Now that opening statements in the trial of People of the State of New York by Letitia James v. National Rifle Association, et al. (James v. NRA) have been made, the vendetta by New York’s AG Letitia James against the pro-Second Amendment organization has begun in earnest. And the defense by the NRA is determined to undermine and defuse each and every claim by the left-wing, anti-NRA prosecutor.
The NRA declares that internal changes that took place long before James targeted the group should be considered by the jury and that the miscreants — some top NRA officials, a travel agent, and a public relations agency — who had defrauded the group have already paid restitution.
Said Sarah Rogers, one of the NRA’s attorneys: “There can be no question that some individuals, some executives — an ad agency, a travel agent — betrayed (the NRA’s) mission.” But, in light of James’ demanding that those executives and other parties pay the NRA back, “Why [is] the NRA, the victim, a defendant in this case?”
Good question. The court proceedings have already revealed that NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre repaid some bills incurred by the NRA on his behalf in order to comply with the group’s updated guidelines. And another NRA executive, Joshua Powell, has agreed to pay back $100,000 to the group.
As Tom Knighton, writing for the website Bearing Arms, noted:
The NRA is a victim, as are its millions of members, because they were the ones essentially defrauded by LaPierre and his alleged cronies.
James is suing the NRA simply because she wants to punish the organization simply for daring to disagree with her and other anti-gun voices.
He added:
If the allegations are accurate … then why would the NRA defend the man who essentially took advantage of it?
What about the “secret ‘poison pill’” that James claimed LaPierre allegedly arranged — a “golden parachute” — to soften his landing when he leaves the NRA at the end of the month?
James demanded to know the details. On January 7 she wrote to Supreme Court Justice Joel Cohen, stating that “the NRA should not be permitted to present Mr. LaPierre’s resignation as a component of its defense [as it] would be highly prejudicial to [my] case [against the NRA].”
She then demanded that the judge require the NRA to answer several questions about that alleged “poison pill” retirement plan.
NRA attorneys replied the next day: “After January 31, 2024, payments under the 2021 Employment Agreement will cease. There are no superseding employment or post-employment agreements with Mr. LaPierre … [nor will] Mr. LaPierre undertake any other employment, independent contracting, consulting, or other work for the NRA or any affiliate, vendor or contractor.”
What about James’ claim that LaPierre was “gifted the use of a 107-foot yacht” owned by an NRA vendor? Said another NRA attorney, Kent Correll: “When Mr. LaPierre was invited to go on someone’s yacht … he didn’t think ‘this is a gift, this is something I need to disclose.’ He thought this was a nice invitation.”
And what about his claim that his health forced him to resign? Said the NRA attorneys: “The NRA is informed that Mr. LaPierre has chronic Lyme disease. The NYAG’s [James’] suggestion that Mr. LaPierre’s health condition is not the cause of his departure is false.”
James is already on the losing end of one demand: that the NRA “be dissolved” if her claims are upheld. Back in March 2022 the same judge — Joel Cohen — ruled against her.
The trial could last six weeks, but the initial skirmishes appear to favor the NRA.
