Don't know if anyone was saying to trust them, but.
I've heard this same narrative over and over enough, especially from antis and neutrals, and given that manufacturers are moving and Colt is starting to slide further and further due to losing some of their military contracts, I'm wondering to what degree it's still valid.
Even during severe fudd moments of the NRA's history, i.e. the GCAs, reaction to the Black Panthers and JFK assassination, and some other bill sponsoring shenanigans around the (Hanlon) Carter-ILA split, how much of that was due to being in cahoots with the industry and whether it was actually in their interests during those particular times in US history. The madness with Ruger and SAAMI didn't happen until the Bush Sr. administration /right before the 90's, and while it's still pretty egregious, I think of it as much of an indictment upon the entire industry pushing for waiting periods, mag limits, and other California-style silliness (Magpul, STI, Barrett, anyone?) about as much as McVeigh's blowout the OK City can be considered an indictment against being a conservative-leaning gun owner who may or may not have a military background.
However, since William B. Ruger cut a check for a million to the NRA, the last person in industry to do so to my knowledge is Larry Potterfield (Midway) a couple years back. I suppose we should be keeping an eye on him, then. I'm under the impression that most of what he sells is AR stuff, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.