Sanders and Wife Steered Campaign, Nonprofit Money to Family and Friends

a reply to: matafuchs

Because nothing says not taking care of the people like factually being the first Congress person to take senior citizens across the border to Canada to obtain cheaper prescription drugs and taking women suffering from breast cancer, enabling them to purchase medications in Canada at 1/10 their cost in the U.S.


This is a petty & pathetic attack on Sanders. You know, the one guy who has been consistently helping people as a politician for years, has stuck to his same message for decades, and has a plethora of documented evidence to back it up.

a reply to: introvert

Big difference, but then you know that.

Since when is a political campaign a family business?
Campaign donors are not sending Sanders money to enrich his own family.
Your comparison reeks of silliness.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: introvert

Big difference, but then you know that.

Since when is a political campaign a family business?
Campaign donors are not sending Sanders money to enrich his own family.
Your comparison reeks of silliness.

Were talking about nepotism and the idea of helping those around us before we branch-out. That simple concept applies to politics as well as any other area of life.

Like I said before, this is old news and obvious desperation to stick Sanders with something. At least be original and find something worth discussing. Rehashing old # just shows you guys are not informed about things that have already taken place and have been laid to rest.

a reply to: introvert

This is not helping a local business. This is millions of dollars including bank fraud. This is not petty either as someone else said. He should be ashamed.

www.citizensforethics.org...

Career politicians...it is what we do NOT need. You can have it. I am not voting for it.

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: introvert

This is not helping a local business. This is millions of dollars including bank fraud. This is not petty either as someone else said. He should be ashamed.

www.citizensforethics.org...

Career politicians...it is what we do NOT need. You can have it. I am not voting for it.

What has he been charged with? Has he been found guilty of anything? Perhaps he is being investigated?

No. He's not. It was looked at and dropped because no fraud was found. You, as has been the case with damn near every thread you have posted lately, have absolutely no clue what you are talking about and your opinion amounts to nothing more than delusions of grandeur.

I'm not voting for Sanders either. I can't.

Why are you creating hit pieces and trying to use old BS to slander a man that has no chance to win the nomination?

a reply to: matafuchs

Your catchphrase isn't really catching on not to mention it's hard to take anyone, or their sources, seriously when they still Trumpet a poll that claims 4 = 40% of 18,000,000.

I suggest reading the posts of flatfish slowly, 2 or 3 times.

PS.

I suck at math too, but calculators are great for basic math.

*Yaaaaaawn*

I was actually a bit worried that Sanders had a genuine flaw or personality issue discovered, but it's just the same old same old.

If your brother is a plumber, and you need a plumber, is there something wrong with hiring your brother? If your friend is a carpenter, and you need a carpenter, is there something wrong with hiring your friend? As far as I'm aware, it's not like he was giving them quadruple the normal rate or anything like that.

This is reaching, and quite unseemly. Certain people are looking for something, anything, to pin on Sanders because they're terrified he's going to win. Because they know he will win if they can't think of something.

Ok, lets break this down shall we.

"According to Jane O’Meara Sanders, the senator’s wife, Sanders’ House campaigns paid her more than $90,000 for consulting and ad placement services from 2002 to 2004. She pocketed about $30,000 of that money."

So what they're saying is that $90,000 was allocated for ad placement, and over two years she was paid $30,000. Considering the amount of time and effort she probably dedicated to her husbands campaign that's probably small potatoes.

"Her daughter Carina Driscoll, Sanders’ stepdaughter, also drew a salary from the campaign. She was paid more than $65,000 between 2000 and 2004, according to her mother."

So its pretty normal practice for the family of a politician to help with the campaign, Its kinda what families do "support each other." You'd pay any other person who was putting time and effort into getting you elected, why can't family members get paid? This is $16,000 a year. Working a part time job at wal-mart would make me more than this.

"After working for the campaign, the senator’s wife would come under scrutiny for expenditures at Burlington College, where she was hired as president in 2004. While she led the school, it paid six-figure sums to her daughter and the son of a family friend."

"scrutiny" that didn't result in any charges, fines, or punishment.

Notice the obfuscation of the facts in this next line "it paid six figure sums to her daughter and the son of a family friend." I can't tell if they're saying that "overall, six figures were paid to her and the family friend altogether." or "Six figures were paid to both her and the family friend." but why is it bad that she got paid by a school to be the PRESIDENT of a school? I don't even understand why that's in here. It's entirely possible that the unnamed "friend" was a faculty member as well.

Thats it for campaign and fundraising stuff. A few sentences intentionally worded to SEEM like there has been wrongdoing.

Lets continue. It goes on to mention that when Sanders was mayor he appointed a friend as city treasurer who got embroiled in a scandal about a telecommunications company. Again, the scandal had nothing to do with sanders. His friend screwed up.

Sanders' wife then secured a loan from the Catholic Diocese in burlington to help purchase one of the Diocese properties ,that it had to sell to pay a 17 million dollar sexual molestation lawsuit (big surprise), to help expand the college. This one is just pretty much business, not a great thing but not "fraud." She overstated the amount of pledges she had by a considerable amount in the hopes of garnering more pledges in the future. Didn't happen. So basically she screwed the catholic church for a property that they had to sell for... basically screwing someone else.

As of the rest of the allegations of familial favoritism, even though she was the president she didn't make decisions and hand out money unilaterally. There is a board that has to approve all decisions and they were fully aware of all dealings she had.

So basically, none of this is scandal. Hell, most of this stuff isn't even objectionable. If this is the worst dirt they could dig up regarding Bernie Sanders then he's definitely doing well.

a reply to: matafuchs

I defended Trump on this same point. It's their campaign money, not tax money. They can spend it to the benefit of friends if they want, just as Trump spent campaign money to benefit his own companies.

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: matafuchs
I don't see a good source here nor obvious or provable wrongdoing.

BRAVO.

This is another pathetic whisper campaign put out by HILLARY.

Hillary's people were behind the WSJ "$18Trillion pricetag" hitpiece and a failed Huffpo hitpiece linking Chavez and Sanders. She's as sleazy as Cheney if not moreso which is amazing considering the level of scum we're talking about.

Hmm... a Socialist using money from non-profit organizations he controls to profit his own family?

This is pretty much the standard operation for every "Socialist" leader in history.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
*Yaaaaaawn*

I was actually a bit worried that Sanders had a genuine flaw or personality issue discovered, but it's just the same old same old.

If your brother is a plumber, and you need a plumber, is there something wrong with hiring your brother? If your friend is a carpenter, and you need a carpenter, is there something wrong with hiring your friend? As far as I'm aware, it's not like he was giving them quadruple the normal rate or anything like that.

This is reaching, and quite unseemly. Certain people are looking for something, anything, to pin on Sanders because they're terrified he's going to win. Because they know he will win if they can't think of something.

This is more than reaching. Its calculated deception by Hillary's people since her foundation took donations from foreign groups and governments that had pending matters with the state department (like weapons sales).

This hit piece is really saying "Hillary is very vulnerable here so lets accuse the other guy first".

originally posted by: Slanter
Ok, lets break this down shall we.

"According to Jane O’Meara Sanders, the senator’s wife, Sanders’ House campaigns paid her more than $90,000 for consulting and ad placement services from 2002 to 2004. She pocketed about $30,000 of that money."

So what they're saying is that $90,000 was allocated for ad placement, and over two years she was paid $30,000. Considering the amount of time and effort she probably dedicated to her husbands campaign that's probably small potatoes.

"Her daughter Carina Driscoll, Sanders’ stepdaughter, also drew a salary from the campaign. She was paid more than $65,000 between 2000 and 2004, according to her mother."

So its pretty normal practice for the family of a politician to help with the campaign, Its kinda what families do "support each other." You'd pay any other person who was putting time and effort into getting you elected, why can't family members get paid? This is $16,000 a year. Working a part time job at wal-mart would make me more than this.

"After working for the campaign, the senator’s wife would come under scrutiny for expenditures at Burlington College, where she was hired as president in 2004. While she led the school, it paid six-figure sums to her daughter and the son of a family friend."

"scrutiny" that didn't result in any charges, fines, or punishment.

Notice the obfuscation of the facts in this next line "it paid six figure sums to her daughter and the son of a family friend." I can't tell if they're saying that "overall, six figures were paid to her and the family friend altogether." or "Six figures were paid to both her and the family friend." but why is it bad that she got paid by a school to be the PRESIDENT of a school? I don't even understand why that's in here. It's entirely possible that the unnamed "friend" was a faculty member as well.

Thats it for campaign and fundraising stuff. A few sentences intentionally worded to SEEM like there has been wrongdoing.

Lets continue. It goes on to mention that when Sanders was mayor he appointed a friend as city treasurer who got embroiled in a scandal about a telecommunications company. Again, the scandal had nothing to do with sanders. His friend screwed up.

Sanders' wife then secured a loan from the Catholic Diocese in burlington to help purchase one of the Diocese properties ,that it had to sell to pay a 17 million dollar sexual molestation lawsuit (big surprise), to help expand the college. This one is just pretty much business, not a great thing but not "fraud." She overstated the amount of pledges she had by a considerable amount in the hopes of garnering more pledges in the future. Didn't happen. So basically she screwed the catholic church for a property that they had to sell for... basically screwing someone else.

As of the rest of the allegations of familial favoritism, even though she was the president she didn't make decisions and hand out money unilaterally. There is a board that has to approve all decisions and they were fully aware of all dealings she had.

So basically, none of this is scandal. Hell, most of this stuff isn't even objectionable. If this is the worst dirt they could dig up regarding Bernie Sanders then he's definitely doing well.

Thanks for the breakdown. This post and thread definitely has moved me closer to voting for Sanders, rather than abstaining completely.

Isn't this just a rerun of the same failed attempt to slander Sanders that happened about 5 or 6 months ago??? I could swear I've read this same exact news story a while back and it was a failure then as well.

Some of the .1% must be starting to worry about getting Berned so they're launching their media hit squad again. I find it very enjoyable knowing they are getting so nervous that they feel lying and spinning the facts are their only option. Someone is coming to Bern down their empire of sleaze finally and they're freaking out. LOL

What a horrible source as well. Even the guy who wrote the article is an ex employee of the Heritage Foundation of all places. As if that's going to be the place to find good impartial journalists!! Yea right...

It's so funny watching all these sources push these junk stories because they can't find anything on Bernie to attack him with. Even funnier is all the other sheep who come here to cackle in agreement with those lies while they throw out the key word "Socialist" like it's the boogeyman.

You people are so predictable.

Swing and a miss OP!

Between this and the dem Trump poll you're now 0-2.

Maybe start directing your attention at Republicans if you want to increase your batting average.

I am crying now you are all so mean. Stop. Please. You have too. I agree with you now. I will dump the GOP and Trump and ALL of my hopes and dreams and integrity and not vote for some racsit jackhole that you all are telling me I shouldn't vote for. You are all so right. This is nothing. It is ok for a politician to use their position for personal gain. You're right, he did not do anything wrong. Thank you again, so much, for showing me the light. THE LIGHT!

VOTE FOR OPPRESSIVE SOCIALISM!!! VOTE FOR HIGHER AND MORE TAXES! VOTE LIKE THE MINDLESS DRONES YOU WANT US ALL TO BE!

a reply to: matafuchs

There's no crying in baseball!

Haha the OP and the other usual posters are scrambling to come up with ANY thing that can stick to the wall...just goes to show you how neocons and haters alike are really feeling that berning sensation 😋

a reply to: muse7

I was laughing at how fast the usual suspects first commented and slandered without looking into it on page 1.

Try pitch again OP, this one was way off target,

a reply to: matafuchs

I just don't understand how you can try to condemn Bernie for whatever it is he's supposedly doing while supporting Trump? You're either misinformed or mindbogglingly hypocritical, as far as I can tell.

I will dump the GOP and Trump and ALL of my hopes and dreams

The GOP and Trump aren't on the same side.