Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 06:46 PM Apr 2016

The most definitive article to date: Vatican: Pope Didn't Invite Bernie Sanders

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/10/vatican-pope-didn-t-invite-bernie-sanders.html

ROME—Not since Pope Francis’s ill-advised meeting with gay marriage opponent Kim Davis has there been so much “he said, she said” controversy about the pope meddling in American politics.

On Friday, Democratic presidential hopeful Bernie Sanders announced that he was “very excited” about having just received an invitation to speak at a small, invitation-only scholarly conference at the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences conference celebrating the 25th year anniversary of an encyclical “Centesimus Annus,” written by Pope John Paul II on the evils of capitalism.

Francis is not expected to attend the conference, which will take place April 15 and 16 with around 30 participants, including Bolivian president Evo Morales and Ecuadorian president Rafael Correa. Francis will be traveling to Lesbos, Greece, on the 16th to shed light on the Syrian refugee crisis there.

The Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi told The Daily Beast that it wasn’t the pope who personally invited the politician. “The invitation was made on behalf of the Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, not by Pope Francis,” he said. “There is no expectation that the pope will meet Mr. Sanders.” He then added that he could not completely exclude the possibility, but that nothing was on the agenda at the moment.
...
Sorondo later toned down his initial comments telling CNN the invitation should not be seen as an endorsement of the senator’s nomination. “It does not signify any support of the campaign," Sorondo said. "We want to establish a dialogue between North America and South America so we thought to invite a [U.S.] politician. The President of Bolivia will also be there. Perhaps the others (candidates) would have been interested but they did not request to come."

He also confirmed to CNN that Sanders had reached out to the Vatican first. “He has expressed an interest many times in the Pope's encyclical and it's clear that he has an interest in studying it,” Sorondo said.
“It might have that effect, but we are not looking to support the campaign."


Confirmation from the Academy that a) Bernie (or a surrogate) reached out first and b) requested to attend.

Evo Morales: http://www.plenglish.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=4768431&Itemid=1

Rafael Correa: http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Ecuador-Rally-Defends-Reform-and-Correa-Against-Anti-Tax-March-20160407-0039.html

More: John Oliver and Correa: http://www.nbcnews.com/news/latino/comedian-john-oliver-rattles-ecuadors-president-rafael-correa-n307641

**************
I will post no more on this subject.
60 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The most definitive article to date: Vatican: Pope Didn't Invite Bernie Sanders (Original Post) BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 OP
Fail! Her Sister Apr 2016 #1
Will not deter Sanders from repeating the lie liberal N proud Apr 2016 #2
Argh! Her Sister Apr 2016 #3
Ah yes ... BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #19
Monsignor needs to beef up on the meaning of "election" and "candidate" robbedvoter Apr 2016 #31
Enormous K & R. Thanks for posting. Surya Gayatri Apr 2016 #4
It's so damned OBVIOUS--but then again, it always WAS. MADem Apr 2016 #5
Yes, I actually saw that one BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #20
K&R! sheshe2 Apr 2016 #6
And Hillary didn't get invited at all. But considering the subject of the conference, it's not PatV Apr 2016 #7
Jeffrey Sachs a BS fan got BS an invite and BS said on the View when asked if he were going to Cha Apr 2016 #8
Clinton didn't ask to attend a seminar on Catholic theology. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #15
This is absolutely the point BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #21
If necessary, I think I can get her invited to something exciting. okasha Apr 2016 #24
lol!!! Her Sister Apr 2016 #33
I'd go to that! Especially if there is food! Lucinda Apr 2016 #49
Hillary did not ask to attend. Why bring her in unless it is only to smear her. Shame on you. riversedge Apr 2016 #27
I blame BS.. he never does his homework. Cha Apr 2016 #9
No, he really doesn't. Bleacher Creature Apr 2016 #16
It still has not dawned on his supporters what a stupid coment that was (by Bernie) riversedge Apr 2016 #28
K&R otohara Apr 2016 #10
HAH! DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #11
k&r DesertRat Apr 2016 #12
If he has an "interest in studying" Centesimus Annus... jmowreader Apr 2016 #13
just a part DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #30
There's also this part jmowreader Apr 2016 #32
Eventually the truth shall prevail Iliyah Apr 2016 #14
Sanders invited himself Gothmog Apr 2016 #17
Here's the important part: "Perhaps the others (candidates) would have been interested but... George II Apr 2016 #18
Ding ! Ding! Ding! Her Sister Apr 2016 #34
If Jeffrey Sachs is Bernie's hand-picked foreign policy advisor LisaM Apr 2016 #22
That any foreign policy "advisor" BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #23
I suspect that this will be okasha Apr 2016 #25
Not a good move overall, IMO. eom BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #26
Probably they wanted BS to look important with the Pope Her Sister Apr 2016 #35
Too clever for their own good, IMO. eom BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #36
I've been digging around on Jeffrey Sachs, and he's a strange character LisaM Apr 2016 #37
Thanks for the links, Lisa! BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #38
He seems to have a particular vendetta against Hillary and Paul Krugman. LisaM Apr 2016 #39
It gets even more interesting when the discussion BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #40
I know; at times it sounds like Opus Dei LisaM Apr 2016 #41
Thanks for all this info into Jeffrey Sachs Her Sister Apr 2016 #46
It also makes Bernie Sanders seem very, very naive. LisaM Apr 2016 #55
It should raise flags BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #59
Couldn't agree more. LAS14 Apr 2016 #51
And to discuss an encyclical that slams socialism. Koinos Apr 2016 #54
Skin deep perhaps. eom BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #58
No Matter. He won't even read the encyclical. Koinos Apr 2016 #60
So all the spin the BS'ers were pushing was false? Quelle Surprise!!!! Tarheel_Dem Apr 2016 #29
They called her a liar and other terrible names... ( Margaret Archer) fun n serious Apr 2016 #42
The response to Margaret Archer laid bare BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #43
They also fund raised on this issue fun n serious Apr 2016 #44
Shameless. BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #45
Yuck! Her Sister Apr 2016 #47
The agenda Her Sister Apr 2016 #48
Thanks for this, Her Sister! BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #50
and it looks like it was supposed to be a coffee break at that time! Her Sister Apr 2016 #52
I wonder whether he'll be BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #57
This person has some in depth analysis on the whole thing Her Sister Apr 2016 #53
Good find. BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #56

liberal N proud

(60,334 posts)
2. Will not deter Sanders from repeating the lie
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 06:54 PM
Apr 2016

It will not keep the €$ers from propagating tell misinformation

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
3. Argh!
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 06:57 PM
Apr 2016
The Monsignor expressed dismay that there was such a fuss about an invitation to a conference few people would have even heard about. “I don't know what is the problem," Sorondo told National Catholic Reporter. "We have two presidents from Latin America, and we don't have a problem. And we have a problem because we invited one candidate to the White House of your country? It's a little impossible to understand."


A conference few people heard about??/ Excuse me but this was announced on The View by BS himself and the show's hostesses.

robbedvoter

(28,290 posts)
31. Monsignor needs to beef up on the meaning of "election" and "candidate"
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:38 AM
Apr 2016

It's not as if politics is such a strange notion to them. Just democracy seems to be.

MADem

(135,425 posts)
5. It's so damned OBVIOUS--but then again, it always WAS.
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 07:22 PM
Apr 2016

I don't blame Bernie for being a bit hornswoggled, but he should have done a bit more due diligence on how the issue would be perceived.

His PR team should have reached out to the PA team--AND The Vatican offices of the Pontiff (assuming he wanted to meet Himself). And that should have happened before he went on TV giggling about how "The POPE" invited him to "The Vatican."


If he thinks the imagery of himself, Correa and Morales is going to be some kind of resonating and iconic thing, he just Did Not Think It Through.

And if he thinks that Francis--or Margaret Archer--are going to be happy that he stunk up the PA conference with "politicking" he'd probably best think again.

This whole thing is in Crash and (LOL) "Bern" territory at this stage of the game. It's the best thing that could have happened to Clinton, though, so I am not displeased. It takes BS OFF the campaign trail for three or four days at least, at a critical time. It's not going to help him with American Catholics who

a. Don't like to be played

b. The conservative ones are GOP, the liberal ones like this Pope's attempts at liberalization ... and don't like seeing him blindsided.


There is a tiny window of opportunity for BS to meet the Pope, but he's going to Lesbos to be with the refugees, so he's going to have to squeeze it in on day 1, if he can find a red eye plane leaving right after the debate...!!

And this??? HILARIOUS!!!!!!!! You'll have to watch on YT, but funny....

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
20. Yes, I actually saw that one
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:25 PM
Apr 2016

when John Oliver (many thanks to the UK for sending him over here!) got involved in a "feud" with Correa.

 

PatV

(71 posts)
7. And Hillary didn't get invited at all. But considering the subject of the conference, it's not
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 07:34 PM
Apr 2016

surprising.

Cha

(297,260 posts)
8. Jeffrey Sachs a BS fan got BS an invite and BS said on the View when asked if he were going to
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 07:38 PM
Apr 2016

see the Pope? "Yup"..

That's the reality and you can try to spin it anyways into the next decade but BS only made himself look bad.

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
15. Clinton didn't ask to attend a seminar on Catholic theology.
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:11 PM
Apr 2016

Because that's a bonkers thing for a US pol in an election campaign to do.

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
21. This is absolutely the point
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:27 PM
Apr 2016

for anyone who considers that Church and State should be separate. Which I do. Which The Founders did.

okasha

(11,573 posts)
24. If necessary, I think I can get her invited to something exciting.
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:15 AM
Apr 2016

Maybe a seminar of a couple dozen half-smashed linguists camped out on San Antonio's River Walk and debating whether mass media will hinder the development of "Tex-Mex" into a a full blown language separate from both English and Spanish.

Bleacher Creature

(11,257 posts)
16. No, he really doesn't.
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:27 PM
Apr 2016

I'm still picking up my jaw from hearing him try and blame the Washington Post for his "unqualified" remark.

I mean, the Post has been churning out misleading headlines for years, but how does a guy running for President openly admit that he doesn't read beyond the headlines?

DemonGoddess

(4,640 posts)
30. just a part
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:11 AM
Apr 2016
His words deserve to be re-read attentively: "To remedy these wrongs (the unjust distribution of wealth and the poverty of the workers), the Socialists encourage the poor man's envy of the rich and strive to do away with private property, contending that individual possessions should become the common property of all...; but their contentions are so clearly powerless to end the controversy that, were they carried into effect, the working man himself would be among the first to suffer. They are moreover emphatically unjust, for they would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State, and create utter confusion in the community".39 The evils caused by the setting up of this type of socialism as a State system — what would later be called "Real Socialism" — could not be better expressed.


So, basically, from what I'm reading already, the encyclical referenced is against Socialism, and of course atheism (this part I would always expect, given it's coming from a Pope).

jmowreader

(50,559 posts)
32. There's also this part
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:54 AM
Apr 2016
13. Continuing our reflections, and referring also to what has been said in the Encyclicals Laborem exercens and Sollicitudo rei socialis, we have to add that the fundamental error of socialism is anthropological in nature. Socialism considers the individual person simply as an element, a molecule within the social organism, so that the good of the individual is completely subordinated to the functioning of the socio-economic mechanism. Socialism likewise maintains that the good of the individual can be realized without reference to his free choice, to the unique and exclusive responsibility which he exercises in the face of good or evil. Man is thus reduced to a series of social relationships, and the concept of the person as the autonomous subject of moral decision disappears, the very subject whose decisions build the social order. From this mistaken conception of the person there arise both a distortion of law, which defines the sphere of the exercise of freedom, and an opposition to private property. A person who is deprived of something he can call "his own", and of the possibility of earning a living through his own initiative, comes to depend on the social machine and on those who control it. This makes it much more difficult for him to recognize his dignity as a person, and hinders progress towards the building up of an authentic human community.


Just from skimming the thing, it looks like John Paul II was very much into "bridled capitalism" - both free-reign capitalism like the Republicans preach, and socialism like Bernie Sanders wants, are both bad in his eyes.

Consider the source and you'll see why this paper is so down on socialism: the Pope who wrote it came from a Warsaw Pact country.

George II

(67,782 posts)
18. Here's the important part: "Perhaps the others (candidates) would have been interested but...
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 08:31 PM
Apr 2016

...they did not request to come."

So, contrary to the Sanders' fans protestations, Sanders or his campaign DID ask to go!!! He DID invite himself!

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
34. Ding ! Ding! Ding!
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 07:55 AM
Apr 2016

There it is!!! People don't realize when they give away the name of the game, but they do! They do give it away!
Ha ha and Ha!

LisaM

(27,813 posts)
22. If Jeffrey Sachs is Bernie's hand-picked foreign policy advisor
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:52 PM
Apr 2016

it was a seriously awful choice. First, this is a giant blunder. Second, I'm Catholic but I don't want my elected officials getting their policy from a dusty think tank associated with the Vatican.

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
23. That any foreign policy "advisor"
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 12:14 AM
Apr 2016

would advise his candidate to reach out to ANY foreign Head of State during a primary election campaign does not speak well for that person's smarts. It certainly does not speak well for that person's practical experience or protocol when dealing with foreign Heads of State.

In some ways this whole "Pope" incident has reminded me of how Sarah Palin in 2008 was so thoroughly punked by The Masked Avengers into thinking that she was speaking to Nicolas Sarkozy. As if ANY foreign Head of State would do such a thing during an election. But Sarah's huge ego made such a stunt easy to pull off. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Masked_Avengers%27_prank_on_Sarah_Palin

OK, so despite the "spin" presented and allowed to stand by Bernie himself, it was not actually the Pope who was approached. But like you, I am totally mystified as to why any person with common sense would think that ANYONE - Catholic or not (the latter especially) would be impressed that someone who has basically been secular throughout his career (whatever his own religious background or lack of it) would think it a coup to finagle an invitation to "a dusty think tank associated with the Vatican" - as you described it so well.

Beyond quirky, IMO.

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
35. Probably they wanted BS to look important with the Pope
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 08:00 AM
Apr 2016

To look Presidential and smart. They wanted a photo op. Furthermore, if the Pope said one or two things about BS or BS economical ideas that probably would've been worth the whole she-bang. Also, it would have gotten the media all on sanders b/c it was unexpected and "impressive".

They thought they were so clever!

LisaM

(27,813 posts)
37. I've been digging around on Jeffrey Sachs, and he's a strange character
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 02:16 PM
Apr 2016

Among other things, he nominated himself to be head of the World Bank, he is strongly in favor of GMO crops, and has a very weird track record in Bolivia and Russia regarding a tactic called "shock therapy" that is supposed to jolt bad economies by applying some very stringent measures. He also hates Hillary (and the Clinton foundation), has accepted millions from George Soros, runs some controversial outfits called "Millennium Villages" in Africa, and is a bitter rival of Paul Krugman. Even he himself admits that his proposed reforms in Russia failed miserably.

Forgive all these links. I think the first two provide the best information. I also can't speak to all the sources, though some are better than others. He seems like a very strange duck.



https://www.independentsentinel.com/pope-francis-has-a-red-adviser/

http://americamagazine.org/issue/call-virtue


http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/?p=29888


http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jan/06/paul-krugman-got-it-wrong-austerity-jeffrey-sachs



http://www.thenation.com/article/opinionnation-should-jeffrey-sachs-be-next-world-bank-president/


http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/7561/economics/shock-therapy-economics/


http://upsidedownworld.org/main/bolivia-archives-31/3522-bolivia-sachs-versus-the-facts


http://www.businessweek.com/investing/green_business/archives/2008/06/jeff_sachs_why.html


BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
38. Thanks for the links, Lisa!
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 05:58 PM
Apr 2016

We certainly do not need anyone with quirky foreign policy credentials at this seminal moment. We need someone with a very steady hand who will build upon Prez O's successes, attempt to mitigate areas where he has not been as successful, develop new areas of success, and begin to make serious inroads on global terrorism by - among other things - helping to rebuild economies that have been destroyed by experiments such as "shock therapy," among others.

Hillary is that person. Bernie not so much. But ABSOLUTELY NO GOPER At ALL!!!

LisaM

(27,813 posts)
39. He seems to have a particular vendetta against Hillary and Paul Krugman.
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 06:14 PM
Apr 2016

I think he sounds a little shadowy.

Now, I might be middle-aged and cynical, but when a think tank I'd never heard of and a so-called foreign policy advisor no one's ever heard of either are involved with procuring an invitation to one of their events for a presidential candidate, I call timeout.

Bernie's either completely aware of the ramifications of the whole strange business, or he's in hopelessly over his head.

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
40. It gets even more interesting when the discussion
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 06:28 PM
Apr 2016

is centered around a document written by the former pope and, according to posts by some here citing from the document itself, does not have a favorable view of socialism.

Is this something else that Bernie may have involuntarily mischaracterized? What a fiasco for him! No due diligence on his part.

LisaM

(27,813 posts)
41. I know; at times it sounds like Opus Dei
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 06:44 PM
Apr 2016

I don't think it is, but the overtly religious element (and the connection to Pope John Paul II) just seem odd.

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
46. Thanks for all this info into Jeffrey Sachs
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:00 PM
Apr 2016

I saw that yes he seems to really have in it for the Clintons.

LisaM

(27,813 posts)
55. It also makes Bernie Sanders seem very, very naive.
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:44 PM
Apr 2016

How did he "choose" this guy as a foreign policy advisor in the first place? How could he (Sanders) have gone out and mischaracterized this appearance so much? What is Sachs angling for? Everything about Jeffrey Sachs raises a red flag with me.

Koinos

(2,792 posts)
54. And to discuss an encyclical that slams socialism.
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:41 PM
Apr 2016

What happened to Bernie's attachment to Eugene Debs?

 

fun n serious

(4,451 posts)
42. They called her a liar and other terrible names... ( Margaret Archer)
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 10:26 PM
Apr 2016


After a whirlwind few days in which Bernie Sanders tried to convince the nation that he had been invited to the Vatican by Pope Francis, only to see immediate pushback by nearly everyone involved, the factual truth of the story has been difficult to pin down. One person at the Vatican countered that Sanders essentially invited himself to a sideshow event so he could falsely claim he was headed to see the Pope, while another person at the Vatican tried to cover for the embarrassment by countering the first person. But now the official Vatican spokesman is setting the record straight – and it isn’t pretty.

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/truth-comes-out-vatican-says-there-is-no-expectation-that-the-pope-will-meet-mr-sanders/24429/

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
43. The response to Margaret Archer laid bare
Mon Apr 11, 2016, 10:31 PM
Apr 2016

some nasty misogyny, IMO.

Thanks for the link. From that article - and this is pretty stark:

Sanders and his campaign have been parsing their words carefully on this issue, likely so they can claim they aren’t technically lying. But if their intent is to imply that the Pope or his reps invited Bernie to anything, or that Bernie is meeting with the Pope, their intent is to deceive.

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
50. Thanks for this, Her Sister!
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:15 PM
Apr 2016

Looks very much as if it will be the standard stump speech. It be be fun to see whether he actually works anything from the encyclical into it, or even mentions the part about Socialists encouraging "the poor man's envy of the rich" etc.

It should be interesting to see how or whether the media fawns all over him ....

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
52. and it looks like it was supposed to be a coffee break at that time!
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:23 PM
Apr 2016

Fawning over the same same stump speech!? Yawn! Would be great to see the reaction of all the erudite scholars in that conference room!

 

Her Sister

(6,444 posts)
53. This person has some in depth analysis on the whole thing
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 04:25 PM
Apr 2016
https://rootedcosmopolitan.wordpress.com/2016/04/11/the-papal-invitation-that-wasnt/

When I sat at my computer Friday morning and saw that Bernie Sanders had been invited to the Vatican I was stunned. Though I voted for Hillary Clinton in the Illinois primary, my reaction was not the Democratic nomination. I thought “wait, this has to be wrong, there is no way the Vatican could be this dumb, it is bad for the Vatican to get embroiled in a US election.” Through the course of Friday it became obvious that in fact no office that directly represents the Pope or is an important body of the Holy See was involved in inviting Sanders to what turned out to be a conference of mostly academics. On why the Sanders campaign agreed to the trip I cannot say. I’m baffled by the decision. But regarding the machinations behind the decision, it appears the invitation was pushed by economist Jeffrey Sachs and American policy advocate and communications consultant Michael Shank. Sachs and Shank both have at least the appearance of a conflict of interest, and if they did in fact initiate the invitation, their actions undermined the interests of both Bernie Sanders and the Catholic Church.



LONGER explanations ensue...

BlueMTexpat

(15,369 posts)
56. Good find.
Tue Apr 12, 2016, 06:25 PM
Apr 2016

This is one thing that really shocked me at the outset:

Bodies that conduct diplomacy generally avoid taking sides in the elections of other countries, in particular when they can do little or nothing to influence the outcome. (But not always.) So that was the first indication something wasn’t right about the supposed invitation of Sanders to come to meet with the Pope.


Also Michael Shank:

Shank is also quite transparent about his antipathy toward Hillary Clinton and his lack of respect for Obama’s presidency. In 2007 he criticized both Clinton and Barack Obama: “Elect Clinton, it seems, and we elect Bush.” And “it appears as if Obama is becoming as Bush-lite as his competitor Clinton.” He’s called Obama a “right of center president,” and asked “Obama worst climate pres?”

Shank has also referred to the Clinton “dynasty,” like the Bush family, “both monarchies undermining democracy.” He’s lauded—and possibly co-written?—Sachs’ opinion pieces attacking Clinton and praising Sanders.

Shank has also done his share of praising Sanders and complaining about his mistreatment by the media. He’s described a potential Sanders foreign policy. He’s alleged that NBC is biased toward Clinton because it’s owned by GE, which for tax reasons “love her Wall St bias.” He’s characterized New York Times pieces as “propaganda” and said the Times was in the “pockets of the Clinton campaign.” And last July he tweeted a quote of Sanders comparing himself to the Pope, and ended the tweet with “@CasinaPioIV,” which is the Twitter account for PAS and PASS.


So Bernie actually compared himself to the Pope. Just
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»Hillary Clinton»The most definitive artic...