Here’s an article, supposedly by director David Coy, but surely ghostwritten by NRA’s law firm, and emailed to the board, telling all how things are actually going well. I hope that no one believes this tripe.
Yes, Chuck Schumer called for NRA to be investigated for bankruptcy fraud. Yes, that’s BS. NRA laid it all on the line (for once) and got dismissed. It was bankruptcy stupidity or insanity, not fraud. So let’s get down to the realities.
“The echo chamber of political commentary” and blah blah blah ” promoted a false narrative about the NRA’s prospects, including that the bankruptcy case is a massive setback.” NRA’s leadership spent hundreds of thousands, if not millions, on the bankruptcy filing. If losing it is no setback, why did they file it? Sounds pretty stupid to us. NRA’s attorneys told the bankruptcy court many times that NRA was facing an “existential” attack by the NY Attorney General and needed bankruptcy to stop her. LaPierre himself testified to that. Was he committing perjury, or is this statement the lie?
Readers are told that losing the bankruptcy somehow is “damaging to Jame’s now yearlong campaign against NRA.” The court heard testimony that the NRA leadership has started to clean up its act, yes. It also heard testimony that it hadn’t, that its new and reforming treasurer, Craig Spray, was fired after he refused to sign tax returns without seeing documents supporting them, that LaPierre had used NRA money for private jets to the Bahamas after the supposed reforms, etc.
“As an example, one of the most widely reported allegations — that LaPierre spent NRA funds on expensive suits — was the subject of testimony that debunked the claim.” The testimony is that the quarter-million in clothing was a gift from Ackerman-McQueen, and it turned out they didn’t bill the NRA. Meaning that LaPierre, the CEO, accepted a quarter million in gifts from a contractor to whom he was paying millions. Some might call that a bribe.
“Dissolution of a nonprofit organization is reserved for only egregious cases of fraud and for sham charities that take donations with no intention of fulfilling their supposed cause.” Really? The NY Attorney General just dissolved the Trump Foundation. Are you saying it met those standards?
“In fact, contrary to some false media stories and “expert” opinions,Hale never made a finding of “bad faith” in connection with the association’s bankruptcy filing. He even pointedly rebuffed that suggestion at a subsequent hearing, clarifying that instead he found a “lack of good faith” in the bankruptcy claim. . . .” LOL! He didn’t find bad faith, he only found lack of good faith! How can they keep from laughing as they write this.
“it will not affect the NRA’s potential plans to move to Texas, which is eager to welcome it.” Really? Then why didn’t you just move and not file bankruptcy? NRA can’t just move and change its “legal domicile” and escape the NY lawsuit. It must change the domicile. A corporation does that by merging with another local corporation. But NY law says a nonprofit cannot merge without the Attorney General’s or a court’s approval. The entire bankruptcy idea was to use the powers of the court to override this. Losing it means the idea is gone forever. This statement is disingenuous, misleading, at. best.
While we’re on the topic, look at what the bankruptcy court (opinion here) said that this article does NOT quote:
“There are several aspects of this case that still trouble the Court, including the manner and secrecy in which authority to file the case was obtained in the first place, the related lack of express disclosure of the intended Chapter 11 case to the board of directors and most of the elected officers, the ability of the debtor to pay its debts, and the primary legal problem of the debtor being a state regulatory action. The Court agrees with the NYAG that the NRA is using this bankruptcy case to address a regulatory enforcement problem, not a financial one. The Court finds that the NRA did not file the bankruptcy petition in good faith because this filing was not for a purpose intended or sanctioned by the Bankruptcy Code. Therefore, cause exists under section 1112(b) to dismiss this case, which the Court finds is in the best interests of creditors and the estate. The Court is not dismissing this case with prejudice, but should the NRA file a new bankruptcy case, this Court would immediately take up some of its concerns about disclosure, transparency, secrecy, conflicts of interest of officers and litigation counsel, and the unusual involvement of litigation counsel in the affairs of the NRA, which could cause the appointment of a trustee out of a concern that the NRA could not fulfill the fiduciary duty required by the Bankruptcy Code for a debtor in possession. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Motions to Dismiss are GRANTED and the above-captioned cases are dismissed without prejudice.”
“The NRA will emerge bigger, stronger and more determined than ever to accomplish its mission.” No, the NRA is likely not to emerge at all. Mostly because directors are writing stuff like this, and the others believing it. Or not believing it, but lacking the courage to speak up and vote. In six weeks, they’ll be doing so without liability insurance coverage.