President Donald Trump may be a few years removed from wheeling and dealing in the world of international business and large-scale real estate investment, but he’s once again proving that he hasn’t lost his eye for opportunity.
With substantial left-wing legal artillery once again trained on the National Rifle Association, Trump suggested Thursday that the Second Amendment advocacy group should replant its roots in the Lone Star State.
According to The Hill, the president’s statement came just hours after New York Attorney General Letitia James, a prominent Democrat, filed a civil suit seeking to dissolve the organization in light of a major financial fraud investigation.
“I just heard about that,” Trump said in a moment with reporters outside the White House. “That’s a very terrible thing that just happened.”
“I think the NRA should move to Texas and lead a very good and beautiful life. And I’ve told them that for a long time. I think they should move to Texas — Texas would be a great place — or to another state of their choosing,” the president continued.
TRENDING: Woman Throws Hot Coffee at Maskless Man, Then a Bloody Brawl Breaks Out
“Texas would be a great place and an appropriate place for the NRA. This has been going on for a long time. They’ve been absolutely decimated by the cost of that lawsuit. And it’s very sad, but I would suggest that that’s what they should be doing.”
“I think the NRA should move to Texas and lead a very good and beautiful life”
President Trump says New York lawsuit aimed at dissolving powerful National Rifle Association over alleged financial mismanagement is a “very terrible thing”https://t.co/RvPCchHJZ3 pic.twitter.com/ROVwIdyfw5
— BBC News (World) (@BBCWorld) August 6, 2020
The Hill previously reported that the legal filing, which spans 169 typed pages, levels allegations of embezzlement against four high-ranking NRA leaders in the state of New York, where the 149-year-old organization is classified as a nonprofit.
The investigation of the NRA by James’ office was carried out over the course of roughly 18 months and allegedly revealed the organization was being used as a “personal piggy bank” by its leaders, who were said to have engaged in “self-dealing, mismanagement and negligent oversight.”
“As today’s complaints lays out,” James said in a Thursday news conference, “[the NRA] fostered a culture of noncompliance and disregard for internal controls that led to the waste and loss of millions of assets and contributed to the NRA’s current deteriorated financial state.
— The Hill (@thehill) August 6, 2020
NRA CEO and Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre, a co-defendant in the suit, was quick to come out against the allegations, suggesting that James and other left-wing opponents to the Second Amendment were abusing their authority to strike a blow to the nation’s leading firearm rights advocacy group.
“This is an unconstitutional, premeditated attack aiming to dismantle and destroy the NRA — the fiercest defender of America’s freedom at the ballot box for decades,” LaPierre wrote in a social media statement. “The NRA is well governed, financially solvent, and committed to good governance.”
“We’re ready for the fight. Bring it on,” the executive added.
LaPierre maintains unchallenged control over the organization after a scandal-ridden 2019, which led to infighting with — and the eventual departure of — U.S. military veteran and then-NRA President Oliver North.
In Thursday’s suit, LaPierre faces direct allegations of elevating unqualified friends to prominent positions within the NRA in order to see more money siphoned out of the organization.
He has been the subject of widespread controversy since legal clouds began to settle over the organization, reportedly securing for himself major pay increases in recent years, despite the NRA’s struggles to remain solvent in a strong firearm economy.
(2/2) The NRA is well governed, financially solvent, and committed to good governance. We’re ready for the fight. Bring it on.”
— NRA (@NRA) August 6, 2020
Whether the allegations and rumors regarding LaPierre and the NRA’s leadership are true, however, the fact remains that James and her left-wing colleagues are undoubtedly weaponizing the justice system against the organization.
Were true justice the goal of James’ inquiry, the clear solution would be substantial jail time and social ousting for the NRA’s current leadership.
The fact that the New York AG’s office is instead seeking the full dissolution of the organization would lead the politically sharp to very different conclusions regarding the intentions behind the investigation.
Do you think the NRA should move to a pro-gun state like Texas?
99% (91 Votes)
1% (1 Votes)
Is there any real question as to whether NRA donors were wronged should these allegations be proven true? Absolutely not.
But I can assure those on the left that such donors would much prefer a revitalized and more transparent NRA to a nonexistent NRA any day of the week. They recognize the organization’s size and power — and they want its protection against leftist gun-grabbers.
Whichever way things go regarding the suit, however, another certainty remains: The NRA is in desperate need of a shot in the arm.
Given the rise of firearm sales in light of recent Democrat-approved lawlessness and looting, there will be no shortage of new members to be found if the organization can manage to regroup and get its act together.
And what better place to do that than Texas, where public opinion trends toward stricter gun control are weakest, citizens still love their firearm rights and a plurality of voters support the NRA itself.
But heck: At this point, any red state will do, folks.
As The Hill noted Thursday, the New York AG has already mobilized to do detriment to the Trump Foundation in the state, and conservative advocacy groups nationwide face large-scale legal weaponization daily.
So when will conservative organizations wake up and realize the coastal elites want them out — and they could fare far better elsewhere?
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.