Whooda thunk it?

[AKA-Spook]

interesting read:

https://www.ammoland.com/2019/04/nra...#axzz5luw8e6VS

[Circuits]

Of late, I'm not sure whether the NRA will factor in at all, in any way, for what ultimately saves the republic - if the republic is actually saved.

I've thrown a lot of good money after 'other' money to the NRA over the years, in either hope or ignorance. If that was 'good money after bad' or not remains to be seen.

[AKA-Spook]

the plot thickens..... https://www.ammoland.com/2019/04/oli...#axzz5mJonPfvL

[Bailey Guns]

Yeah... It seems ole Ollie didn't have a lot of support from the BoD to 86 LaPierre. I think his plan backfired and bit him in the ass this time. Just like another operation he was involved in.

[Gman]

Another article: NRA ousts president Oliver North after alleged extortion scheme against chief executive

National Rifle Association President Oliver North has been ousted after an alleged extortion scheme within the group?s highest-ranking officials came to light on Friday. In a statement, North told the organization he was ?informed? he would not be nominated for reelection. North?s term ends Monday.

The NRA?s chief executive, Wayne LaPierre, wrote a letter to the board Thursday accusing North of plotting to remove him from the group by threatening to release to the board ?damaging? information about LaPierre. He claimed North, a former Marine Corps lieutenant colonel perhaps best known for his role in the Iran-contra affair, was pressuring him to resign over alleged financial transgressions.

?Delivered by a member of our Board on behalf of his employer, the exhortation was simple: resign or there will be destructive allegations made against me and the NRA,? LaPierre wrote in the letter, which was published Friday by the Wall Street Journal.

?I believe our Board and devoted members will see this for what it is: a threat meant to intimidate me and divide us,? he continued. ?I choose to stand and fight, and hope to bring 5 million members with me.?

Subscribe to the Post Most newsletter: Today?s most popular stories on The Washington Post

LaPierre, the NRA?s executive vice president, who has been with the organization for decades, said he refused to comply with the threat, adding that he was ?alarmed and disgusted? by the situation.

On Saturday, at the NRA?s annual meeting in Indianapolis, Richard Childress, a vice president at the NRA, read what amounted to a resignation letter from North that announced and explained his departure.

?Please know I hoped to be with you today as NRA president endorsed for reelection,? North wrote. ?I?m now informed that will not happen.?

North continued his resignation letter by saying he believes the NRA should establish a committee to review the organization?s finances, which he said constitute a ?clear crisis? that ?needs to be dealt with? if the NRA wants to continue to be a viable organization.

The NRA?s board, comprising 76 members, is scheduled to meet Monday.

North?s departure and the circumstances surrounding it cast a public light on the apparent discord within the influential gun rights group.

The Wall Street Journal reported that North, who became NRA president last year, defended himself in a letter to the board Thursday, indicating his actions were ?for the good of the NRA.? North previously wrote a longer letter to the board?s executive committee, alleging LaPierre had made more than $200,000 of wardrobe purchases and charged them to a vendor.

Sources familiar with the matter told the Journal that LaPierre?s Thursday letter was an ?angry reaction? to North.

The back-and-forth is apparently fueled by a growing rift in a decades-long relationship between the NRA and the advertising agency Ackerman McQueen, according to the Journal. The NRA filed a lawsuit against Ackerman McQueen this month in Virginia alleging the firm had not been transparent in justifying its billings. In a statement to the Journal, Ackerman McQueen argued it was complying and called the lawsuit ?frivolous, inaccurate and intended to cause harm to the reputation of our company.?

The suit specifically mentions a contract between Ackerman McQueen and North, the Journal reports, who was hired by the agency last year to host an NRATV documentary program, which LaPierre says nets him ?millions of dollars annually.?

LaPierre detailed a phone call between one of his staff members and North that took place Wednesday, in which North allegedly suggested Ackerman McQueen was prepared to release an ?allegedly damaging letter to the entire NRA board.?

?The letter would contain a devastating account for our financial status, sexual harassment charges against a staff member, accusations of wardrobe expenses and excessive staff travel expenses,? LaPierre wrote. ?But then, Col. North explained the letter would not be sent ? if I were to promptly resign as your Executive Vice President. And, if I supported Col. North?s continued tenure as president, he stated he could ?negotiate? an ?excellent retirement? for me.?

The NRA did not respond to a request for comment.

LaPierre wrote that after the call, he was informed by others he ?needed to withdraw the NRA lawsuit against [Ackerman McQueen] or be smeared.? An Ackerman McQueen spokesman declined to comment to the Journal.

LaPierre went on to assert the claims made by the advertising firm were ?conveniently? fabricated and brought up amid the lawsuit and demands from the NRA for accurate books and records.

The turmoil was publicized on the same day President Trump spoke at the NRA?s annual meeting in Indianapolis.

[FoxtArt]

Throwing North under the bus to protect the status quo perhaps? I don't doubt the NRA is rife with corruption simply because of its size and age.

It's fascinating to me, but I think of large organizations (governments, companies, etc.) as organisms. Any threat against the status quo - internal or external - is dealt with no different than a biological systems immune response - or auto-immune response. Even if proper "whistleblowers" of whatever form, might be best for both the longevity and public interest; it will always end badly for those opposing the "quo". I'm also of a belief that corruption is an ingrained aspect of human sociology on an organizational scale. Logic would seem to make you think that entities -including governments, law enforcement departments, lobbying orgs, large churches, etc. would regularly purge their corruption as it almost always would serve the future interests of both that entity and the public. YET, you never, ever see that happen, because insidious corruption seems to be a natural aspect of our sociology that despite it's adverse effects, in large scale we unwittingly, but reliably, will always defend it from within. Even those that do not want to be participants, still seem to reliably defend entity-level corruption, and you can pretty much guarantee it's existence in any organization of sufficient size.

Now, if Wayne was purged would it resolve the problem? Probably not. The NRA has been around for so long, and with the massive influx of money (and theoretical purpose of putting itself out of business), its all but a guarantee that if not already corrupt; it will be. On top of that, it will never be motivated to cut itself off from the revenue stream... e.g. the NRA requires drama (has been plenty for a few years) but it will foster it if necessary - because without controversy, you can't get a $200k wardrobe.

I wish it (sociology - entity level corruption) was better studied.

[Zundfolge]

Can someone explain to me what is so bad about Wayne? And do so without stupid hyperbole or conspiracy bullshit (like 'he's as bad as Bloomberg" or "the NRA wants gun control to keep the money flooding in" or "The NRA has sold us out over X").

[Bailey Guns]

Can someone explain to me what is so bad about Wayne? And do so without stupid hyperbole or conspiracy bullshit (like 'he's as bad as Bloomberg" or "the NRA wants gun control to keep the money flooding in" or "The NRA has sold us out over X").

I think he's been pretty effective myself. Most of the time. When he's not throwing gun owners under the bus like with his bump-stock bullshit. He was riding pretty high after the "good guy with a gun" thing and goes and says it would be a good idea for the ATF to take another look at the legality of bump stocks.

But I think North was trying to railroad him on this deal and LaPierre has just a little too much juice for that bullshit.

[FoxtArt]

I think he's been pretty effective myself. Most of the time. When he's not throwing gun owners under the bus like with his bump-stock bullshit. He was riding pretty high after the "good guy with a gun" thing and goes and says it would be a good idea for the ATF to take another look at the legality of bump stocks.

But I think North was trying to railroad him on this deal and LaPierre has just a little too much juice for that bullshit.

Yeah, not arguing ineffective or effective myself; and agree on North railroading + LaPierre having plenty of influence. I just think it's silly for any of us to think you wouldn't have those issues in an organization this old... and likewise, it's also silly to think we wouldn't have the same issues with North, or any other leadership. Not that it's justified, but it's inevitable. Some are worse than others, of course. You don't get that far without being a member of one good ol' boy club or another. North included.

It's also not "conspiracy" to observe that the NRA will never work itself out of a job, and it never has tried to. It's an observation of politics. Anyone would have to be quite silly... or more appropriately, naive, to think conservatives are immune from the influence of money, or immune from being shysters, simply because they are conservatives. Every "type" of person seems to believe that their "type" are the good guys, and never do that stuff.

[Bailey Guns]

Yeah, not arguing ineffective or effective myself; and agree on North railroading + LaPierre having plenty of influence. I just think it's silly for any of us to think you wouldn't have those issues in an organization this old... and likewise, it's also silly to think we wouldn't have the same issues with North, or any other leadership. Not that it's justified, but it's inevitable. Some are worse than others, of course. You don't get that far without being a member of one good ol' boy club or another. North included.

It's also not "conspiracy" to observe that the NRA will never work itself out of a job, and it never has tried to. It's an observation of politics. Anyone would have to be quite silly... or more appropriately, naive, to think conservatives are immune from the influence of money, or immune from being shysters, simply because they are conservatives. Every "type" of person seems to believe that their "type" are the good guys, and never do that stuff.

I agree. Conservatives seem to have a real problem with stepping on their dicks. And they get crucified for it...usually deservedly so. The real bias is in how it's handled by the media as opposed to how they'd handle the same thing done by a democrat. This situation is no different.