About those excessive contributions
to Bernie's campaign, I just woke up to the fact that the report is only talking about those excessive contributions through 2015.
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/988/201602110300034988/201602110300034988.pdf
This report does not include any of the many millions that have been contributed since 1 Jan 2016. So it will be very interesting to see those numbers and whether the excessive contributions have continued.
I can certainly understand how in the heat of a campaign, multiple contributions in small amounts might not get added up accurately so that they can be caught immediately.
But when individuals send in one-time amounts of $5000 and $3000 which clearly exceed the $2700 max, as was the case for several contributors, the numbers should have been caught immediately. 
I certainly don't envy Ms Jackson her position in a very hot seat that could be getting hotter by the minute.
Can you even begin to imagine the outrage if Hillary's campaign were in this position? 
= new reply since forum marked as read
response, I think. It seems to have changed since I last saw it. 
Of course, the FEC doing its job must be an anti-Sanders conspiracy. 
And yes, I am sure that the campaign treasurer will feel the wrath of some. But will any blame ever be attributed to the candidate himself?
After all, Hillary is single-handedly blamed for the Iraq War, ISIS and nearly everything else that has gone wrong in America and the world since Bill Clinton's Presidency.
"Establishment," so different rules apply to those who are not, 
what any journalist might say that irritates his supporters.
I noticed yesterday that four of the Sanders campaign's top five contributors are:
Alphabet, Inc.(Google)
Microsoft Corp.
Apple Inc.
Amazon
https://www.opensecrets.org/pres16/contrib.php?id=N00000528&
Using the Berniac standard that where these contributions come from, whether employee or employer, is irrelevant, it begs the question: How many "American" jobs have these companies shipped to Kissinger's China? And, by contrast, how many "American" jobs has Goldman Sachs sent there?
BTW, #6 is the U.S. Navy and #7 is Kaiser Permanente 
. What do these entities expect in return for their contributions?
about when righteous purity is the standard from which there can never - ever - be any deviations whatsoever.
And Jackson (and by extension, Sanders) haven't figured out that Excel spreadsheet thingy yet. 
Hint: Pivot tables can be your friend. So can sorting.
generally required, although additional reports are required before the candidate's primary election and before and after the GE.
http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_candidate.shtml#report
So we may not see anything additional before April - or even early May 2016.
It cannot be posted enough, IMO.
I do - not a good role model to follow.
Do you mean MY post?
What of the investigation into his campaign 's (top staffers involved) theft of Clinton campaign data? Amazingly, his fortune turned right after that.
He seldom gets called out when he lies--an example is when he says he doesn't use any super pac help.
His campaign uses logos of organizations without their authorization.
His campaign deceitfully accessed lunch rooms of union members in Nevada in order to push Sanders.
Etc.
It appears he is given kid glove treatment, and why is that? Is it because of what is at stake? Could it be that Democrat Party officials fear that any consequences given to Sanders' unethical conduct would alienate his base and cost us big in the GE? Or have we just turned into passive, accommodating pushovers?
screaming about receiving Clinton fundraising emails.
Well, I only began receiving fundraising emails from Bernie's campaign after that Dec event. Was there a relationship? Probably not, but ...
At least I give Bernie the benefit of the doubt. They only apply the benefit of the doubt to Bernie and believe any trash whatsoever that is posted about Hillary.
In any event, I have clicked the "Unsubscribe" button on the Bernie requests.
I have also unsubscribed, but unlike you I will not give the benefit of the doubt anymore. I see too much of what I deem unethical.
Sanders would have to convincingly address all of it: take measurable steps to reign in miscreants, and apologize for his own behavior and that of his campaign--and then change it all. He needs to take responsibility for the deliberate divisiveness his campaign (and himself, too) are fostering as well.
REASONABLE PEOPLE HERE! 
As to the data breach, I've been a Hillary supporter since she announced. I had NO interest in supporting an (I) who tended to be divisive. But gee, started getting contribution emails from his campaign. Why is that do you ya think? 
Anyway, on dkos, there's a topic about this, and yet, the rabid toads who see that Sanders does nothing wrong, ever, are squawking because SHE shows on her FEC filing returned donations. Why is that? Because they exceeded the limit ya think? So....because she's following the law, she's being dishonest, but St. Bernie is not?
Sorry, it's been kinda building in me for a long time.
all too well.
Double standards all over the place. Hillary can do no right and Bernie can do no wrong. Ever.
