The guy's "research" was sketchy at best. Seeing a different sub-fund on your billing statement than you thought you donated to means exactly nothing (does not indicate where the money actually went). Oh, and his evidence is months old, so little chance corroborating it easily. I wonder why he waited until now..?
And that's assuming this guy isn't completely fabricating the story. The author's previous credits were all for biased-bordering-on-libelous hatchet jobs on the NRA specifically --why should this be different?
TCB