A Senator Presses the NRA for Information on the Gun Lobby Mole
| Thu Aug. 7, 2008 11:36 AM PDT
So far the National Rifle Association's reaction to the Mother Jones investigation that revealed that a NRA-connected mole had penetrated the gun control community for 15 years has been nothing but silence. No matter which media outfit asks the gun lobby for a comment--ABC News, Associated Press, Mother Jones--the NRA declines to say anything. It just refuses to explain its connection to Mary Lou Sapone, the self-described "research consultant" who infiltrated various gun control groups under the name of Mary McFate. As we first reported, a onetime business associate of Sapone said during a deposition that the NRA was a client for Sapone.
Why won't the NRA speak? Can anyone compel it to respond to the Sapone story?
Senator Frank Lautenberg, a New Jersey Democrat, is the first in Congress to give it a try. On Thursday, he sent a letter to John Sigler, the president of the NRA:
I write regarding Mother Jones' recent expose of a reported National Rifle Association (NRA) operative who infiltrated a number of gun violence prevention organizations. This story contains serious allegations and I urge you to address them quickly.
According to Mother Jones, Mary McFate spent more than a decade rising through the ranks at several gun violence prevention organizations, including CeaseFire PA, Freedom States Alliance and States United to Prevent Gun VIolence. At the same time, however, McFate--going by the name Mary Lou Sapone--reportedly was a paid "research consultant" for the NRA. As a result, McFate/Sapone was in a position to learn about, and to report back to the NRA on, the concerns, plans and strategies of various gun violence prevention groups.
In light of these serious charges, I call upon you to immediately:
* Admit whether these charges are true or false;
* If these charges are true, disclose the precise nature of the NRA's relationship with Mary McFate/Mary Lou Sapone, including how much she was paid, the time periods for which she received payment and the services she provided;
* Make public the names (including any aliases) of any other NRA employees, consultants, members, or volunteers who have joined gun violence prevention organizations in order to report to the NRA on their activities; and
* Denounce and discontinue the practice of asking or encouraging NRA employees, consultants, members and volunteers to infiltrate gun violence prevention groups.
Although the NRA and I certainly have had our disagreements over the years, I hope that we can agree that the gun violence prevention debate should be based upon an open and honest exchange of ideas, not on underhanded tactics.
Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Lautenberg also sent copies of this letter to Wayne LaPierre, the CEO of the NRA, and Chris Cox, who heads the NRA's political arm.
Will Lautenberg receive a prompt reply of any substance? As an advocate of gun control measures, Lautenberg is indeed not one of the NRA's favorite legislators. But can the gun lobby ignore his request for information about its involvement in the McFate/Sapone episode? And if it does tell him to get lost, what might happen next? But whatever occurs, the NRA's silence up to now hardly allays suspicions about its role in the McFate operation.
Continues Below
Continued From Above
Comments
If the aspiring Woodwards & Bernsteins at Mother Jones know of some laws or statutes that they think were violated in this case, I strongly urge you, again, to turn your documents over to the appropriate prosecutor's office, and let them do what they're supposed to do when a crime is committed.
If you have not, then it becomes obvious that your attempts to get Congress involved and force this matter forward by means of increased media exposure is nothing more than a shameful, self-serving waste of Congress' time, and TAXPAYERS' Money!
Congress should have more important things to do than waste it's time being used by the gun-control minority to force their agenda back into the public discussion, after your humiliationg loss in the SCOTUS.
Important things to do, such as impeaching Bullsh & Cheney.
Oh, and if you want to have a look into firearms laws and regulations that are apparently being violated with impunity, suggest that Congress investigate Josh Sugarmann (Violence Policy Center) and his public refusal to comply with the strict requirements of his FFL by operating as a legitimate gun dealer, keeping regular public hours in a storefront establishment.
As he's had it renewed, and recently, it is entirely possible that he provided inaccurate or misleading information to BATFE regarding his operation as a Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer. (Probably a Felony!)
This has been brought up repeatedly in the discussions on these very discussion boards. MoJo has been silent on the issue.
Apparently only the Gun RIGHTS organizations are expected to abide by the law, and Gun CONTROL organizations are considered to be exempt from it.
Submitted by Thirdpower (not verified) on Thu Aug. 7, 2008 1:19 PM PDT.
Why doesn't the good Senator send a similar letter to VPC exec Josh Sugarmann who uses an FFL to get into firearm industry events, or Dr Gary Wintemute who clandestinely took photos at gun shows to publish anti-gun papers? Oh, right, because he's just a shill for the anti-gun lobby.
Submitted by Eric Ferguson (not verified) on Thu Aug. 7, 2008 1:21 PM PDT.
Good for Mother Jones for exposing this, and good for Sen. Lautenberg following up. I doubt it's all that unusual for people to join organizations they oppose just to see the inside, and I'm sure journalists need to do this sometimes. If however someone is a paid spy, that's different.
Laws Broken, do you have any idea what you're talking about? No one else does.
Submitted by Thirdpower (not verified) on Thu Aug. 7, 2008 1:42 PM PDT.
Interestingly enough, when NYC Mayor Bloomberg hired private investigators to try and illegally purchase firearms out of state, committing multiple felonies in the process, Mother Jones supported it:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2006/12/3083_nyc_sues_more_...
Not a mention of the letter of rebuke he got from the justice department for doing it ,the fact that he fought handing over the evidence to the BATFE or that ,when he did, NO charges were brought against the dealers by either the state or federal authorities.
Interestingly enough, when NYC Mayor Bloomberg hired private investigators to try and illegally purchase firearms out of state, committing multiple felonies in the process, Mother Jones supported it:
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/archives/2006/12/3083_nyc_sues_more_...
Not a mention of the letter of rebuke he got from the justice department for doing it ,the fact that he fought handing over the evidence to the BATFE or that ,when he did, NO charges were brought against the dealers by either the state or federal authorities.
BC - chuckling...
NRA will probably have their legal staff send him a very polite response, though it would be great to be able to see the look on his face if they sent the one you suggested :)
No surprise that it was Lautenberg they managed to persuade to drag their nonsense into Congress, rather than going through the normal law enforcement channels to have a prosecutor's office investigate whether anything illegal was actually done... BEFORE Congress starts wasting it's time and OUR Money pursuing yet another wild goose.
But what has the left ever cared about wasted taxpayer money, unless it was the military doing the wasting?
Oh well.
I guess they feel they have to do SOMETHING after the spanking their side took in the Heller decision. (& their Bruce Falconer - gun show yellow-sheet was just an embarrassment..)
* Admit whether these charges are true or false;
Interesting wording, isn't it?
It clearly implies a presumption of guilt, since one doesn't "admit" that charges are false.
I was always told that our system of Justice called for a presumption of Innocence!?!
Not Guilt!
Maybe 'Justice' doesn't apply when a U.S. Senator with a well established bias is demanding answers from one of the people he's shown bias against??
Or maybe not when the charge involves someone who supports the Second Amendment.
Or maybe Lautenberg has no real interest in Justice, and is simply leaping on an opportunity to publicly hang a 2nd Amendment advocate out to dry.
Submitted by chris (not verified) on Thu Aug. 7, 2008 8:12 PM PDT.
here is the NRA response.
Senator, we will gladly admit all of these things once you explain how you as a Senator can justify an amendment to a gun control bill that is named after you. Your position as a senator means that you are supposed to support and defend the constitution. your amendment makes it so that anyone can have their 2nd amendment rights stripped by just being alleged to have done something and BEFORE any trial takes place. Again, once you provide a satisfactory justification of how this practice is legal and moral, we will comply with your request.
Submitted by thirdpower (not verified) on Thu Aug. 7, 2008 9:23 PM PDT.
"Although the NRA and I certainly have had our disagreements over the years, I hope that we can agree that the gun violence prevention debate should be based upon an open and honest exchange of ideas, not on underhanded tactics."
As Sebastian at Snowflakes in Hell stated, I don't think the Senator really wants an open and honest exchange of ideas. Whenever that happens, as the recent SCOTUS case showed, the anti's lose. It's only when they can limit the discussion in a controlled (by them) situation that they can claim any victories.
Lautenberg's an a**-wipe. He's the scum who championed ex post facto punishment of people who committed misdemeanors (and paid their debt to society) decades before the passage of his legislation.
If there is a god, may he strike Lautenberg dead for his traitorous treachery.
The vilification of the NRA continues. When gun control groups engage in similar behavior, they are praised by the media. When a gun control group leader like Mike Bloomberg actually hires people to break the law for his cause, it hardly gets any attention (except strong rebuke from the federal government). To the media at least, anti-rights groups are good, pro-rights groups are bad. What is wrong with that picture?
Lautenberg is going to end up embarassed over this petty nonsense.
SeattleGunTotingLiberal:
It appears that you have an accurate and objective handle on the situation. Good for you.
I am one of those "gun idiots", happen to hold three degrees (including PhD). I've read all the court briefs up, down, and sideways, from all parties in that Parker/Heller case.
I'm paid nothing by the NRA, and you haven't slightest idea of what you're talking about. Thanks for your contribution.
Submitted by William W. Wexler (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 5:02 AM PDT.
I see the NRA gunbots have hit the thread. Well, boys, I'm just going to ignore the rest of the tripe and talking points you regurgitate into it, as this is a real discussion, not a Wild West NRA Revival. Now I know that the bazooka, ray gun, and MOAB wannabe owners will post an endless string of "calling me out" posts, but their flailing doesn't change the basic facts. They are on the wrong side of the gun ownership issue and what the intention and meaning of the 2nd Amendment is. Their vision of the future is that every man, woman, and child will walk the earth armed to the teeth, ready to shoot the next person at the drop of a hat for any offense, real or perceived. If you don't want to participate, well, tough s***, you're just going to get shot, then, or stay home. If you are a person of color, you really better watch it, don't let the sun go down on you in a white area if you know what's good for you.
I think MoJo did everyone a great service by pushing this story forward. Many people are unaware of how the NRA is working behind the scenes to push their vision of cowboy movies into US life. Of course, the reaction of "she didn't do anything illegal" is to be expected, because gun advocates are expert, lawyered-up, statute nit-pickers when it comes to their own business. These are the same jerks that generally disdain lawyers and complain incessantly that too many criminals get off by technicalities and it would have been better if they were just shot dead at the scene of the crime. Lautenberg's request for facts from the NRA is a good signal to Americans, and if NRA members had any integrity at all they would be demanding that their organization comply with his request. I know if I were still a member, I would be demanding it.
The Mole Story is just a glimpse of what you could expect if the NRA ever implemented its full agenda. It's a story of cowboy mentality, straight out of an episode of the Lone Ranger. In order to find out what the townsfolk are planning, The Ranger puts on a disguise and walks among them. But he's the Lone Ranger, so spying is OK. In other words, if you're RIGHT it doesn't matter what you do, because you're RIGHT. The gun freaks think they're right and they'll do whatever they can dream up and think they can get away with to make sure that Johnnie and Susie can put a gun in their backpack when they go off to school. To make it legal to put a gun in your car, your briefcase, your boot, or whatever and be ready to blam away whenever your perception of the situation makes you think you need to.
Police officers I know hate this idea. Many officers draw their gun once or twice in their entire careers, and some never fire a shot. The notion of citizen vigilantes out there shooting up schools, malls, churches, traffic jams, yard sales, and whatever gives them the creeps. There's nothing that escalates a trivial situation to a critical situation faster than injecting a firearm into it.
But that's what the gunbot freaks want. They want a freak show where they can strut around with auxiliary phallus objects bristling from every possible place. When I lived in Texas, the guy I bought my shotgun from used to carry THREE guns with him at all times. You never know when one of those Messkins might get out of line. Of course, only law-abiding citizens will get guns, (somehow), and if they happen to break the law, well, that's when the rest of us spring into action and frontier justice will solve the problem.
This is 21st Century America. If I wanted to live like that, I'd move to the jungle. Cheers to Senator Lautenberg, and NRA members who are worth a shit will get behind him and hold whoever disgraced an already disgraceful group accountable for this cowardly spying.
-Wexler
Submitted by thirdpower (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 6:27 AM PDT.
Morning Willy,
It's really cute. Since you've got nothing but ad hominems and personal attacks, you and Mr. Seattle need to refer to others as "gunbots" , "freaks", and "paid minions".
I've shown where Mother Jones supported ILLEGAL activities in support of gun control. No hypocrisy there right?
But since it's for "gun control", any measure is acceptable, right?
I dont like NRA and people who make a big deal out of it.
Regardless, so she was a spy. What is the illegal part in it?
If its illegal, fry her ass and NRA. Nothing wrong in it; otherwise its a waste of time for congress to even be talking about it.
I am shocked, shocked I tell you to find that the NRA might just be guilty of using the same tactics of deceit that the Brady Coalition and other anti gun organizations have been guilty of since their inception.
But then again it's always a treat to watch when a con man realizes that he's the mark in the sting.
Submitted by Brian Schmidt (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 6:45 AM PDT.
IIRC, she joined the Boards of Directors of several anti-gun groups. If so, she had a fiduciary duty not to reveal the info disclosed to her. Revealing was a violation of civil law. It could also be theft since she gave it away, with NRA also culpable.
The paid trolls from the NRA are whining about MJ calling on Congress to investigate the NRA's zombie secret agents... which proves how much they're afraid that Congress will do so.
The post that compared Mary McFate's penetration of the Boards of Directors of several gun-control groups to NY City's sending out buyers who acted like gangbangers and bought dozens of guns from out-of-state dealers... who NEVER checked their background, as required by law, is especially funny. Karma sez that some of you trolls will meet some of the REAL bangers who bought guns from those law-breaking dealers. Karma's a ball buster.
@Brian Schmidt:
..."she had a fiduciary duty"...
Please explain... Are "Pennsylvanians Against Handgun Violence ","Ceasefire Pennsylvania","Brady Campaign", etc. actually corporations? I thought they were 'Mutual Admiration Societies'...
Why can't the gun dealers or manufacturers of guns be sued for distributing the gun used in a murder or maiming of innocent citizens..
Maybe if it affected their pocket book they might pay attention to the slaughter they are causing..
A simple question that deserves an answer..
Doober, in case you did not know licensed firearms dealers comply with federal laws. The dealers do not sell firearms to criminals under the table. The problem is with the dope dealing low life inbreed feral scum that infest the inner cities. The laws are in effect that are alleged to prevent such trash from possessing a firearm. Criminals do not comply with the laws. Now is that hard for you to figure out? It's the criminals stupid!
Submitted by thirdpower (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 9:34 AM PDT.
"The paid trolls from the NRA"
Got no facts? Just make ad hominems.
"who NEVER checked their background, as required by law,"
Which explains why NO charges were brought up against the dealers, right?
Remember, it's OK to commit felonies in entrapment if it's for your cause. But a damning offense if the other side does , well, nothing illegal.
Submitted by Peter Kohan (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 10:07 AM PDT.
If the NRA is a registered lobbying organization - or if it's just a 501c(3) - isn't it required to disclose this type of information publicly?
Submitted by gunbot (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 10:57 AM PDT.
What you bedwetting liberal socialists fail to recognize is that a great many of us gunbots already possess the arms and ammo to start a small war. We think of your efforts like the ticking of your own nuclear clock, pushing ever closer to midnight. We'd prefer to retain our rights through peacefull means but are prepared to defend them by whatever means necessary. Food for thought.
Democracy is nothing more than two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.
Guns are ubiquitious. So what if there are laws about who can purchase one from a licensed firearms dealer? You don't need a dealer to get a gun. Buying a gun is easier than buying groceries. Anyone who wants one will find one, permit or no permit.
Guns aren't going away, the NRA will never allow that happen. We should be concentrating on why America has more gun violence than any other country in the world. Canadians have just as many guns as we do, but far less gun violence. Why?
Submitted by gunbot (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 11:32 AM PDT.
Sorry, just trying to speak at a level you'll understand. Of course you probably have guns too, right? You just don't think the unwashed masses should be trusted with them. We all need that "benevolent" government for surrogate parents don't we? We don't need liberty, just security right. We must be protected from ourselves
That was a super-awesome post wasn't it???. Almost as good as your spectacularly spiffy one. I guess I'm just cool like that, huh?
Submitted by Walter W. Waxworx (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 11:35 AM PDT.
I see W.W. has found another discussion to fill up with ad hominem attacks.
Got any homophobic paranoia to share with us today, W.W.?
Any more of your homophobic derision you'd like to spew?
I agree with the first poster. What laws, if any, were broken and why does Congress need to do anything at all about it? They don't do their regular work - why make them do something else unrelated to what they already don't do? I would be exceptionally surprised if this situation was unique. Corporate spying goes on all the time (although, it IS illegal). This was non-profits checking out other non-profits for operation strategies. She didn't take money from both (that I know of). If she did, then she committed fraud. That's another issue.
Personally, I am against gun control because it doesn't control the right people. But, neither am I an NRA member, so I'm not asking these questions with any agenda. I WOULD be concerned if FBI or CIA operatives were among the gun control orgs or on the NRA membership rolls (and they probably are). That's a whole different kettle of fish.
Submitted by gunbot (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 12:22 PM PDT.
Naw darlin' I remember "Red Dawn". I remember "Atlas Shrugged" "1984" and "Unintended Consequences" too. Go figure, I can actually read. May I suggest you read the Federalist and Anti-Federalist papers as a reference to the Constitution. It might help you grasp the difference between a Republic and a Democracy and why the latter is a affront to liberty.
Isn't this a form of terrorism?
No.
Unless you're talking about setting a Senator with a Political Agenda on someone, for something that no one at Mother Jones seems to be able to tie to any specific legal violations.
That might qualify as a form of Terrorism.
RE: doober:"
Why can't the gun dealers or manufacturers of guns be sued for distributing the gun used in a murder or maiming of innocent citizens..
Maybe if it affected their pocket book they might pay attention to the slaughter they are causing..
A simple question that deserves an answer..
"
Cutlery manufacturers should also be held responsible when somebody is stabbed with one of their knives.
If someone drowns in a swimming pool, the water department should be liable.
Submitted by jethro bodine (not verified) on Fri Aug. 8, 2008 1:43 PM PDT.
Naw, she's a double agent. this story is a ruse to gain the confidence of the NRA. now she's gonna get double secret clearance and spy for sarah brady. ya' gotta watch them double naught spies.
Oh, and William, if you bought your shotgun from some Texas gunbot and not a licenced dealer then you violated your own liberal code. Is this typical "do as I say and not as I do" liberal hypocrisy????
Who cares if the NRA did infiltrate anti-gun groups. What could it have benefited them?
The anti-gun groups are losing because MOST people don't share their HATRED of gun-owners, we gun-owners are passionate about our RIGHTS, we have the correct LEGAL and MORAL positions, and we're motivated to fight for our rights without pay.
The anti-gun people are pretty much paid partisans. They can't win against a determined populace.
This whole bruhaha is a joke.
Basically what I'm reading here is a lot of "Your-rights-offend-me-therefore-lets-get -rid-of-them" crap. And what jackass would suggest suing gun makers for the results of criminals? How about suing the cops whenever they shoot somebody, in that case? Why not sue Ford for all the traffic fatalitites? Why not sue Microsoft because my email didn't go through?
Get a grip.
Yeah, you guys sure are smarter than our forefathers, I can see that. They must've been a bunch of "redneck cowboys" to stick that 2nd amendment in there. They sure didn't use any foresight, did they?
Or did they? My mom had to defend herself with a knife from a rapist because poor people can't afford guns. The police were ambivalent, even aggressive with her. She technically was in violation of the law by carrying a concealed weapon.
I encourage all of you gun-grabbers to google "A World Without Guns," then read it.
