Bernie Sanders brings up 9/11, Donald Rumsfeld, and missing trillions of dollars

It seems like Bernie is taking heat for recalling Rumsfeld's speech about the trillions the DoD couldn't account for, but Bernie never said the "money is missing," he is pointing out how poorly the Pentagon's accounting is and used Rumsfeld's own comments to highlight that fact, and that it is rife with waste and fraud - two truths the disinfo shills in this thread are hard at work keeping everyone distracted from.

Here is a transcript I made from the video, starting at about 11:45:

In a variety of ways, the military industrial complex, and the large defense contractors, are ripping off the taxpayers of this country, and they are ripping them off through huge cost over runs, in which they say they'll bid for a contract - okay we'll bid this system for x billion, and then as it turns out it is 2x by the time the system is built. It turns out that there is illegal activity in virtually every major defense contractor that has been charged with fraud or has reached a settlement with the government and, uh, paid heavy fines for ripping off taxpayers, and that's with minimum oversight, to tell you the truth, listen it's probably worse than that.

You see people with different points of view like john McCain and myself and others, that are determined, determined to end that type of waste fraud and abuse, to give you one more example, this is an interesting story, ironic story, the day before 9/11, I think it was September 10th, 2001, some guy who I have nothing in common with, Donald Rumsfeld, then Secretary of Defense, he gave a speech, and he said that there are trillions of dollars in the Department of Defense that we cannot account for, that was Rumsfeld, that was the day before 9/11, he gave a speech that never got a whole lot of attention. Right now, the Department of Defense, to the best of my knowledge, is the only agency in government that cannot sustain an independent audit. So if you go to them and say 'how many private contractors do you have?' 'Well, we really don't know, we can't tell you, it's so complicated, it's a huge complicated system...' I believe that when we talk about making the government cost effective and protecting tax payers, it doesn't simply mean cutting medicaid and food stamps, what it does mean is taking a hard look at an agency which receives about 600 billions dollars a year where there is an enourmous amount of waste and fraud.

Sanders is the ONLY politician running for POTUS who is saying this.

a reply to: ThichHeaded

Here is an ATS post that was made a few days back that does an excellent job of explaining what really happened with the bill and debunking your post attacking Sanders for not standing up to the fed!

originally posted by: MystikMushroom


I figured there was more to the story, and it turns out I was right...

The House version was passed first, and modified to include those provisions you mentioned...but Sanders isn't in the House, he was in the Senate:

""quote
On November 19, 2009, the Committee on Financial Services approved the Paul-Grayson amendment to the Financial Stability Improvement Act of 2009 (H.R. 3996). The amendment includes many provisions of the Federal Reserve Transparency Act, including removing GAO audit restrictions and allowing a more complete audit of the Federal Reserve, including reviewing various policies and agreements with foreign entities.[16][17] It was passed by in a 43-26 vote, with bipartisan support despite opposition from former supporter and Committee Chairman Barney Frank. The amendment was also opposed by Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and others from the Obama administration.[16]

Frank declined to vote for the final amendment after proposed changes made by fellow Democrat Melvin Watt representing North Carolina's 12th congressional district, which encompasses most of Bank of America hometown Charlotte, were stripped out in favor of the amendment's original language by the amendment proposed by Paul and Grayson.[16] Watt's proposed version included provisions that allowed audits of the Fed's balance sheet, but not for the monetary policy.
- unquote""

So whoever this Watt guy in the House got the amendments tacked on you're talking about to the House bill...

Then, Sander's introduced an almost identical bill in the Senate. I sure didn't see anyone else doing that, or even attempting anything aimed at the Fed -- despite being a weakened attempt:

""quote
On March 16, 2009, U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) introduced the Senate companion version, S. 604, the Federal Reserve Sunshine Act of 2009, with the same provisions; this version was then referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs.[22] The bill currently[when?] has 32 co-sponsors.[23]
- unquote""
Wikipedia

So, Sander's didn't come up with these amendments to the original idea -- but he did have the stones to at least introduce the Senate version -- more than I can say for anyone else in the Senate.

Sanders didn't even add them in -- he just took what had passed the House and had the balls to try in the Senate.

But of course, the Republicans didn't bother to jump in and help or anything ... instead they decided to just sit and watch, and then later launch attacks at Sanders. At least the man did something.

So we're going to attack him for doing something, when his detractors didn't. That's like me loosing a football game and being blamed for it, when the people blaming me didn't even bother to suit up and play themselves.

Poor form...

source

a reply to: Gumerk

How can anybody not like this guy!

a reply to: elementalgrove

trying to reason with that professional contrarian is a feedback loop of frustration (as it's intended to be).

originally posted by: Ghost147
It's too bad I'm not American, otherwise I'd be voting for Bernie. He seems like the only possible candidate that's not totally insane.

American's are going to have a tough election next year, it seems

Funny...I see him as one of the few insane.

quote from Donald Rumsfeld:
"According to some estimates we cannot track for some $2.3 trillion dollars in transactions".

common quote from HelloBruce in this and other threads:
"they never said the money was missing"

originally posted by: elementalgrove
a reply to: hellobruce

Enjoy your game of semantics Bruce,
Once again thank you for the laughs!

Touche.

finance.yahoo.com...

From 911myths.com: "They still don't look too impressive to us -- $700 billion without proper documentation is a lot of money -- but it's hard to see how any of this constitutes a motive for the 9/11 attacks."

lol. Well, don't let his statements get sidetracked. War is a racket.

As a non-American I can honestly say that voting for anyone other than Sanders is a waste of a vote. Even if he follows through with only half of what he speaks, America will be so much better off. At the very least it would keep corporate interests out of big politics for 4-8 years. Which would hopefully be enough time to reverse the damages they've caused, though that's pushing it.

I agree with everything he said, but the elites will have him killed with ideas like that, if he were to even get near the Presidency. They didn't let Kennedy get away with it.

iirc, the subject had been mentioned many times prior to 9/11 by Sec.Rumsfeld, this is taken directly from official transcripts of speaking events. This initiative was part of his own budget reform plans, as he was in is position less than a year.

Personally, I lean toward MIHOP from LIHOP, but this charge against DR should be taken aside.

More on topic, Sanders will be Hillary's steppingstone to the election. That's all he is....Al Gore Junior, and his opinions should be regarded just as highly.

I don't think anyone in the contest really has a grasp of the the job requirements, other than being part of some ugly modern fascist beauty contest sponsored by corporations.

40% of the members here are more ethically and morally qualified than any of the above.

a reply to: FlyingFox

Not like Sanders has more than thirty years of experience and is extremely morally sound, or anything.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: Gumerk

How can anybody not like this guy!

Is the simple answer his religion ?....I overheard people talking about him being Jewish the other day like it was a big deal and I have seen people on these boards making a point that he is a Jew ....I kinda have to wonder if this is where some of the negativity stems from

I thought it was a well known fact that the unaccounted money was reported on by multiple websites before 9/10/01 and wasn't a secret.
www.911myths.com...

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: FlyingFox

Not like Sanders has more than thirty years of experience and is extremely morally sound, or anything.

I guess it's a relative scale.

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
I thought it was a well known fact that the unaccounted money was reported on by multiple websites before 9/10/01 and wasn't a secret.
www.911myths.com...

It was well known to a lot of people, but funnily enough no truthers read any of the reports prior to Rumsfeld!

originally posted by: Mandroid7
I hate to say it, but I would take Trump over Sanders any day.

It's either going to go really good, or real bad with him, but it wont be stagnant, that's for sure.

Who's more likely to be establishment?

The socialist who believes in bigger gov, or the businessman who understands the hindrance they are?

Yeah do we want a politician who may get paid off or a guy who has done the paying off politicians the mafia and God knows who else.

If you think Trump remotely gives a crap about you, I feel for you.

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: nancyliedersdeaddog
I thought it was a well known fact that the unaccounted money was reported on by multiple websites before 9/10/01 and wasn't a secret.
www.911myths.com...

It was well known to a lot of people, but funnily enough no truthers read any of the reports prior to Rumsfeld!

Yep there was little motive re: to hide missing funds, initiate huge war to distract. They hide in plain site and freely admit there are billions unaccounted for. That is a bogus motive.

a reply to: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

It's a shame, because Bernie is really addressing the issues that will have a direct effect on families in this country. ISIS is a threat, but economic factors effecting families in this country are a much bigger threat! The cost of health care in this country should be a number one priority! The out of control tuition costs for education needs to be addressed. It's affecting everyone who has kids! Social Security and Medicare should be secured and laws passed where it's illegal to embezzle money out of these programs just like its illegal in the public sector! Wall street and Corporate fraud which affects all of us needs to be stopped. Military spending and foreign aid needs to be reigned in so this excess money can be spent on American citizens here at home!

These are the real issues affecting each and every one of us. Not radical Islam that has it's roots overseas. We should have never laid foot on that powder keg! Bernie had the fortitude to see beyond the lies and voted against going to war in Iraq. The rest of these candidates including Hillary went along with George Bush's smoke and mirrors evidence.

It's astounding that voter's in this country ignore Trump's narcissistic personality, rudeness, bully tactics, degradation of women and bigotry of this man. I can guarantee if anyone was introduced to someone on the street with these traits, the majority would be saying "that guy is an asshole." Yet a lot of voters want this guy to represent this country? What does that say about the moral fiber of this country? It's really disgusting...and if anyone has to use the bathroom, Trump considers that disgusting.

a reply to: ginseng23

I thought that it wasn't to hide that there were billions missing, it was to hide where those billions actually went.

I support trump although lot of things Bernie talks about is right too

Isn't it true that they say all the right things during elections and then it ends up meaning nothing

Isn't it true ?