Dear Is Mise,

They're not allegations. They're facts. And they're
easily accessible on the web. Here's just two links.
One from the New York Times where the amounts listed
include money the NRA spends on behalf of candidates,
in addition to money it gives directly to candidates:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/04/opinion/thoughts-prayers-nra-funding-senators.html

And -

One from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-nra-politicians-20180215-story.html

Dear rache,

You are correct of course. There are a myriad of ways that corporate donors can slip under the radar one of them is the "Ring of Freedom" path where memberships of a million dollars gets you a gold ring and perhaps your picture on a website full of images of older white people. Perhaps there is a black face in there somewhere.

http://www.nraringoffreedom.com/membership/membership-levels/

Paul,

Found any evidence yet that the US NRA donates money to Australian political parties et al?

Issy, I do not wish to repeat myself, the evidence has been provided previously.

BTW; Those in glass houses should not throw stones. what is "et al" Please enlighten. or get yourself an online spell checker, as you often advise others to do

Foxy,

Thise sites tell of political donations not bribes, get your facts straight.

Paul,

You have never provided any evidence of NRA funds going to Australian politicians, firearms supporters et al.

I had supposed that being an educated comedian that you would be familiar with 'et al'.

However as you do not seem to be then here it is,

"Et al. is an abbreviation for et alia (neuter plural). But it can also be an abbreviation for et alii (masculine plural), or et aliae (feminine plural). This phrase means “and others.”

Dear Is Mise,

You're the one having trouble with facts.

The amounts listed as explained not only included money
the NRA spends on behalf of candidates, they also included
in addition the money it gives directly to candidates. And by
the way, direct contributions arent' the only way to wield
clout. The NRA are master's of it. Do your research.

As one American poster wrote on the web -

"In any other civilised country the way the NRA funds
politicians would be seen as corruption. Any politician
supporting policies that cause children to die because
of that political funding would be in prison. America
has lost the plot on this one."

"As I see it the NRA ... it's a protection racket!"

And you defend them?

Incredible. And very sad.

Foxy.

None the less what the NRA does with its money is not bribery, look up the legal definition of bribery.

Political donations are not bribery in the USA, nor, for that matter, are political donations in Australia.

Do I defend the NRA?

Yes!!

They are after all defending their Constitution against those who would subvert it; are they not right to defend their Constitution?