Umm... wow. You guys may know I routinely limit searches by date ranges to pull things from Google that are free from a pro- or anti-Trump bias.
Out of curiosity, I searched, "Letitia James cases against charities" time limited from Jan 1, 2010 through Dec 31, 2016. I figured I may get some Trump charity overlap, but I wanted to see if she had a history of going after charities generally. Now she's not been the AG that long, but I didn't know her history, so I thought maybe she was previously a prosecutor of some kind (turns out she wasn't).
Here's the disturbing part. That search turned up over 10 pages of articles, the vast majority of which directly relate to the NRA case just filed, but showing search dates from years ago. The articles are current if you follow the links, but the search dates have clearly been backdated.
Here's one example:
New York Attorney General Moves to Dissolve NRA - news ...
searchandnews.com › player › category › news › article
Oct 16, 2014 - In a lawsuit filed on Thursday, Attorney General Letitia James claims that top NRA executives used charitable funds for personal gain, among other offenses.
This one may be my favorite:
MSNBC - On the New York AG filing a lawsuit against the ...
m.facebook.com › msnbc › posts
Oct 22, 2011 - New York Attorney General Letitia James filed a lawsuit Thursday against the National Rifle Association seeking to dissolve the gun rights advocacy group and accusing top executives of "years of illegal self-dealings" that funded a "lavish lifestyle."
In any event, this is 100% political. If it were not, she'd go after the executives directly not the charity. By seeking to dissolve the charity she's trying to force it to waste is charitable assets immediately prior to the election on an expensive legal suit.
Again, this should be a no brainer for anyone with any sense of civil liberties or civil rights. The remedy sought is completely out of line with the harm alleged and there is zero chance it would be pursued against someone that is not her political opponent. Who are we kidding, her office has ignored bigger charitable crimes that are on her side, and spent an inordinate amount on a politically motivated investigation. That seems to be the specialty of the NY AGs.
Hope everyone likes this tactic as much when the right copies it in the future.
I'm struck again about the "bad apple" versus "bad org" argument. When somebody at ACORN royally screws up, its evidence of widespread conspiracy. When a cop screws up, its one bad guy. When somebody gets caught farming 30 votes, its evidence of a plot to destroy democracy. When someone in the NRA is unethical or lawbreaking, its a freak occurrence. If instead it had been the Clinton Foundation, then HEADS MUST ROLL!
ACORN's purposes and methods were illegal. If you believe Jones, the NRA was a victim of out of control executives.
When someone get's caught farming votes it's evidence that your meme "there's no real election fraud" is a lie. We don't have any real ability to detect fraud, which is something the Democrats are counting on with this strategy. The fact that we detect it all with a secret ballot and poor voter ID laws is more likely evidence that it's endemnic than that it never occurs.
The Clinton Foundation was involved in far bigger illegal activities. They'd never survive the kind of scrutiny the NY AG applied to the NRA (without much of a basis), but lucky for the Clinton Foundation, it's on the blue team and will never be investigated in such a manner no matter what evidence appears.
We no longer have a system of justice that applies to both sides evenly. The left has weaponized prosecutors offices, correctly identifying that their discretion is unreviewable - no matter how egregiously applied. They are free to release rioters no matter how legitimate the charges, not prosecute crimes solely for political reasons, and investigate their enemies and subject them to abuse, which they are routinely doing. Lawfare at its grossest. Like I told you when Obama was establishing the executive authority precedents, you may not like how the next guy uses them (and that was a massive understatement of a prediction), this too is a change that all of you personally are going to live to regret.