition to the leftist agenda,” Meadows said. “This has been a power grab by a political opportunist — a desperate move that is part of a rank political vendetta. Our members won’t be intimidated or bullied in their defense of political and constitutional freedom.”

 

Trump also decried the legal action against the organization, which spent millions on his behalf in 2016, calling it a “terrible thing” as he spoke to reporters Thursday morning at the White House. He said the NRA had been “decimated” by legal expenses and suggested the group should move from New York to Texas.

Experts in tax law said the deep investigation into the NRA’s finances showed the potential for state officials to vigorously enforce nonprofit rules.

AD

“It is a watershed moment in nonprofit regulation,” said Douglas Varley, who advises nonprofit organizations at the law firm of Caplin & Drysdale.

With a decline in IRS funding and enforcement, there has been a widespread belief that “the locus of nonprofit enforcement is shifting from IRS to the states,” he said. “Here is the clearest possible evidence of that reality. I think everyone who believes a strong regulator is needed would heartened by this.”

 

The dual suits filed by the attorneys general in New York and Washington punctuate nearly two years of infighting at the NRA over management of the group’s funds, a civil war that led to the exodus of many veteran members and top officials.

Longtime NRA member Rob Pincus, a critic of LaPierre’s leadership, said Thursday in a statement that “none of us who have been pushing for NRA reform are celebrating today’s announcement.”

AD

“It is tragic that the NY AG’s office is having to step in to clean up the NRA,” he added.

The group’s bitter internal battle burst into public view in April 2019 at the NRA’s annual convention in Indianapolis, when then-NRA President Oliver North was forced out by LaPierre after pressing for an internal financial review.

The Washington Post and other news organizations subsequently revealed how the NRA directed funds to board members and how LaPierre racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in charges at a Beverly Hills clothing boutique and on foreign travel.

The Post also reported how, after a mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Fla., Pierre told close associates he was worried about how easily he could be targeted and needed a more secure place to live and sought to buy a $6 million, 10,000-square-foot French-style country estate in Westlake, Tex.

AD

The suit expands on previous allegations that LaPierre improperly charged the NRA for private jet travel and luxury vacations that had no clear business purpose. The filing claims LaPierre billed the NRA more than $500,000 for private charter flights he and his family took to visit the Bahamas eight times over three years.

Last year, a spokesman for LaPierre told The Post his visits to the Bahamas were for NRA business. But the New York attorney general’s investigation found the trips were private vacations.

In four years, LaPierre was reimbursed by the NRA for $1.2 million in expenses that were personal trips, golf fees and gifts, the suit claims.

LaPierre also spent $3.6 million of NRA money for private travel consultants to arrange private jets and executive car service for his and his family’s use over just two years, the suit says. And he set aside several millions each year for private security for him and his family.

LaPierre also enjoyed the largesse of NRA vendors who hoped to keep their organization’s business, the suit said. One vendor gave LaPierre and his wife an all-expense paid trip to Africa for a safari adventure; another frequently loaned LaPierre and his family the use of his 107-foot yacht on his visits to the Caribbean.

Phillips, the former treasurer, is accused in the suit of arranging a NRA deal worth more than $1 million that benefited his girlfriend. The lawsuit also claims that shortly before he retired in 2018, Phillips obtained a contract for himself worth $1.8 million. On paper, Phillips’s contract called for him to provide advice and consulting services for the new treasurer; but the new treasurer said he knew nothing of the contract and never received any services from Phillips, the suit claims.

Powell, LaPierre’s former chief of staff, had his salary increased from $250,000 to $800,000 in just three years as a reward for his loyalty to LaPierre, the suit states, and allegedly pocketed an additional $100,000 he was not entitled to as a housing allowance. In addition, Powell also arranged for his wife and father to earn money through NRA contracts.

The lawsuit accuses Frazer, who was general counsel to the NRA, of failing to make sure the nonprofit was governed properly and followed state and federal laws, and it claims he certified false or misleading annual statements.

James said Frazer failed to comply with the rules on board governance, to make sure the board was aware of and voting on major financial transactions and to follow the NRA’s conflict of interest policy.

A central fraud embedded in NRA finances, James’s suit claims, was a secret agreement to pass questionable expenses through its Oklahoma-based advertising agency, Ackerman McQueen.

Under this agreement, the suit alleges, LaPierre and his inner circle of trusted deputies rerouted millions of dollars in lavish personal expenses for themselves, their families and allies through Ackerman McQueen. The goal was to avoid having the board or other members of the NRA know that the charitable organization was paying so much money for LaPierre’s membership fees at golf clubs, private jets and designer suits, the lawsuit said.

Ackerman McQueen then billed the NRA for these large, unexplained sums, calling them “out-of-pocket” expenses, suggesting they were related to the company’s advertising work for the NRA.

The attorney general’s office said it found that Ackerman McQueen billed the NRA $70 million in just 2017 and 2018 for its public relations work, including “out-of-pocket” expenses.

A very large portion of those hidden expenses were for personal trips and expenses for LaPierre. In a deposition in a separate lawsuit last year, LaPierre acknowledged he did not report any of the NRA-paid expenses as personal income to the IRS and claimed they were business expenses.

In its statement, the attorney general’s office said this practice “did not comply with IRS requirements, and, as a result, all such expenses should have been included by the NRA in taxable personal income for LaPierre.”

The partnership between the NRA and the public relations firm began to crack after James, then a candidate for New York attorney general, announced in summer of 2018 that she planned to launch an investigation of the NRA if she won. LaPierre hired a new law firm, led by Angus McQueen’s estranged son-in-law. That attorney, Bill Brewer, urged that the NRA to audit Ackerman McQueen’s bills in preparation for James’s probe.

At LaPierre’s direction and with Brewer’s help, the NRA ejected its in-house lawyer and sued Ackerman McQueen, accusing them of concealing details of the nearly $40 million the NRA paid the firm each year.

Last spring, North announced in Indianapolis he would not seek a second term as president, warning about exorbitant payments to Brewer’s firm and reports of financial mismanagement.

“There is a clear crisis,” North said in his letter announcing his departure.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the NRA is near broke, I imagine support will disappear from all of those people piggies with their hands out for donations. Mr. Trump will be among the first as soon as he realizes it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And our local elk population will blame disgusting liberals such as myself for its demise. That nice Wayne LaPierre was only trying to promote gun safety and second amendment rights and we just couldn't leave them alone. Shame on us.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So the NRA is basically a televangelist setup. The gun worshippers hand over tons of money to the guys who run their church, and it gets blown on right-wing political donations and a decadent luxury lifestyle for the boss.

Wayne LaPierre is a good name for a televangelist. I haven't seen pics of the guy, but I assume he has televangelist hair too. For some reason extravagant weird hair turns on the stupid. There are people out there who think Trump looks cool and tough, chief among them being Trump himself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dogballs, this is quite the development. @Cacoethesic Tom.

I have a serious question for ya. Did you not perceive the corruption?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, saxdog said:

Citing systemic organizational fraud New York's attorney general filed to dissolve the NRA. Other non profits killed by New York for fraud include the now defunct Trump Foundation. 

 

From the Washington Post

 

New York attorney general seeks to dissolve NRA in suit accusing gun rights group of wide-ranging fraud and self-dealing

 
Default Mono Sans Mono Serif Sans Serif Comic Fancy Small Caps
Default X-Small Small Medium Large X-Large XX-Large
Default Outline Dark Outline Light Outline Dark Bold Outline Light Bold Shadow Dark Shadow Light Shadow Dark Bold Shadow Light Bold
Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%
Default Black Silver Gray White Maroon Red Purple Fuchsia Green Lime Olive Yellow Navy Blue Teal Aqua OrangeDefault 100% 75% 50% 25% 0%
New York attorney general files civil suit, seeks to dissolve NRA
 
 
National Rifle Association leaders drained $64 million from the nonprofit, according to a civil suit filed New York Attorney General Letitia James. (NY attorney general)
August 6, 2020 at 2:38 p.m. EDT
Add to list

The chief executive of the National Rifle Association and several top lieutenants engaged in a decades-long pattern of fraud to raid the coffers of the powerful gun rights group for personal gain, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by the New York attorney general, draining $64 million from the nonprofit in just three years.

 

In her lawsuit, Attorney General Letitia James called for the dissolution of the NRA and the removal of CEO Wayne LaPierre from the leadership post he has held for the past 39 years, saying he and others used the group’s funds to finance a luxury lifestyle.

She also asked a New York court to force LaPierre and three key deputies to repay NRA members for the ill-gotten funds and inflated salaries that her investigation found they took.

 

James accused the NRA leaders of flouting state and federal laws and signing off on reports and statements they knew were fraudulent, while diverting millions of dollars away from the NRA’s charitable mission to benefit themselves and their allies.

 

The attorney general requested that the court bar the four men — LaPierre, general counsel John Frazer, former treasurer Woody Phillips and former chief of staff Joshua Powell — from ever serving in a leadership position for a New York charity in the future.

“The NRA’s influence has been so powerful that the organization went unchecked for decades while top executives funneled millions into their own pockets,” James, a Democrat, said in a statement.

 

Her investigation, which began in February 2019, found a “a culture of self-dealing, mismanagement, and negligent oversight at the NRA that was illegal, oppressive, and fraudulent,” according to a statement by the attorney general’s office.

The scope of the allegations by the New York attorney general come as a serious blow to the longtime political powerhouse and a top ally of President Trump, which is planning to again spend millions this fall on behalf of him and other Republican candidates.

AD

NRA officials lashed back in response, accusing James of a premeditated plan to take down the organization in a countersuit filed in federal court.

In a tweet, Trump accused the “Radical Left New York” of “trying to destroy the NRA.”

 

Meanwhile, D.C. Attorney General Karl A. Racine announced Thursday that his office filed a separate lawsuit against the NRA Foundation, which is based in Washington. Racine accused the organization of being a puppet of the NRA, despite legal requirements that it independently pursue charitable purposes. Instead, Racine said his office found, the foundation repeatedly loaned the NRA money to address its rising deficits.

James said at a news conference Thursday that she is seeking to dissolve the NRA because of the brazenness of the group’s violations of law.

“The corruption was so broad and because they have basically destroyed all the assets of the NRA,” she said. “Enough was enough … No one is above the law, not even the NRA.”

AD
 

Her office cited as a precedent its previous action against the Trump Foundation, which led Trump to shut down the charity in 2018 amid allegations that he used it for his personal benefit.

The New York lawsuit against the NRA paints a picture of widespread wrongdoing at the influential gun rights group, and a freewheeling atmosphere in which top officials repeatedly took advantage of their positions for their personal benefit.

In one new revelation, the attorney general said her investigation uncovered that LaPierre recently arranged a post-employment contract for himself with the NRA worth $17 million. He never sought board approval for the deal, the suit claims.

 

The lawsuit also claims LaPierre failed to report large sums of personal income to the IRS. James’s office said it found that the NRA chief funneled personal expenses through an outside public relations firm, allowing him to avoid reporting hundreds of thousands of dollars of personal income.

AD

James said Thursday that she was referring those findings to the IRS. She also said that if her office uncovers criminal activity, it will be referred to the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office.

In response, the NRA said Thursday that it was filing its own lawsuit against James, alleging that the New York attorney general has violated the group’s free speech rights and has been unfairly targeting the gun rights lobby since she began campaigning for the office.

 

“This was a baseless, premeditated attack on our organization and the Second Amendment freedoms it fights to defend,” NRA President Carolyn Meadows said in a statement. “You could have set your watch by it: the investigation was going to reach its crescendo as we move into the 2020 election cycle.”

NRA officials said they believe James’s action was designed to disrupt the group’s momentum at a critical time in the 2020 election campaign. The NRA political action arm is planning on spending tens of millions of dollars this fall to mobilize its members to defeat Democratic candidates who seek gun restrictions, including putative Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden, according to a person familiar with fundraising, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal strategy.

AD

“It’s a transparent attempt to score political points and attack the leading voice in opposition to the leftist agenda,” Meadows said. “This has been a power grab by a political opportunist — a desperate move that is part of a rank political vendetta. Our members won’t be intimidated or bullied in their defense of political and constitutional freedom.”

 

Trump also decried the legal action against the organization, which spent millions on his behalf in 2016, calling it a “terrible thing” as he spoke to reporters Thursday morning at the White House. He said the NRA had been “decimated” by legal expenses and suggested the group should move from New York to Texas.

Experts in tax law said the deep investigation into the NRA’s finances showed the potential for state officials to vigorously enforce nonprofit rules.

AD

“It is a watershed moment in nonprofit regulation,” said Douglas Varley, who advises nonprofit organizations at the law firm of Caplin & Drysdale.

With a decline in IRS funding and enforcement, there has been a widespread belief that “the locus of nonprofit enforcement is shifting from IRS to the states,” he said. “Here is the clearest possible evidence of that reality. I think everyone who believes a strong regulator is needed would heartened by this.”

 

The dual suits filed by the attorneys general in New York and Washington punctuate nearly two years of infighting at the NRA over management of the group’s funds, a civil war that led to the exodus of many veteran members and top officials.

Longtime NRA member Rob Pincus, a critic of LaPierre’s leadership, said Thursday in a statement that “none of us who have been pushing for NRA reform are celebrating today’s announcement.”

AD

“It is tragic that the NY AG’s office is having to step in to clean up the NRA,” he added.

The group’s bitter internal battle burst into public view in April 2019 at the NRA’s annual convention in Indianapolis, when then-NRA President Oliver North was forced out by LaPierre after pressing for an internal financial review.

The Washington Post and other news organizations subsequently revealed how the NRA directed funds to board members and how LaPierre racked up hundreds of thousands of dollars in charges at a Beverly Hills clothing boutique and on foreign travel.

The Post also reported how, after a mass shooting at a high school in Parkland, Fla., Pierre told close associates he was worried about how easily he could be targeted and needed a more secure place to live and sought to buy a $6 million, 10,000-square-foot French-style country estate in Westlake, Tex.

AD

The suit expands on previous allegations that LaPierre improperly charged the NRA for private jet travel and luxury vacations that had no clear business purpose. The filing claims LaPierre billed the NRA more than $500,000 for private charter flights he and his family took to visit the Bahamas eight times over three years.

Last year, a spokesman for LaPierre told The Post his visits to the Bahamas were for NRA business. But the New York attorney general’s investigation found the trips were private vacations.

In four years, LaPierre was reimbursed by the NRA for $1.2 million in expenses that were personal trips, golf fees and gifts, the suit claims.

LaPierre also spent $3.6 million of NRA money for private travel consultants to arrange private jets and executive car service for his and his family’s use over just two years, the suit says. And he set aside several millions each year for private security for him and his family.

LaPierre also enjoyed the largesse of NRA vendors who hoped to keep their organization’s business, the suit said. One vendor gave LaPierre and his wife an all-expense paid trip to Africa for a safari adventure; another frequently loaned LaPierre and his family the use of his 107-foot yacht on his visits to the Caribbean.

Phillips, the former treasurer, is accused in the suit of arranging a NRA deal worth more than $1 million that benefited his girlfriend. The lawsuit also claims that shortly before he retired in 2018, Phillips obtained a contract for himself worth $1.8 million. On paper, Phillips’s contract called for him to provide advice and consulting services for the new treasurer; but the new treasurer said he knew nothing of the contract and never received any services from Phillips, the suit claims.

Powell, LaPierre’s former chief of staff, had his salary increased from $250,000 to $800,000 in just three years as a reward for his loyalty to LaPierre, the suit states, and allegedly pocketed an additional $100,000 he was not entitled to as a housing allowance. In addition, Powell also arranged for his wife and father to earn money through NRA contracts.

The lawsuit accuses Frazer, who was general counsel to the NRA, of failing to make sure the nonprofit was governed properly and followed state and federal laws, and it claims he certified false or misleading annual statements.

James said Frazer failed to comply with the rules on board governance, to make sure the board was aware of and voting on major financial transactions and to follow the NRA’s conflict of interest policy.

A central fraud embedded in NRA finances, James’s suit claims, was a secret agreement to pass questionable expenses through its Oklahoma-based advertising agency, Ackerman McQueen.

Under this agreement, the suit alleges, LaPierre and his inner circle of trusted deputies rerouted millions of dollars in lavish personal expenses for themselves, their families and allies through Ackerman McQueen. The goal was to avoid having the board or other members of the NRA know that the charitable organization was paying so much money for LaPierre’s membership fees at golf clubs, private jets and designer suits, the lawsuit said.

Ackerman McQueen then billed the NRA for these large, unexplained sums, calling them “out-of-pocket” expenses, suggesting they were related to the company’s advertising work for the NRA.

The attorney general’s office said it found that Ackerman McQueen billed the NRA $70 million in just 2017 and 2018 for its public relations work, including “out-of-pocket” expenses.

A very large portion of those hidden expenses were for personal trips and expenses for LaPierre. In a deposition in a separate lawsuit last year, LaPierre acknowledged he did not report any of the NRA-paid expenses as personal income to the IRS and claimed they were business expenses.

In its statement, the attorney general’s office said this practice “did not comply with IRS requirements, and, as a result, all such expenses should have been included by the NRA in taxable personal income for LaPierre.”

The partnership between the NRA and the public relations firm began to crack after James, then a candidate for New York attorney general, announced in summer of 2018 that she planned to launch an investigation of the NRA if she won. LaPierre hired a new law firm, led by Angus McQueen’s estranged son-in-law. That attorney, Bill Brewer, urged that the NRA to audit Ackerman McQueen’s bills in preparation for James’s probe.

At LaPierre’s direction and with Brewer’s help, the NRA ejected its in-house lawyer and sued Ackerman McQueen, accusing them of concealing details of the nearly $40 million the NRA paid the firm each year.

Last spring, North announced in Indianapolis he would not seek a second term as president, warning about exorbitant payments to Brewer’s firm and reports of financial mismanagement.

“There is a clear crisis,” North said in his letter announcing his departure.

 

 

 

 

Why doesn't the AG just charge them with fraud and prove it.

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Why doesn't the AG just charge them with fraud and prove it."

That pesky free speech argument gets in the way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Why doesn't the AG just charge them with fraud and prove it.

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

The allegation isn't that a few particular individuals committed criminal fraud  -  it's that self-dealing is rampant in the entire organization, to such an extent that the org is a fraudulent enterprise.

Self-dealing can be rampant throughout an org, without any one person performing an act that contains all 5 elements of criminal fraud:

  1. material misrepresentation of a fact,
  2. knowledge of its falsity,
  3. an intent to induce reliance,
  4. justifiable reliance by the plaintiff and
  5. damages. 

And besides, Civil is more efficient, you only need to prove more likely than not, as opposed to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, frenchie said:

The allegation isn't that a few particular individuals committed criminal fraud  -  it's that self-dealing is rampant in the entire organization, to such an extent that the org is a fraudulent enterprise.

Self-dealing can be rampant throughout an org, without any one person performing an act that contains all 5 elements of criminal fraud:

  1. material misrepresentation of a fact,
  2. knowledge of its falsity,
  3. an intent to induce reliance,
  4. justifiable reliance by the plaintiff and
  5. damages. 

And besides, Civil is more efficient, you only need to prove more likely than not, as opposed to guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

 

I only see claims against the top leadership and national board members.   Less than 100 total. 
There are over 5 million members of the NRA.  


I’m predicting the NRA will restructure pay some fines, get a new board and leadership and move on.    Just like United Way and others

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

What the fuck does that mean.

It points out tax codes and regulations applicable to non-profits.

My question remains

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

If they are breaking the law indict and convict.

This is just using the power of the state for harassment and political gain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

What the fuck does that mean.

It points out tax codes and regulations applicable to non-profits.

My question remains

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

If they are breaking the law indict and convict.

This is just using the power of the state for harassment and political gain.

you're being dopey again, your words are nonsensical.  Here's one written for the less intelligent.

If you can't read a simple link, go to your DuckDuckGo and type in "Attorney General Regulation Charitable Organizations" and you will learn the statutory enforcement tools available to the various state attorneys general.  All your questions will be answered.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, The Joker said:


I’m predicting the NRA will restructure pay some fines, get a new board and leadership and move on.    Just like United Way and others

 

No restructuring permitted after dissolution. They will have to start over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

No restructuring permitted after dissolution. They will have to start over.

 Which they surely will.  

  Big time political cash cows are nearly impossible to kill. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Mark K said:

 Which they surely will.  

  Big time political cash cows are nearly impossible to kill. 

Given the NRA's current balance sheet and the likely penalties and legal bills over the next few months, the organization will likely not survive in its current form. The name will of course live on.  I wish I knew more about how assets are disposed of in a court-ordered dissolution of a charity, but someone's gonna buy it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

This is just using the power of the state for harassment and political gain.

You can't pretend to be this dumb after years of demonstrating intelligence; it doesn't fly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Given the NRA's current balance sheet and the likely penalties and legal bills over the next few months, the organization will likely not survive in its current form. The name will of course live on.  I wish I knew more about how assets are disposed of in a court-ordered dissolution of a charity, but someone's gonna buy it!

I suggest the next iteration will be called perhaps the National Firearms Association, or National Gun Owners Association. Something like that. 

 Same circus, new monkeys. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

What the fuck does that mean.

It points out tax codes and regulations applicable to non-profits.

My question remains

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

If they are breaking the law indict and convict.

This is just using the power of the state for harassment and political gain.

Come on man, it's been said over and over here the AG is going after dissolving the corrupt organization and seeking civil restitution.  AND she will refer criminal conduct to the MDNY and the IRS.  Presumably the proper authorities. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/6/2020 at 3:29 PM, saxdog said:

The chief executive of the National Rifle Association and several top lieutenants engaged in a decades-long pattern of fraud to raid the coffers of the powerful gun rights group for personal gain, according to a lawsuit filed Thursday by the New York attorney general, draining $64 million from the nonprofit in just three years.

I'm shocked, I tell you, just shocked!  Such an upstanding man like Wayne LaPierre doing such a thing?  Why, it seems impossible!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frenchie said:

You can't pretend to be this dumb after years of demonstrating intelligence; it doesn't fly.

Senescence. Anyone defending Trump after his demonstrated incompetence and idiocy must be either stupid or senile.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

Why does the state take to civil court when they are there to enforce law?

If they are breaking the law indict and convict.

This is just using the power of the state for harassment and political gain.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Senescence. Anyone defending Trump after his demonstrated incompetence and idiocy must be either stupid or senile.

Saorsa generally doesn't defend Trump, though, does he?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Given the NRA's current balance sheet and the likely penalties and legal bills over the next few months, the organization will likely not survive in its current form. The name will of course live on.  I wish I knew more about how assets are disposed of in a court-ordered dissolution of a charity, but someone's gonna buy it!

I was wondering about that myself, 
some form of court appointed Receivership?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apparently there are both state and federal remedies available. Bankruptcy in fed court is an option, as is state dissolution and receivership. 
 

Snip
Significantly, whether a charity is a corporation or a trust, the Charities Bureau of the attorney general’s office is closely involved when a New York charity winds down or merges. New York, therefore, has statutes, case law, and a regulatory process aimed at protecting donor-imposed restrictions (or, in the case of unrestricted gifts, presumed donor expectations about activities a gift was intended to support) when a charity goes out of business or merges into another organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They might be restricted from selling off the name to only another charity

cant believe the doctrine of Cy Pres actually has real life application

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frenchie said:

You can't pretend to be this dumb after years of demonstrating intelligence; it doesn't fly.

I guess you missed her political campaign for the office of AG.

It is funny to watch the lefty echo chamber act outraged when your blackshirt group is referred to as "terrorists", yet you don't seem to have any issue with the same term when it comes from a (D) candidate.

And by "coincidence" (totally not arranged I'm sure), the DC DA announces his case against the NRA Foundation. Imagine that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

 

And by "coincidence" (totally not arranged I'm sure), the DC DA announces his case against the NRA Foundation. Imagine that...

pretty good chance they have some good meat on the bone or she probably wouldn't risk the loss.  wanna see what they got?  I do

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If she's got a case she should take it to criminal court.  That's what an Attorney General should do.  At the least if she has what she claims she should use the tax laws to remove their tax exempt status.

https://www.sullivangalleshaw.com/new-york-city-jury-trials-civil-cases/

Most civil trials in New York use only six jurors instead of the typical 12 in a criminal case. In order to make a decision in a criminal case, jurors usually need to believe the case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” and all 12 of them need to agree. In a civil case, the standard is much lower. A jury only needs to be convinced “by a preponderance of the evidence” – which is approximately the same as believing the plaintiff’s story is “more likely than not.” They also do not need to agree; you can win a personal injury trial with only five of the six jurors on your side

So, she can't make a criminal case and needs a lower standard of proof and agreement to get a judgement.

Meanwhile the defendant has the opportunity to bankrupt themselves and face endless carping in the press.

It's a political ploy this soon before the election because it won't matter what the outcome (in a few years time) will be but the talking points will be many and guilt assumed.

NY would be better served if they actually enforced their own criminal laws in regards to homicide.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, frenchie said:

Saorsa generally doesn't defend Trump, though, does he?

Not directly, but he does seem to support a political philosophy somewhere around Franco.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Not directly, but he does seem to support a political philosophy somewhere around Franco.

Franco, Mussolini, Marcos. Older the better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saorsa said:

If she's got a case she should take it to criminal court.  That's what an Attorney General should do.  At the least if she has what she claims she should use the tax laws to remove their tax exempt status.

https://www.sullivangalleshaw.com/new-york-city-jury-trials-civil-cases/

Most civil trials in New York use only six jurors instead of the typical 12 in a criminal case. In order to make a decision in a criminal case, jurors usually need to believe the case “beyond a reasonable doubt,” and all 12 of them need to agree. In a civil case, the standard is much lower. A jury only needs to be convinced “by a preponderance of the evidence” – which is approximately the same as believing the plaintiff’s story is “more likely than not.” They also do not need to agree; you can win a personal injury trial with only five of the six jurors on your side

So, she can't make a criminal case and needs a lower standard of proof and agreement to get a judgement.

Meanwhile the defendant has the opportunity to bankrupt themselves and face endless carping in the press.

It's a political ploy this soon before the election because it won't matter what the outcome (in a few years time) will be but the talking points will be many and guilt assumed.

NY would be better served if they actually enforced their own criminal laws in regards to homicide.

giphy.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Texas then-AG Greg Abbott suing a charity, to disband it, in civil court: 

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Troopers-charity-under-state-AG-scrutiny-closes-3822470.php

A story where lots of State AGs sue charities in civil court a lot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_cancer_charities

 

Maybe ...that's just the way it's normally done? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saorsa said:

If she's got a case she should take it to criminal court.  That's what an Attorney General should do. 

Apparently... not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frenchie said:

Texas then-AG Greg Abbott suing a charity, to disband it, in civil court: 

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Troopers-charity-under-state-AG-scrutiny-closes-3822470.php

A story where lots of State AGs sue charities in civil court a lot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_cancer_charities

 

Maybe ...that's just the way it's normally done? 

It's one option that I have been pointing out for years. For example:

On 6/4/2015 at 5:14 AM, Cacoethesic Tom said:
On 2/4/2012 at 6:12 AM, Fat Point Jack said:

Corporations will be people when Texas executes one.

 

And not even all that funny, considering that states do revoke corporate charters. That's an execution. So what you're waiting for already happened. You can go ahead and agree with the entire Supreme Court on this point, since I did already show you that all 9 believe corporations are people.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, frenchie said:

Apparently... not.

Apparently what?  Apparently she can't prove a case in criminal court so goes for max accusations and publicity?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Apparently what?  Apparently she can't prove a case in criminal court so goes for max accusations and publicity?

 

Apparently a lot of criminals see charities as a way to get rich. Apparently the AGs go about shutting them down, and pass tax fraud issues to the IRS. Are you saying that we cannot trust Trump’s IRS to prosecute LaPierre? Don’t worry, it won’t be Trump’s for much longer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Apparently what?  Apparently she can't prove a case in criminal court so goes for max accusations and publicity?

 

Not sure why this is the hill you want to die on.  She did the same with the Trump "Foundation".  Going after a criminal's money, especially when it's all they live for, is a pretty bad punishment in itself. And AGAIN, she will refer criminal charges to the MDNY and IRS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Apparently what?  Apparently she can't prove a case in criminal court so goes for max accusations and publicity?

 

Apparently nothing to do with the burden of proof.  Apparently Civil is just the normal, typical process when a charity goes off the rails & an AG seeks to dissolve it:

9 hours ago, frenchie said:

Texas then-AG Greg Abbott suing a charity, to disband it, in civil court: 

https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/article/Troopers-charity-under-state-AG-scrutiny-closes-3822470.php

A story where lots of State AGs sue charities in civil court a lot:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reynolds_cancer_charities

 

Maybe ...that's just the way it's normally done? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, roundthebuoys said:

Not sure why this is the hill you want to die on.  She did the same with the Trump "Foundation".  Going after a criminal's money, especially when it's all they live for, is a pretty bad punishment in itself. And AGAIN, she will refer criminal charges to the MDNY and IRS.

Are you in favor of government harassment of citizens when they can't make a case in law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, frenchie said:

Apparently nothing to do with the burden of proof.  Apparently Civil is just the normal, typical process when a charity goes off the rails & an AG seeks to dissolve it:

 

There are already legal processes for dealing with charities and non-profits.  Remove their tax exempt status.  Their members and supporters can continue to contribute but it doesn't impact government revenue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Are you in favor of government harassment of citizens when they can't make a case in law?

Sigh.  She made a case, it's been posted here, it's a civil case.  That is a "case in law".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

Are you in favor of government harassment of citizens when they can't make a case in law?

There is a case in law, but for some reason the DOJ under Barr is not prosecuting it. I wonder why.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

A so goes for max accusations 

 

what's 'max accusations'?

Have you read the statute yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

Are you in favor of government harassment of citizens when they can't make a case in law?

What do you call that thing passed by the NY legislature and signed by the NY Governor that directs the AG to file a civil action to dissolve a fraudulent charity?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saorsa said:

There are already legal processes for dealing with charities and non-profits. 

Yep.  i posted the info above.  have you read the statute yet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That thing that has been used for years to prosecute bad guys is now a bad thing because I like bad guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MR.CLEAN said:

Yep.  i posted the info above.  have you read the statute yet?

When most people claim to of "posted the info above", they would mean an actual link to the NY statute, not a paper by the Urban Institute.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mike G said:

That thing that has been used for years to prosecute bad guys is now a bad thing because I like bad guys?

"These terrorists at the NRA did all these criminal things, so we will charge them with civil crimes, instead of criminal ones"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

"These terrorists at the NRA did all these criminal things, so we will charge them with civil crimes, instead of criminal ones"

Ahh.  I get it.  Let me edit it for you.

That thing that's been used for years to dissolve dishonest companies is now a bad thing because I like the dishonest company.

I got mixed up with issues facing other trump friends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

When most people claim to of "posted the info above", they would mean an actual link to the NY statute, not a paper by the Urban Institute.

 

I suppose for those whose duckduckgo is broken, I can help.  Three enforcement mechanisms in the regs. First is administrative. 

 

Part 97. Administrative Enforcement by the Attorney General Section 97.1. Procedures applicable to administrative proceedings commenced by the Attorney General pursuant to article 7-A section 177 28 (a) Violations under the Attorney General's administrative jurisdiction. Upon a finding by the Attorney General that any person has committed or is committing a violation of article 7-A, by engaging in activities prohibited under section 172-d that are subject to the administrative remedies of section 177, or by failing to comply with the reporting requirements set forth in section 172-b, the Attorney General may impose the administrative remedies listed in section 97.2 of this Part. Section 97.2. Remedies in Attorney General's administrative proceeding (a) Upon a finding of a violation of article 7-A, the Attorney General may: (1) revoke, suspend or deny a registration of a charitable organization, professional fund raiser, professional solicitor or fund raising counsel or issue an order directing a charitable organization, professional fund raiser, professional solicitor or fund raising counsel to cease and desist specified fund raising activities; and (2) assess a civil penalty in an amount authorized by article 7-A section 177. Section 97.3. Notice of violation (a) The Attorney General shall, before revoking, suspending or denying any registration or exemption, or issuing a cease and desist order, or assessing a civil penalty, notify the respondent in writing and provide an opportunity for a hearing in accordance with article 7-A section 177 and this Chapter. (b) The notice shall consist of a statement of the charges and shall be served by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail to the last known business address of the respondent. (c) If, within 30 days of the date of mailing of the notice of violation, the violation is cured, the respondent may be entitled to waiver of any civil penalty, as provided under article 7-A section 177.2(b). Section 97.4. Requests for hearings (a) Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with articles three and five of the New York State Administrative Procedure Act (SAPA) and in accordance with 19 NYCRR Part 400. (b) A hearing must be requested within 20 days after receipt of notice from the Attorney General. (c) A hearing shall take place within 30 days of the receipt of the request by the Attorney General. (d) Should the respondent not request a hearing, the Attorney General may impose the administrative remedies described in section 97.2 of this Part. Section 97.5. Notice of hearing (a) A hearing shall be held at a time and place designated by the Attorney General. 29 (b) The Attorney General shall notify the respondent in writing of the time and place of the hearing. The notice may be served by personal delivery or by registered or certified mail to its last known business address. (c) Every notice of hearing shall be served with a copy of articles three and five of SAPA, 19 NYCRR Part 400 and this Chapter. (d) The notice shall include: (1) a statement of the time, place and nature of the hearing; (2) a statement of the legal authority and jurisdiction for the hearing; (3) the sections of the statutes or rules and regulations involved; (4) a statement of the facts asserted; and (5) a statement that free interpreter services will be made available. Section 97.6. Administrative hearing officers All hearings shall be conducted by administrative law judges (hearing officers) appointed by the Attorney General or the Attorney General's designee. The hearing officer shall be an attorney who has not worked on or otherwise become familiar with the facts of the matter in issue, and shall exercise his or her judgment independently and impartially. Section 97.7. Adjournments (a) Adjournments must be requested by written affidavit sent to the hearing officer no later than three business days before the scheduled date of the hearing. The affidavit should contain sufficient details to explain the reason for the request. (b) Adjournments will be granted only for good cause. (c) No more than two adjournments will be granted. Section 97.8. Subpoenas (a) Subpoenas may be issued by the hearing officer, the Attorney General or any attorney for a party who is a member of the New York Bar. (b) Subpoenas shall be served in accordance with the Civil Practice Law and Rules. Section 97.9. Conduct of the hearing (a) A hearing officer designated by the Attorney General shall conduct the hearing. (b) The hearing officer may regulate the conduct of the hearing, require witnesses to attend the hearings, take proof and make relevant factual determinations. 30 (c) The respondent may appear at the hearing, cross examine witnesses and produce evidence on his or her own behalf. Should the applicant fail to appear at the hearing, the hearing officer shall hear the evidence given by the Attorney General and make his or her findings and recommendations on the basis of that evidence. (d) The proceeding may be resolved by stipulation, consent order or default of any respondent. Section 97.10. Representation Any respondent who requests a hearing or is compelled to appear before the Attorney General has the right to be represented by counsel or a non-lawyer representative. Section 97.11. Evidence (a) Strict rules of evidence do not apply. (b) In order to expedite the hearing, the hearing officer may permit all or part of the evidence to be submitted in written form. (c) The Attorney General shall have the burden of proving the violation by a preponderance of the evidence. (d) A party has the right to cross examine witnesses. (e) Objections to evidence may be made and shall be noted in the record. Section 97.12. Record (a) The hearing officer shall make a complete record of the proceeding by whatever means he or she deems appropriate, including but not limited to, stenographic transcription or recording devices. (b) The record shall include: (1) records and documents in the Attorney General's possession relevant to the initial findings under article 7-A; (2) notices, pleadings, motions and all rulings by the hearing officer; (3) evidence presented; (4) questions, offers of proof and objections; (5) findings of fact and conclusions of law; and (6) the decision or determination. (c) If requested, the Attorney General shall prepare the record and any transcript of the proceedings within a reasonable time after the decision, but before the commencement of time for judicial review, and provide a copy to any party. 31 Section 97.13. Costs The Attorney General may charge for the costs incurred in preparing and providing copies of the record. Section 97.14. Motions (a) A motion to dismiss the statement of charges for failure of proof may be made at the conclusion of the Attorney General's case. (b) The hearing officer may: (1) grant the motion; (2) deny the motion and continue the hearing; or (3) reserve making a decision on the motion and continue the hearing. (c) Denial of the motion by the hearing officer is not appealable because it is not a final decision on the merits. Section 97.15. Findings of fact (a) Any party may submit written proposed findings of fact to the hearing officer within the time frames set by the hearing officer. The hearing officer will rule on each finding of fact. (b) Findings of fact must be based on the evidence. Section 97.16. Time periods (a) Every adjudicatory proceeding must be completed within 150 days of the date of the hearing stated in the notice of hearing. A request for an adjournment extends the time period by the length of time the adjournment is granted. (b) Prior to the expiration date, the Attorney General or the hearing officer may extend the time period for no longer than an additional 120 days by a written determination mailed to all parties that the proceeding cannot be completed within 150 days and the reasons for the extension. Section 97.17. Final determinations and orders (a) The hearing officer shall make a final determination within 10 days of the conclusion of the hearing. (b) The hearing officer shall make his or her determination or order in writing after consideration of the entire record and as supported by substantial evidence. Substantial evidence means such proof as a reasonable person may accept as adequate to support a decision and constitutes a rational basis for the decision. 32 (c) The determination shall contain findings of fact and conclusions of law or reasons for the decision. (d) The Attorney General shall serve a copy of such determination or order upon the respondent personally or by registered or certified mail to the last known business address, or to the attorney of record. (e) The Attorney General shall maintain an index of all final written decisions by name and subject area. Section 97.18. Stay of the decision or order (a) After the decision and before filing an appeal from the decision, any party may immediately apply to the Attorney General for a stay pending a decision on an appeal. (b) The application must be in writing, based on evidence in the record and served on opposing parties, who can rebut the application in writing within two business days of receipt. (c) The Attorney General's designee shall promptly decide the application. Section 97.19. Administrative appeal from the decision or order (a) Within 30 calendar days of receipt, any of the parties may appeal from the decision or order revoking, suspending or denying any registration or exemption, or issuing a cease and desist order or assessing a civil penalty, by filing with the individual designated by the Attorney General to hear administrative appeals, and serving on the other party or parties, a written memorandum stating the appellant's arguments. (b) The memorandum should identify the part or parts of the decision to which the appellant is objecting, state the grounds for the objection and identify the portions of the record supporting the objection. (c) The party served with the appeal may file and serve a memorandum in opposition and a cross-appeal within 30 days after service of the appeal. A response to a cross-appeal may be filed and served within 15 days after service of the crossappeal. (d) The record on appeal shall consist of the transcript of the hearing, the evidence admitted at the hearing and the memoranda. (e) The individual designated by the Attorney General to hear and decide administrative appeals may make a final written determination: (1) confirming the decision; (2) vacating the decision with an explanation of the basis for vacating the decision; or (3) sending the matter back to the hearing officer for further proceedings. Section 97.20. Judicial appeal from the final administrative determination 33 Within 120 days after the final determination, a party may appeal from the final determination by commencing a proceeding for judicial review under article 78 of the New York State Civil Practice Law and Rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Second is civil.

 

Part 98. Civil Enforcement by the Attorney General Section 98.1. Civil enforcement by the Attorney General This Chapter shall not prohibit the Attorney General from initiating any civil action or proceeding authorized by law for failure to register and/or file reports pursuant to, and/or comply with, any provision of EPTL article 8 or article 7-A, any other law or the common law

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Final is criminal.

Part 99. Criminal Enforcement by the Attorney General Section 99.1. Criminal enforcement by the Attorney General (a) This Chapter shall not prohibit the Attorney General from initiating any criminal action authorized by law for failure to register and/or file reports pursuant to, and/or comply with, any provision of EPTL article 8 or article 7-A, any other law or the common law. (b) Any person who swears falsely to any document required by this Chapter to be signed under penalties for perjury may be guilty of a crime under the New York Penal Code. (c) Any provision of article 7-A, violation of which is designated a misdemeanor without specification of classification, is a class A misdemeanor. See Penal Law section 55.10.2(b).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Wayne popped his head out his bunker and tweeted: "Out of our cold, dead hands".

It seems that he was referring to the money he stole, and not his gunz.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Well, Wayne popped his head out his bunker and tweeted: "Out of our cold, dead hands".

It seems that he was referring to the money he stole, and not his gunz.  

9-mike-luckovich-creators-1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Saorsa said:

The fact that something is legal does not make it right.

 

The fact that something is illegal surely makes it wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Saorsa said:

The fact that something is legal does not make it right.

 

????????????? Dude?  I have no problem with you, why are you dying on this particular hill??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cacoethesic Tom said:

Nope.

Like I would follow your links...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Raz'r said:

Like I would follow your links...

The drug prohibition thread. 

Which is an irritating way, of course, to make his point, but it's still a good point.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, frenchie said:

The drug prohibition thread. 

Which is an irritating way, of course, to make his point, but it's still a good point.

 

Oh, I knew what he would be implying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frenchie said:

The drug prohibition thread. 

Which is an irritating way, of course, to make his point, but it's still a good point.

 

I could have chosen any number of examples. Braiding hair without the requisite 1500 hours of training. Doing math without a license. Feeding homeless people. There are threads on all of those, but I guess it's irritating to link to them? The list of things that are prohibited but not wrong is pretty long.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, frenchie said:

The drug prohibition thread. 

Which is an irritating way, of course, to make his point, but it's still a good point.

 

Not really. All the local drug war spam is over-simplified, shortsighted, incomplete, and unproven. 

Any connection between drug enforcement and other matters, such as (pick one) the racial divide, gun violence, and uncooperative witnesses, is childish. And flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NRA files for bankruptcy, says it will reincorporate in Texas

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/nra-files-for-bankruptcy-says-it-will-reincorporate-in-texas.html

This is a blow to freedom lovers everywhere that only disgusting liberals such as myself can revel at. Truly this great man has been under-appreciated. First Shitstain. Now Waynestain. The future is dark. Tom, I'm disappointed in you.

image.thumb.png.41635c3b226bc5023056450b47f609c9.png

Give now. Show them liberals. Tomorrow may already be too late. 

https://donate.nra.org/donate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/15/2021 at 1:43 PM, Olsonist said:

NRA files for bankruptcy, says it will reincorporate in Texas

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/15/nra-files-for-bankruptcy-says-it-will-reincorporate-in-texas.html

This is a blow to freedom lovers everywhere that only disgusting liberals such as myself can revel at. Truly this great man has been under-appreciated. First Shitstain. Now Waynestain. The future is dark. Tom, I'm disappointed in you.

image.thumb.png.41635c3b226bc5023056450b47f609c9.png

Give now. Show them liberals. Tomorrow may already be too late. 

https://donate.nra.org/donate

Can I send my stool sample over the border? Asking for a friend. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not just declare gun ownership to be a religion?  Wayne will be flying in a private jet before he knows it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

Why not just declare gun ownership to be a religion?  Wayne will be flying in a private jet before he knows it.

He already is/was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Rain Man said:

Why not just declare gun ownership to be a religion?  Wayne will be flying in a private jet before he knows it.

Why not just declare gun ownership to be a gender? Wayne will have their own private bathroom before they know it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

Why not just declare gun ownership to be a gender? Wayne will have their own private bathroom before they know it.

M, F, and D? Dicks might need the biggest bathroom and the most emotional support. Ted Cruz can bless the first one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's his house

image.png.6bfa03bcbcd8da34aaf942afa5da4273.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Chris in Santa Cruz, CA said:

Are you talking about the Catholic Church?

Trump is legally the President.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Chris in Santa Cruz, CA said:

Are you talking about the Catholic Church?

No, the concept that we are a nation of laws.

That leads to the idea that anything a power hungry politician wants becomes 'good'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites