Giffords vs. NRA, et al. - D.C. District Court, Filed 11/2/2021

[TrappedinCalifornia]

The hits, they just keep coming for the NRA. The filing... Giffords vs. NRA, et al.

Giffords Sues the National Rifle Association for Violating Campaign Finance Laws

• 2014: Thom Tillis in the race for Senate in North Carolina (vs. Kay Hagan); Tom Cotton in the race for Senate in Arkansas (vs. Mark Pryor); Cory Gardner in the race for Senate in Colorado (vs. Mark Udall)
• 2016: Ron Johnson in the race for Senate in Wisconsin (vs. Russ Feingold); Donald Trump in the presidential race (vs. Hillary Clinton)
• 2018: Josh Hawley in the race for Senate in Missouri (vs. Claire McCaskill); Matt Rosendale in the race for Senate in Montana (vs. Jon Tester)

[32spoke]

Giffords vs. NRA, et al. - D.C. District Court, Filed 11/2/2021

My
Question was answered by your link.. I should have read the link first.

Not a good day

[TrappedinCalifornia]

How about we start with asking if there is any merit in the accusations before we jump to insulting those who are critical of some of the things which have a basis in fact? Yeah, I know campaign finance laws are labyrinthine, making it easier to fall back on the increasingly tired discussion of who is/isn't "loyal;" but, let's keep our eye on the legalities as this is, now, another legal action brought against the NRA.

As I summarized what has been repeatedly stated by, at least some of the critics or more rational, in a thread which is dedicated or been allowed to focus on that type of discussion... Amended complaint shows depth of problems at the NRA...

...As I said, as they have built it over the decades, the NRA is each individual member. As a result, there is going to be a certain amount of 'messiness' in forming a consensus and addressing the needs, perceptions, and desires of the membership. What is needed is a focus on the organization rather than personal loyalties, issues, and preferences. Why? First, it is the only way the organization is going to survive. Second, those who think changes are unnecessary are not only a minority, they are blinded by those personal loyalties, issues, and preferences or, at the very least, their vision is obscured. Those who demand "this" or "that," specifically and solely, as what is needed to 'fix' the problems which DO exist, are blinded or have their vision compromised similarly. Third, as Kestryll alluded to, as the LaPierre defenders allude to, as the critics allude to... We need the NRA to get back into the business of defending the Second Amendment rather than creating litmus tests and shibboleths for determining who is a "real" gun owner and who "deserves" to be...

Short version... Continuing to snipe at each other isn't getting us anywhere and distracts from both defending the organization from the 'spin' being placed on the irregularities that do exist and from focusing on as well as fixing those irregularities which do need attention, making the organization stronger or, at least, less vulnerable.

[32spoke]

How about we start with asking if there is any merit in the accusations before we jump to insulting those who are critical of some of the things which have a basis in fact? Yeah, I know campaign finance laws are labyrinthine, making it easier to fall back on the increasingly tired discussion of who is/isn't "loyal;" but, let's keep our eye on the legalities as this is, now, another legal action brought against the NRA.

As I summarized what has been repeatedly stated by, at least some of the critics or more rational, in a thread which is dedicated or been allowed to focus on that type of discussion... Amended complaint shows depth of problems at the NRA...



Short version... Continuing to snipe at each other isn't getting us anywhere and distracts from both defending the organization from the 'spin' being placed on the irregularities that do exist and from focusing on as well as fixing those irregularities which do need attention, making the organization stronger or, at least, less vulnerable.

Agreed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MyOdessa]

How about we start with asking if there is any merit in the accusations before we jump to insulting those who are critical of some of the things which have a basis in fact? Yeah, I know campaign finance laws are labyrinthine, making it easier to fall back on the increasingly tired discussion of who is/isn't "loyal;" but, let's keep our eye on the legalities as this is, now, another legal action brought against the NRA.

As I summarized what has been repeatedly stated by, at least some of the critics or more rational, in a thread which is dedicated or been allowed to focus on that type of discussion... Amended complaint shows depth of problems at the NRA...



Short version... Continuing to snipe at each other isn't getting us anywhere and distracts from both defending the organization from the 'spin' being placed on the irregularities that do exist and from focusing on as well as fixing those irregularities which do need attention, making the organization stronger or, at least, less vulnerable.

And your legal expertise in evaluating Federal Election laws is what?

[IVC]

Let's see how all of these play out. Strategic litigation to drain the resources from an organization is quite different from succeeding on merits.

Also, anything about inner workings of the NRA is up to the NRA members, not those who "almost joined," "would join only if...," "won't join until/unless...," "won't renew," etc. My guess is that most of us actual members will wait and see.

[The Gleam]

I recall a time when Giffords was pro-2nd Amendment and a toting gun owner.

One crazy (certified) piece of crap shoots her, and now she's pushing gun bans and going after the NRA, as well as the 2nd Amendment, with laws and lawsuits that STILL would not have stopped her attacker from shooting her that day - or now.

I wonder how much she and her wife are being paid by Bloomberg, Soros, or Benioff.

---

[ja308]

I recall a time when Giffords was pro-2nd Amendment and a toting gun owner.

One crazy (certified) piece of crap shoots her, and now she's pushing gun bans and going after the NRA, as well as the 2nd Amendment, with laws and lawsuits that STILL would not have stopped her attacker from shooting her that day - or now.

I wonder how much she and her wife are being paid by Bloomberg, Soros, or Benioff.

---

We can fight back by recruiting new members who do not fall for anti gunners tricks.
The NRA has been contributing to candidates for decades. They got this figured out.
Of course like Police Officer Derik Chavin, sometimes courts side with the real criminals, for political advantage .

[TrappedinCalifornia]

...My guess is that most of us actual members will wait and see.

Which is exactly what I have long said my position has been; with the caveat that certain changes have become inevitable, regardless of the veracity inherent in many of the accusations.

Let's see how all of these play out. Strategic litigation to drain the resources from an organization is quite different from succeeding on merits.

Exactly. But, that's not what I meant by starting with asking if there is any merit in the accusations. Where many of these lawsuits begin and where many, if not most, of the criticisms of the organization stem from is a certain lack of transparency over the years into the decision-making/approval process on a variety of things within the NRA hierarchy. Acceptance of such decisions, be it the cost of LaPierre's suits or the decision to align with, then separate from Ackerman-McQueen or, in the case of this lawsuit, the process of campaign contributions or a number of other 'issues,' isn't a metric of loyalty so much as it is a lack of willingness to become involved; which, to one degree or another, is a derivative of the lack of transparency and how much 'insight & influence' individual members feel they have.

For some, even many, such leads to frustration. For others, it leads to indifference and blind faith. For most, as you suggest, patience is the required response. But, this is why I've said an organization such as the NRA has to be able to walk and chew gum at the same time insofar as the PR battle(s). It also has to keep its act "clean" in that any... irregularity or seeming irregularity... will draw scrutiny from both without and within.

While it is a truism that not everyone should be allowed into where or even given proprietary insight into how the sausage is made, the ingredients are still mandatory on the label. If you are afraid to make even those available, legitimate and not so legitimate questions are raised. What we are seeing with these lawsuits and the threads/criticisms is just that, a mixture of legitimate, not so legitimate, and illegitimate questions being raised, with the rationale behind each becoming muted and only the attention-grabbing headlines being seen. The only way to answer the legitimate ones, diffuse the not so legitimate ones, and rebuff the illegitimate ones is by examining things objectively; not by sniping, being dismissive, ignoring the irregularities (or seeming irregularities), or by creating litmus tests and shibboleths for determining who is a "real" gun owner and who "deserves" to be.

[-hanko]

Agreed

Same agreement here.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

...I wonder how much she and her wife are being paid by Bloomberg, Soros, or Benioff.

From 2013... Bloomberg made six-figure donation to Giffords-led group

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg made a personal six-figure contribution to Americans for Responsible Solutions, the political action committee run by former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) and her husband Mark Kelly, a source close to the mayor tells NBC News...

However, some or even most of that will likely be 'cloaked.' Even more to the point, it's not so much the direct contributions, but the connections or 'networking' among the various groups. It's something we saw and I attempted to illuminate in one of my early threads on this site... "Evidence" of Who Is Behind The Parkland Kids?

It's that type of 'networking' which has become not only obvious, but overt via the current ABC News series I've been documenting in OT... ABC News Series: Rethinking Gun Violence ... via the sources for their data, information, and talking points.

If you look at the lawsuit, scrolling to "The Parties," you find...

Giffords was founded in 2013 under the name Americans for Responsible Solutions ("ARS"), and was renamed Giffords in October 2017. It works with two sister entities... Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence... Giffords PAC... Congresswoman Giffords founded Giffords for the express purpose of competing with the NRA...

Regardless of who sourced the money for Giffords' beginnings (Giffords has become its own, anti-gun behemoth) or who is funding these lawsuits, the reality is that, as has been thoroughly established at this point, there is a certain level of factual reality behind the accusations being made against the NRA and that factual reality (again, regardless of the degree of veracity vs. the 'media spin' vs. the merits of the legal filings) has made the NRA vulnerable to these types of attacks. Thus, it behooves the NRA and its members to objectively look into and evaluate those 'facts' and take the appropriate steps to rectify them, thereby mitigating and/or eliminating those vulnerabilities.

Unfortunately, we have never really looked at them objectively and, instead, have become mired in debates and screaming matches over what would be "appropriate steps;" thus, distracting the organization and its members from the business of defending the Second Amendment.

[TrappedinCalifornia]

A couple of days old, but... Lawsuit: NRA illegally funded Trump, other GOP candidates

...The NRA responded Thursday with a statement calling the lawsuit “another premeditated abuse of the public by our adversaries — who will stop at nothing in their pursuit of their anti-freedom agenda. This latest action is as misguided as it is transparent. Suffice it to say, the NRA has full confidence in its political activities and remains eager to set the record straight.”...

[IVC]

I'm surprised that the gun community is jumping on the NRA, which has been under the microscope in the abusive and gun-hating jurisdictions, over a shill organization such as Giffords', trying to make spacious arguments about "in-kind contributions" or crossing over between NRA/PVF/ILA.

Do you think it would have any possibility of success if the NRA sued, e.g., MSNBC for "in-kind contributions" to all democrats who ever ran for office? It would look ridiculous. So is this lawsuit. It's a way to attack NRA funds, not to try to succeed on merits.

[ja308]

I'm surprised that the gun community is jumping on the NRA, which has been under the microscope in the abusive and gun-hating jurisdictions, over a shill organization such as Giffords', trying to make spacious arguments about "in-kind contributions" or crossing over between NRA/PVF/ILA.

Do you think it would have any possibility of success if the NRA sued, e.g., MSNBC for "in-kind contributions" to all democrats who ever ran for office? It would look ridiculous. So is this lawsuit. It's a way to attack NRA funds, not to try to succeed on merits.

Its not the gun culture people in my experience who are jumping on the NRA .

Ive met one assumed member who started bashing WLP. I set him straight and I doubt he will publicly embarrass himself again.
2 others were uncouth slobs who I suggested they join as we need many millions more. I set each one straight, but like all brainless, illiterate, slobs they will never part with a few bucks and risk, in there minds exposure as a gun owner .

Along those lines is the hidden fighter, who when the chips are down, will don a cape with tactical gear and show all his training, obtained from you tube vids.. History of course shows us hiding is the American way.
Patrick Henry " Give me liberty or give me a hiding place "
John Paul Jones , I have yet not begun to hide"

Fighting starts with small steps . Joining the NRA is the best small step one can take.

For me being a Life Benefactor member and having 5 million Brothers and Sisters is an honor.

Gun lovers who are not NRA members are encouraged to join. 5 years for a 100 and like IVC said . We have the ability to vote for the B of D.

[-hanko]

In the end, all these voices against WLP and trying to paint anyone who supports either the NRA or WLP as a fanatic, will be judged against the performance of the NRA. Not only as a training and educational organization, not only as the civil rights organization, but also as an organization that has significant political and legal clout AND accomplishments.

Are you going to give WLP and the NRA credit if we win shall-issue nationally?

Definitely, and with no doubt!