Business
Wayne LaPierre and the NRA: A timeline on January 6, 2024 at 7:15 pm Business News | The Hill
The National Rifle Association announced Friday that longtime chief Wayne LaPierre will resign at the end of the month, marking the end of an era as the group continues to face legal and financial trouble.
Long-maligned by gun control activists and constantly controversial, LaPierre has served as the group’s face in Washington for over three decades.
Rise to power
LaPierre is not generally the type of person one would expect to head a gun-rights organization. He grew up in Roanoke, Va., in a home without firearms, and didn’t purchase his first gun until he was out of college.
Bouncing around between political jobs in Virginia and Massachusetts Democratic circles — once turning down a job from then-Speaker of the House Tip O’Neil (D-Mass.) — LaPierre joined the NRA lobbying team in 1978.
In his 2021 critical history of the organization, journalist Tim Mak described LaPierre as “bookish” and an “awkward egghead type.”
But, he was considered extremely effective by colleagues and quickly rose in the group’s ranks. In just a few years, he was promoted to lead the NRA’s state lobbying arm and then its federal lobbying effort.
“This organization was sliding into … an abyss when he took over, and he stabilized it and turned it around and started building it,” former NRA President Marion Hammer said in a 1995 Los Angeles Times feature.
Known for social awkwardness, lackluster fashion sense and a reputation for being a push-over, Mak described, LaPierre nonetheless found success winning over Washington politicians to his gun-rights cause.
He took the CEO job in 1991 with reluctance, only after no other candidate stepped up. Even in the 1995 LA Times feature he showed little confidence in his own job, joking that the NRA board would be quick to have him removed.
It was an open secret that LaPierre didn’t even enjoy shooting guns, Mak wrote, once showing up to a skeet shoot with an embarrassingly rusted shotgun, and years later being so clumsy with gun safety that his weapon was confiscated during a video filming.
“He represents a real departure for the NRA,” author Osha Gray Davidson, who wrote a 1993 book on the history of the organization, told the LA Times. “He’s the first leader for the NRA that doesn’t come from the shooting-sports and hunting area. He’s a politician.”
A video leaked to The New Yorker in 2021 showed LaPierre on an African trophy hunt, attempting to take down an elephant. After nervously felling the elephant, he went on to miss a killing blow three times and was chastised by his guide.
“Wayne would be spotted far more often with his legal pads than with a pistol,” Mak wrote. “He looks at guns through the lens of politics — as a political junkie, not as a lover of firearms.”
Kingmaker
His early years at the helm of the NRA were marked with internal strife and legislative difficulties. The first hurdle was the 1991 Brady Bill, named for the press secretary who was paralyzed during an assassination attempt on President Reagan.
It mandated federal background checks on gun purchases for the first time, and faced fierce opposition from the NRA. While it did pass, the group won a concession, doing away with the proposed five-day waiting period to purchase a weapon and instead opting for an instant background check.
Then came the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban, a landmark bill that threatened to severely hamper gun enthusiasts. But with NRA support, a sunset clause was added to the weapon ban portion of the 1994 crime bill, which expired in 2004. Two decades later, there is little political will to re-implement it, despite efforts from Democrats.
Through scandals of spending and controversies of policy surrounding ever-more-frequent school shootings, the NRA reached its height in the 2000s and 2010s.
LaPierre was the head of arguably the most powerful lobby in Washington, and wielded that power to force the hands of dozens of politicians on gun policy. Through a militant membership and hefty political donations, the NRA could sink a candidate by endorsing a rival.
The group also spent hundreds of millions on legal cases, challenging gun control measures in nearly every state.
Fading empire
Cracks began to show in the late 2010s and into this decade. As former President Trump took center stage of GOP politics, less attention was paid to the gun lobby. While the NRA was still successful in pursuing legal cases, its influence was no longer what it was.
Membership started to drop, and with it fundraising.
The association lost about a half-million members from 2021-22, according to gun violence news nonprofit The Trace. It raised just $213 million in 2022, about half of its 2016 total, according to the nonprofit Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington.
That came at the same time legal bills rose. New York Attorney General Letitia James (D) filed a suit against the NRA in 2021, alleging that LaPierre and other executives corruptly spent millions of association funds on personal luxuries.
That included Caribbean vacations, private jet trips, fancy dinners and even LaPierre’s penchant for gourmet ice cream.
Following an 18-month investigation, James said the NRA fostered “a culture of self-dealing, mismanagement and negligent oversight,” costing the group $64 million over three years. She sought to dissolve the whole organization in the suit, but a state judge pared back that demand last year.
Resignation
LaPierre’s resignation announcement came just three days before the New York case is set to go to trial. He remains a defendant in the case, and has denied wrongdoing.
His resignation was somewhat unexpected, but the 74-year-old chief cited heath reasons for his departure.
In the interim, the NRA will be led by long-time executive and Head of General Operations Andrew Arulanandam, the group announced Friday.
LaPierre now has the opportunity to go through with a retirement plan he laid out for the LA Times in 1995 and has reportedly frequently repeated to friends since: to start an ice cream shop in northern Maine.
Business, News, NRA The National Rifle Association announced Friday that longtime chief Wayne LaPierre will resign at the end of the month, marking the end of an era as the group continues to face legal and financial trouble. Long-maligned by gun control activists and constantly controversial, LaPierre has served as the group’s face in Washington for over three…
Business
How Trump’s Tariffs Could Hit American Wallets

As the debate over tariffs heats up ahead of the 2024 election, new analysis reveals that American consumers could face significant financial consequences if former President Donald Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted and maintained. According to a recent report highlighted by Forbes, the impact could be felt across households, businesses, and the broader U.S. economy.

The Household Cost: Up to $2,400 More Per Year
Research from Yale University’s Budget Lab, cited by Forbes, estimates that the average U.S. household could pay an additional $2,400 in 2025 if the new tariffs take effect and persist. This projection reflects the cumulative impact of all tariffs announced in Trump’s plan.
Price Hikes Across Everyday Goods
The tariffs are expected to drive up consumer prices by 1.8% in the near term. Some of the hardest-hit categories include:
- Apparel: Prices could jump 37% in the short term (and 18% long-term).
- Footwear: Up 39% short-term (18% long-term).
- Metals: Up 43%.
- Leather products: Up 39%.
- Electrical equipment: Up 26%.
- Motor vehicles, electronics, rubber, and plastic products: Up 11–18%.
- Groceries: Items like vegetables, fruits, and nuts could rise up to 6%, with additional increases for coffee and orange juice due to specific tariffs on Brazilian imports.

A Historic Tariff Rate and Economic Impact
If fully implemented, the effective tariff rate on U.S. consumers could reach 18%, the highest level since 1934. The broader economic consequences are also notable:
- GDP Reduction: The tariffs could reduce U.S. GDP by 0.4% annually, equating to about $110 billion per year.
- Revenue vs. Losses: While tariffs are projected to generate $2.2 trillion in revenue over the next decade, this would be offset by $418 billion in negative economic impacts.
How Businesses Are Responding
A KPMG survey cited in the report found that 83% of business leaders expect to raise prices within six months of tariff implementation. More than half say their profit margins are already under pressure, suggesting that consumers will likely bear the brunt of these increased costs.

What This Means for Americans
The findings underscore the potential for substantial financial strain on American families and businesses if Trump’s proposed tariffs are enacted. With consumer prices set to rise and economic growth projected to slow, the debate over tariffs is likely to remain front and center in the months ahead.
For more in-depth economic analysis and updates, stay tuned to Bolanlemedia.com.
Business
U.S. Limits Nigerian Non-Immigrant Visas to Three-Month Validity

In July 2025, the United States implemented significant changes to its visa policy for Nigerian citizens, restricting most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas to a single entry and a maximum validity of three months. This marks a departure from previous policies that allowed for multiple entries and longer stays, and has important implications for travel, business, and diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Key Changes in U.S. Visa Policy for Nigerians
- Single-Entry, Three-Month Limit: As of July 8, 2025, most non-immigrant visas issued to Nigerians are now valid for only one entry and up to three months.
- No Retroactive Impact: Visas issued prior to this date remain valid under their original terms.
- Reciprocity Principle: The U.S. cited alignment with Nigeria’s own visa policies for U.S. citizens as the basis for these changes.
- Enhanced Security Screening: Applicants are required to make their social media accounts public for vetting, and are subject to increased scrutiny for any signs of hostility toward U.S. institutions.

Rationale Behind the Policy Shift
- Security and Immigration Integrity: The U.S. government stated the changes are intended to safeguard the immigration system and meet global security standards.
- Diplomatic Reciprocity: These restrictions mirror the limitations Nigeria imposes on U.S. travelers, emphasizing the principle of fairness in international visa agreements.
- Potential for Further Action: The U.S. has indicated that additional travel restrictions could be introduced if Nigeria does not address certain diplomatic and security concerns.

Nigeria’s Updated Visa Policy
- Nigeria Visa Policy 2025 (NVP 2025): Introduced in May 2025, this policy features a new e-Visa system for short visits and reorganizes visa categories:
- Short Visit Visas (e-Visa): For business or tourism, valid up to three months, non-renewable, processed digitally within 48 hours.
- Temporary Residence Visas: For employment or study, valid up to two years.
- Permanent Residence Visas: For investors, retirees, and highly skilled individuals.
- Visa Exemptions: ECOWAS citizens and certain diplomatic passport holders remain exempt.
- Reciprocal Restrictions: Most short-stay and business visas for U.S. citizens are single-entry and short-term, reflecting reciprocal treatment.

Impact on Travelers and Bilateral Relations
- Nigerian Travelers: Face increased administrative requirements, higher costs, and reduced travel flexibility to the U.S.
- U.S. Travelers to Nigeria: Encounter similar restrictions, with most visas limited to single entry and short duration.
- Diplomatic Tensions: Nigerian officials have called for reconsideration of the U.S. policy, warning of negative effects on bilateral ties and people-to-people exchanges.
Conclusion
The U.S. decision to limit Nigerian non-immigrant visas to three months highlights the growing complexity and reciprocity in global visa regimes. Both countries are tightening their policies, citing security and fairness, which underscores the need for travelers and businesses to stay informed and adapt to evolving requirements.
Business
Nicki Minaj Demands $200 Million from Jay-Z in Explosive Twitter Rant

Nicki Minaj has once again set social media ablaze, this time targeting Jay-Z with a series of pointed tweets that allege he owes her an eye-popping $200 million. The outburst has reignited debates about artist compensation, industry transparency, and the ongoing power struggles within hip-hop’s elite circles.

The $200 Million Claim
In a string of tweets, Minaj directly addressed Jay-Z, writing, “Jay-Z, call me to settle the karmic debt. It’s only collecting more interest. You still in my top five though. Let’s get it.” She went further, warning, “Anyone still calling him Hov will answer to God for the blasphemy.” According to Minaj, the alleged debt stems from Jay-Z’s sale of Tidal, the music streaming platform he launched in 2015 with a group of high-profile artists—including Minaj herself, J. Cole, and Rihanna.
When Jay-Z sold Tidal in 2021, Minaj claims she was only offered $1 million, a figure she says falls dramatically short of what she believes she is owed based on her ownership stake and contributions. She has long voiced dissatisfaction with the payout, but this is the most public—and dramatic—demand to date.
Beyond the Money: Broader Grievances
Minaj’s Twitter storm wasn’t limited to financial complaints. She also:
- Promised to start a college fund for her fans if she receives the money she claims is owed.
- Accused blogs and online creators of ignoring her side of the story, especially when it involves Jay-Z.
- Warned content creators about posting “hate or lies,” saying, “They won’t cover your legal fees… I hope it’s worth losing everything including your account.”
She expressed frustration that mainstream blogs and platforms don’t fully cover her statements, especially when they involve Jay-Z, and suggested that much of the coverage she receives is from less reputable sources.

Satirical Accusations and Industry Critique
Minaj’s tweets took a satirical turn as she jokingly blamed Jay-Z for a laundry list of cultural grievances, including:
- The state of hip-hop, football, basketball, and touring
- The decline of Instagram and Twitter
- Even processed foods and artificial dyes in candy
She repeatedly declared, “The jig is up,” but clarified that her statements were “alleged and for entertainment purposes only.”
Political and Cultural Criticism
Minaj also criticized Jay-Z’s political involvement, questioning why he didn’t campaign more actively for Kamala Harris or respond to President Obama’s comments about Black men. While Jay-Z has a history of supporting Democratic campaigns, Minaj’s critique centered on more recent events and what she perceives as a lack of advocacy for the Black community.
The Super Bowl and Lil Wayne
Adding another layer to her grievances, Minaj voiced disappointment that Lil Wayne was not chosen to perform at the Super Bowl in New Orleans, a decision she attributes to Jay-Z’s influence in the entertainment industry.
Public and Industry Reaction
Despite the seriousness of her financial claim, many observers note that if Minaj truly believed Jay-Z owed her $200 million, legal action—not social media—would likely follow. As of now, there is no public record of a lawsuit or formal complaint.
Some fans and commentators see Minaj’s outburst as part of a larger pattern of airing industry grievances online, while others interpret it as a mix of personal frustration and performance art. Minaj herself emphasized that her tweets were “for entertainment purposes only.”

Conclusion
Nicki Minaj’s explosive Twitter rant against Jay-Z has once again placed the spotlight on issues of artist compensation and industry dynamics. Whether her claims will lead to further action or remain another dramatic chapter in hip-hop’s ongoing soap opera remains to be seen, but for now, the world is watching—and tweeting.
- Business1 week ago
Pros and Cons of the Big Beautiful Bill
- Advice3 weeks ago
What SXSW 2025 Filmmakers Want Every New Director to Know
- Film Industry3 weeks ago
Filming Yourself and Look Cinematic
- News2 weeks ago
Father Leaps Overboard to Save Daughter on Disney Dream Cruise
- Health2 weeks ago
McCullough Alleges Government Hid COVID Vaccine Side Effects
- Advice2 weeks ago
Why 20% of Us Are Always Late
- Advice2 weeks ago
How to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker
- Entertainment1 week ago
Juror 25’s Behavior Sparks Debate Over Fairness in High-Profile Diddy Trial