MANHATTAN (CN) — A member of the National Rifle Association’s board was forced to explain a group of blistering Facebook posts attacking the nonprofit’s leadership, which is being accused by the New York Attorney General of siphoning donor funds to finance personal expenses.
Willes Lee, a current board member and past NRA vice president, threw a Manhattan courtroom into a tizzy on Wednesday when he failed to show up on time for his testimony.
NRA lawyers said in court that Lee told them he “will arrive shortly” for hours. He was apparently in Midtown — just blocks away from the New York Supreme Courthouse downtown — when the trial broke for lunch.
“I expect him to be here when we need him,” Judge Joel Cohen said. “Unless he is walking, he should be here by now.”
But Lee’s testimony was worth the wait. When he finally showed up near the end of the day, state lawyers wasted no time peppering him with questions about his recent critiques of NRA leadership. Conveniently for them, Lee had posted those thoughts to one of his Facebook pages in the form of more than a dozen posts from 2023.
In one post, Lee called himself the “echo-buster,” the “devil’s advocate to counter the groupthink echo chamber.”
“Our chamber prefers echoes,” Lee wrote, referring to the NRA board and executives. ”Board members are aware, that’s why they’re silent … they see what happens (even to officers) when you speak.”
New York Attorney General Letitia James accuses NRA leadership — including its longtime CEO Wayne LaPierre — of silencing whistleblowers who questioned errant spending. Those whistleblowers include Christopher Cox, a former top NRA lobbyist who said he was “disgusted” by LaPierre’s personal spending, and Oliver North, a former NRA president who was told to “stop asking questions” about the bills.
Both Cox and North claim they were falsely accused of staging a “coup” against LaPierre and were forced out of the organization for blowing the whistle.
State lawyers on Wednesday continued to display post after post from Lee, chiding NRA executives and their “attack dogs,” who he told to “chill” in one Facebook message. Lee said that he was eventually asked to stop airing his dirty laundry on social media by old board members.
“Butt hurt? Old member of the NRA Board of Directors emailed me to order me off [FaceBook] and called me ‘a wimp.,’” Lee wrote in another post.
Lee was far more reserved in court than he was on Facebook. During his testimony, he was hesitant to critique the NRA at all, despite his willingness to do so frequently online last year.
“I don't know why I was posting those now,” he said Wednesday. “But I must have felt that way.”
He didn’t deny the validity of the content in any of the posts, however.
For the attorney general’s office, Lee’s posts represent a pattern of behavior that’s integral to their overall lawsuit — that LaPierre ruled the NRA with an iron fist and those without unquestioned loyalty to him would be retaliated against.
James claims that LaPierre used the NRA as his “personal piggy bank” when billing the nonprofit for private jet travel, black car service and other personal expenses.
Some of those expenses were broken up into several small invoices in order to avoid raising red flags, another witness testified Wednesday.
Lisa Supernaugh was the assistant to Wilson “Woody” Phillips, the longtime NRA finance chief who is a co-defendant in James’ case. Phillips is accused of covering up LaPierre’s personal spending by skirting oversight and discouraging his subordinates from questioning the bills.
State lawyers showed a brief email chain to the court between Supernaugh and Gayle Stanford, LaPierre’s personal travel agent who arranged some of these pricey flights. Stanford was asking her about how she should bill the NRA for one of LaPierre’s recent trips.
“Would you like separate invoices under $50k for the cars rather than one very large one?” Stanford asked Supernaugh.
“Yes if possible,” Supernaugh replied. “Makes it easier on this side to get processed.”
“Thanks. Expecting them tonight…” Stanford wrote back.
As it turns out, the $50,000 number was intentional. Supernaugh testified Wednesday that the NRA has an internal policy that requires purchases of $50,000 or more to go through more oversight.
Those purchases “must have the written approval of the appropriate NRA division director and one officer,” the policy reads, according to James’ complaint.
Purchases of $50,000 or less require only the written approval of one appropriate NRA division director. In this case, it would be Phillips, Supernaugh testified. Had Stanford lumped the expenses into one big bill, it would require an additional signature from an NRA officer, she said.
During his own testimony, LaPierre claimed that his private flights were necessary for safety reasons. He added that he has since paid off the NRA for what he owes.
Wednesday was LaPierre’s final day as the NRA chief. After more than 30 years at the helm, he announced his resignation earlier this month just days before the start of this trial. He attributed his chronic Lyme disease as the primary reason for his departure from the organization.
Follow @Uebey
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Walmart pays up April 12, 2024 -
