Issy, given you are into abbreviations, and noting your last load of hog wash. Here's on for you; ROTFLMFAO

Dear Is Mise,

They are not defending their Constitution. What they're
doing is defending their belief in their right" to bear
arms." Which amounts to their belief to use weapons in
whatever way they choose - for that they buy the support
they need. And that in anyone's books amounts to bribery.
And if you can't see that, you have a problem.

BTW: I did look up the definition of bribery. And it does fit.
Paying money to induce someone to do what you want, to
achieve your ends - amounts to bribery -
and calling it a "donation" does not change that fact.

//They are after all defending their Constitution against those who would subvert it//

Amending the Constitution is not 'subverting' it. Stop being so melodramatic. There have been 27 amendments so far, with the most recent being ratified in 1992. The world is not going to end if they introduce a 28th amendment to repeal the 2nd, in the same way that the 21st was used to repeal the 18th after it turned out to be a well-intentioned but bad idea.

The NRA are bribing congress(wo)men to defend the rights to bear arms in the same way as Planned Parenthood are bribing congress(wo)men to defend their rights to market baby body parts.

"Amending the Constitution is not 'subverting' it. "

So why don't they get on with amending it then rather than trying to do an end run around 2A by incrementally strangling gun owner's rights. Might I suggest that the reason they don't propose a constitutional amendment is that they know they've got precisely no chance of getting it passed. Hence the need to use the law and lawfare to subvert intent of 2A.

The following link might help:

http://www.vox.com/the-big-idea/2018/2/27/17051560/money-nrs-guns-contributions-donations-parkland-march

"Your hero Pruitt is now the subject of 10 separate Federal investigations."

That's quite a segue there SR. We were talking about guns and lobbying and you go off on some entirely unrelated sojourn. Fantasising about a Pruitt assassination? Or just unable to follow a logical argument?

Yes, the deep state are trying very hard to find some way of getting Pruitt out of the EPA. That to me shows what a great job he's doing and how dangerous he is to their standing. After all, if the EPA is forced to follow the real science and is forced to justify its attacks on the economy, all their previous decisions might go up in smoke, if you'll forgive the expression. And since they can't mount a logical (there's that word again) argument, they try to get him on bogus charges.

Oh he spent all this money on travel. What a disaster. But don't mention that he's spending roughly the same amounts as his predecessors.

Get back to me when something is proven.

"Even Republicans are looking seriously at him;"

Yes this must be very confusing to you since the other side would never do this. Rather than decide to gather the evidence and try to see if there's any there there, the Democrats always seek to hide the evidence and circle the wagons to protect their guilt. Ever heard of the Imran Awan? Probably not. The media you read/trust are trying very hard to hide that story. As Jim Treacher says "Modern journalism is all about deciding which facts the public shouldn't know because they might reflect badly on Democrats."

" here you are wanting to bend down and polish his boots. "

I don't know that I've ever wanted to polish anyone's boots, left or right. At least no one alive today. Perhaps Churchill, maybe Augustus, certainly Themistocles (did he wear boots?).

I think your hyperbolic ranting is revealing a degree of panic at how well the Trump administration is doing. Have a Bex and a lie down.