Lahut’s article begins as follows:
After the N.H. Firearms Coalition (NHFC) brought a banner and signs with images of Democratic Statehouse lawmakers and a Nazi symbol to a committee hearing last week, the N.H. Democratic Party filed a formal complaint with the N.H. Attorney General’s Office Thursday.
So there is no question about the source of the banner and signs. Stated slight differently, as a practical matter the banner and signs are NOT anonymous political advertising.
Lahut’s article states:
The N.H. Democratic Party is filing its complaint under state election law on the grounds that the NHFC did not disclose the name of the organization on the signs. The placards were carried by a half dozen gun rights activists in the hearing room, according to a Concord Monitor report.
The complaint alleges the gun-rights group violated RSA 664:14, which states that, for political advertising for or against a measure, “the name of the enterprise or organization shall be indicated and the chairman or treasurer of the enterprise shall sign his name and address.”
To cut to the chase, even though the entire political world knows the source of the signs … that is, even though there is no anonymity … Buckley has filed a complaint under a statute intended to prevent anonymous political advertising.
That’s really stupid. And really a waste of taxpayer money.
The reporter, however, never asks Buckley why he is fling a complaint about anonymous political advertising when there is no anonymity. He does however devote much of the article to the Democrats’ “outrage” at being compared to Nazis.
Buckley filing a compliant about anonymous political advertising when he and everyone involved knows the source of the banner and signs in question is a cheap political stunt. The reporter not questioning Buckley’s abuse of the statute and allowing the Democrats to rant about the content of the signs but not asking the NHFC to respond to that is FakeNews.