Bernie Sanders Comes Clean

[UglyGreed]

Voters should be grateful for the government transparency laws that required Senator Bernie Sanders, a rival to Hillary Rodham Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, to reveal how much he made last year in speaking engagement fees. The total is $1,867.42 for three appearances, a grand sum that is chump change in presidential politicking but enough for the senator to respectably donate the money to charity.

Mr. Sanders, the Senate’s Vermont independent and self-described Democratic socialist, is a far better speaker than those numbers indicate, as his weekly talk radio conversation, “Brunch With Bernie,” has shown. He has delighted leftist political junkies for the past decade with his iconoclastic broadsides. But the senator doesn’t milk his signature New England contrariness for money, not yet anyway.

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/05/26/bernie-sanders-comes-clean/?_r=1

I knew the pressure from my thread earlier demanding transparency would do some good

[daleanime]

1. I feel so betrayed.

[AzDar]

2. Don't forget... he's in bed with Big...Nursing?

[Perogie]

8. Please don't let it be

Nurse Ratched

[Cassiopeia]

22. I'll up that one

[PonyUp]

50. Or this one:

[arikara]

42. Oh man....

she looked so old and mean when I saw that movie. Now she looks like a kid.

[AllyCat]

53. Cannot believe I heard this from an HRC supporter on this board.

Accusing nurses of being a "Super PAC". I let loose on him/her and never heard back.

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. Owned for sure.

[malthaussen]

4. Wonder where the forty-two cents came from.

I guess Bernie contradicts the stereotype of the hard-bargaining New Englander. Of course, he was born in Brooklyn...

-- Mal

[nilram]

27. My guess is he had a tip jar

[840high]

41. From my vaccum cleaner.

[MADem]

5. If he wanted to make money on the speaking circuit, he would have had to quit the Senate.

Ethics rules, and all that. Hello? Jim Wright? Newt Gingrich? Everyone here must be either so young or forgetful--they don't remember these things, I guess.

If/when he quits the Senate, I'm sure, if he's interested, he'll be able to find an agent who will book him into speaking engagements for some decent scratch. Jimmy Carter makes very good money doing this, too, even at his advanced age--he's not just monitoring elections and building Habitat homes. Russ Feingold did it for a bit. Cynthia McKinney can be hired to give a speech.

Lots of retired/former politicians take this tack as a way to pay the bills or put aside a nest egg.

He's also good for a multi-million dollar book deal if he wants, assuming he agrees to work with a publisher and an editorial assistant to produce a marketable product. That's another thing that many retired or former politicians do.

[zalinda]

9. That may be so

but, that doesn't excuse Hillary of making all those speeches when she knew she was going to run for President. She didn't need the money! If she wanted something to do, she had a foundation she could have run or follow in Carter's footsteps and actually DO something to help the world instead of just increasing her personal wealth.

Z

[MADem]

15. It's not a case of "may be so" - it is so!

You think it's a bad thing to make speeches to Wall Street bankers to earn a nest egg to be spent on campaign expenditures? I don't think HRC's goal was "just increasing her personal wealth." That money is in a pile to spend on her general election campaign. If she doesn't make it that far, she'll likely toss that cash into a foundation cause. If it's not paying her general election bills, it'll probably go to microloans to women's businesses or disease eradication, or something.

Should no Democrats do this, ever, for any reason? By "this" I mean, specifically: Speak to Wall Streeters/corporate movers and shakers in exchange for cash? If Wall Street Bankers, et. al., have the money, and want to give it away to fund campaigns, you're saying that's bad and shouldn't happen?

I just want to be clear on your POV, here.

[zalinda]

26. If you are no longer going to be working for the government

have at making speeches to the finance district. When you make a speech and then collect a 'fee' and then run for an office, it really, really looks like you are campaigning. There is a revolving door in DC which has to stop. We, the people are getting lost in the equation. It seems like it is now, we the corporations, who are at the top most in the minds of politicians.

The DC crowd keeps hiring the same people over and over again, and it's we the people who are suffering because of it.

And, all her 'campaign expenditures'? Last time Obama helped pay them, she paid very little out of her own pocket. It will be the same way this time.

Z

[MADem]

32. Russ Feingold--UNDER THE BUS with you!!!!!! He went on the lecture circuit!

And look what he's doing now....

http://russfeingold.com/


So, you're going to call him "really campaigning" when he did that, too?


How about if you host a private party with a few political friends, and invite a few rich and well connected Wall Streeters and other movers and shakers to come to your party, and and you and your political friends give speeches and hobnob with the rich, banking guests/donors, and have someone else collect the monetary donations from the guests, and those guys who collected the cash dole it out to you and your friends later?


Is that OK, if there's a bit of separation there?

[Lordquinton]

43. Interesting perspective

You think it's a bad thing to make speeches to Wall Street bankers to earn a nest egg to be spent on campaign expenditures?

Like, yes? Literally yes?

[MADem]

45. Well, Senator Sanders needs to pack up his speeches, take off his "Wall Street Host" hat,

and crawl under that bus with Feingold, Clinton, and a shitload of other Democrats, then....

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/


He's been hosting and partying with the one percenters (25 percent of them from the financial sector) for the last six years in luxury resorts; giving speeches, rubbing shoulders, chit-chatting, in small group dynamic "retreats" with some of the wealthiest and most loyal donors to the party.

The money gets collected by the DSCC and then is doled back out to the hosts and other Democrats. That way, they can decry that filthy lucre while spending it, hand over first, because it isn't labeled "Wall Street CASH." Instead, it has an inoffensive little "DSCC" label on it...so it's all good!

[TTUBatfan2008]

52. The Clintons...

Have received corporate donations in the hundreds of millions for their campaigns and speeches. $150m in speeches alone and probably another $150-200m in campaign donations. Sanders is not perfect, but he is a lot cleaner than they are and he's a lot cleaner than about 99.9% of the political system.

People are fed up with the corruption. It's an insult to people's intelligence when Hillary complains about hundreds of millions of mega corporate dollars flowing to people like Jeb Bush and then insists that corporate money has zero impact on her policies.

[Lordquinton]

54. So before he wasn't doing anything to help down ticket dems

Sanders has "raised more money for the Senate Democrats than almost any other member of the Senate Democratic caucus" because he sees helping the party regain the majority as critical.

"He has in the past written letters and helped Senate Democrats elect Democrats. He thinks that's very important to the country,"

Now he's in bed with wall street! I was wondering why there were wheels on those goal post you were standing by.

[MADem]

55. And no one finds it odd that he stayed quiet when that was brought up? That's the biggest tell of

all--why didn't he tout his loyalty to the party?

What a perfect demonstration of his affinity--and his "establishment status" -- with the Democratic caucus in the Senate!

But maybe, just maybe, that "INSIDER" truth wasn't what he wanted his fans to see. He wanted them to believe that he is an outsider, because, as an insider, one has to wonder "Why didn't he do MORE?"

He IS "in bed with Wall Street" and his courting of them in Palm Beach and Martha's Vineyard down the years is absolute proof of it. He was giving happy speeches to these people--he wasn't wagging his finger and yelling at them, he was jollying them along so they'd cough up 33K every year, bundle 100K at a pop, and raise a half million or more in their lifetimes.

This isn't a goal post--these are static events, that have happened down the years, and Sanders is a key player--a HOST, not just a speaker--in a Quid Pro Quo between corporate entities, a full quarter of whom came from the FINANCIAL SECTOR aka Wall Street, and his own campaign coffers.

It's a beautiful arrangement, though--by running the Wall Street money through the DSCC, he can claim, to people not paying attention, that Wall Street money isn't funding him. It's a disingenuous claim, since he talks to the people who donate the Wall Street money, and he knows that the DSCC is holding the Wall Street money and doling it out to him and other Senators/candidates, but it's kind of like giving a buddy some money to get you some weed. Why, YOU didn't buy that weed--your FRIEND did. You might be getting your buzz on, but you didn't "officially" make the purchase! You'd never, ever do such a thing....!

That one degree of separation enables one to be able to tell a bit of a fib, because it's not "really" a fib. But when you lift the lid, you see the actual process--and it is exactly what it looks like.

[Lordquinton]

56. So he has inside knowledge of how broken the system is

which is why he is campaigning to change it. While we're on the subject of fibs, he didn't single handedly host any of the fundraisers, he was one of many co-hosts for the events, working with other senate Dems to further the Democratic party. less than 30% of the attendees were reportedly from the financial sector, and that was split up and filtered through the fundraiser, so there was no quid-pro-quo directly, unlike Hillary campaigning with the head of Goldman Sachs on stage.

Now, does he do nothing for down ticket Dems, or is he this master fundraising host?

[MADem]

57. Yes, and he got that inside knowledge by going back, year after year,

to beautiful Martha's Vineyard in the heat of summer and luxury Palm Beach in the cold of winter!!

He didn't just do this ONCE. He did it many, many times. Why didn't he "sound the alarm" years ago? Perhaps the benefits he accrued outweighed the "distaste" he might have once felt?

You know, after a while, you become PART of the problem. He is--and has been for years--an establishment player, a party insider.

He isn't just some schmuck--he's a HOST (I never said THE host--but he is A host--not simply an 'attendee' or 'speaker') at these shindigs. He's raking it in, hand over fist, moving the money through the DSCC to avoid the Wall Street Stank, and if he really thinks that's not "OK" he should not do it.

Just because they don't put the money right in his hand, that doesn't improve the situation--that makes it worse. Why? Because he knows where the cash came from--even though his supporters might not. He knows he is getting benefit from chatting up Wall Street, the MIC, etc., and it's disingenuous to insist otherwise.

[Lordquinton]

58. So which is it?

Not doing anything to support dems, or doing too much? Is he too right or too left?

You're making me dizzy with all this spinning!

[MADem]

59. Well, Clinton's husband, and by extension SECSTATE HRC, got excoriated for "supporting Dems."

Bill Clinton is a big reason that we as a party are competitive at all. We used to get beaten at the money game all the time--he brought us into the big leagues, and we've had the WH for nearly sixteen years since (and if you count the fact that Gore was robbed, that's even more compelling).

But Sanders has told his supporters that he doesn't take Wall Street money, that it's 'bad,' and 'wrong,' and 'waahwaahwaaah superpac!' But, as we see, he takes DSCC money, and DSCC money IS Wall Street money. Further, he is deeply entrenched in RAISING that money.

From any angle--he has been busted. "Do as I say, not as I do." He points the finger at others for doing the same thing that he, himself, does.

To be polite, that is disingenuous.

And there's nothing "dizzying" or "spinning" about watching someone say "Don't do that!" while they do the very same thing--it is, quite simply, hypocrisy.

[Lordquinton]

60. So he does help fundraise for dems

OK, glad we cleared that up.

Now, is he too left, or too right?

[MADem]

61. Yes, he is a member of the Democratic Party ESTABLISHMENT--and he has been for YEARS.

He didn't tell his supporters the truth about that, and now he's been caught out. He positioned himself as an outsider, when actually, he is more up in the system than a lot of players on the Hill.

This isn't about "left" or "right." It's about that system he rails against to you, but, when you're not looking, he's helping--in a big way, too--to perpetuate.

[Lordquinton]

62. Which is why he's so keen to change it

he knows what elected officials have to do in order to get elected, and he is trying to change it. His presidential campaign isn't relying on those donations, and he isn't relying on any superpac funded by the financial sector.

I'd hardly call what he did "In a big way" he was a name on the card to help the party - our party- in events that were organized by the fundraising committee. He was there as a big name, and you're making him out to be some mastermind arranging a funnel from wall street to his pocket, which could not be further from the truth.

The main thing this article does is destroy the popular line from the Hillary campaign that Bernie does nothing to help other dems get elected (Which, by the way, was in defense of Hillary and her thousand dollar a plate fundraisers).

You should focus on something real, not something that demolishes your other arguments.

And is he some libertarian dream, or a far left unicorn? I can't tell what you're trying to pint him as since it shifts so often.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

18. I love mind readers

Sanders has for years been doing info exchanges with everyday people.

That is what we need - not paid canned crap

[MADem]

19. Do you fail to notice my use of the word "IF?"

I wasn't mind reading, I was using the 'conditional.'

My points stand.

[SoLeftIAmRight]

20. It depends on what you mean by IF

...

[MADem]

33. No it doesn't. nt

[A Simple Game]

39. If'when he quits the Senate? I don't think our Presidents can do speeches for pay either. n/t

[MADem]

40. He couldn't do it as Secretary of Labor, either.

But if (there's that IF) he decided to depart the Hill, he could cash in with a book, and probably get a hefty seven figure advance, at a minimum.

And I'll bet he could command healthy speaking fees, too--at least for the first three or four years. Then, depending on his profile, his price would go up or down.

[merrily]

6. $1,867.42 for three speeches that he donated to charity? Which rock did he crawl out from under?

[roguevalley]

10. lol! his first impulse is always to others hence the

Donation. Rock hard integrity

[merrily]

11. I cannot abide conduct that slimey.

For me, this is the hair that healed the camel's back! I'm out.

[roguevalley]

12. bwahahahaha!

[MADem]

16. He HAS to give that money away--ethics rules. Enforced integrity, if you will.

There are limits on 'outside income' and doing things like making appearances for direct cash payments.

Others have gotten in trouble for doing this while an elected official. Sample: https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1955&dat=19900302&id=HPkhAAAAIBAJ&sjid=zKIFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1116,742948&hl=en

It's less apparent if the cash is kited through a third party. That's the way it's done under CU.

[questionseverything]

28. third party like a foundation

[MADem]

30. No. Like the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee.

The money Clinton has made hasn't gone to any foundation--it's in a bank account, waiting for the day she might need it in a general campaign, if the GOP starts throwing everything they have at her. They don't "do" stocks and bonds, or have any complicated investments--they catch enough shit without them. A lot of Republicans are furious that they don't "invest" because it would make it easier to pin accusations on them.

If she doesn't make it to the general, the foundation will probably see that cash. Most of the money they have made from books and appearances does go to that effort, otherwise.

If it goes to the Clinton Foundation (and I assume that's what you meant), she can't get it back. That's an international entity. Besides, why have them hold the cash when a bank will do?

[questionseverything]

31. thousand ways to take a brbibe

http://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/jul/30/hillary-clinton-ubs-tax-evasion-settlement-foundation

Hillary Clinton’s overlap of private and political activities was once again in the spotlight on Thursday after a Wall Street Journal report that since Clinton helped broker a settlement in a legal tax case against UBS while she was secretary of state, the Swiss bank has increased its financial support and involvement in Clinton Foundation projects.

In February 2009, the IRS sued UBS and demanded that it disclose the names of 52,000 possible American tax evaders with secret Swiss bank accounts. In the months that followed – thanks to involvement of Clinton as secretary of state and Swiss lawmakers – a legal settlement was negotiated. On 19 August 2009, it was announced that UBS would pay no fine and would provide the IRS with information about 4,450 accounts within a year.

Since the deal was struck, disclosures by the foundation and the bank show the donations by UBS to the Clinton Foundation growing “from less than $60,000 through 2008 to a cumulative total of about $600,000 by the end of 2014”, according to the Wall Street Journal.

The bank also teamed up with the foundation on the Clinton Economic Opportunity Initiative, creating a pilot entrepreneur program through which UBS offered $32m in loans to businesses, the newspaper reported. Other UBS donations to the Clinton Foundation include a $350,000 donation from June 2011 and a $100,000 donation for a charity golf tournament.

Additionally, UBS paid more than $1.5m in speaking fees to Bill Clinton between 2001 and 2014, the newspaper reported.

[MADem]

34. I will agree with you on that score.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/

...The Vermont senator and presidential candidate is a prolific fundraiser himself and has regularly benefited from the Democratic Party apparatus.

In recent years, Sanders has been billed as one of the hosts for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's retreats for the "Majority Trust" -- an elite group of top donors who give more than $30,000 per year -- at Martha's Vineyard in the summer and Palm Beach, Florida, in the winter. CNN has obtained invitations that listed Sanders as a host for at least one Majority Trust event in each year since 2011....donors who have either contributed the annual legal maximum of $33,400 to the DSCC, raised more than $100,000 for the party or both.

Sanders has based his presidential campaign on a fire-and-brimstone critique of a broken campaign finance system -- and of Hillary Clinton for her reliance on big-dollar Wall Street donors. But Sanders is part of that system, and has helped Democrats court many of the same donors....A Democratic lobbyist and donor who has attended the retreats told CNN that about 25% of the attendees there represent the financial sector -- and that Sanders and his wife, Jane, are always present.

"At each of the events all the senators speak. And I don't recall him ever giving a speech attacking us," the donor said. "While progressive, his remarks were always in the mainstream of what you hear from senators." ...

[questionseverything]

35. the horrors...we is trying to help get dem senators elected

i have no problem with bernie supporting the democratic senators he caucuses with

and the dscc decides whom to invite, not bernie

the important thing is when it comes to his own presidential campaign he is creating a whole new way of funding, small donations from regular people

and so far,it is working

[MADem]

36. Well, I am asking for clarity and I certainly got it.

Clinton is trying to get a Democratic former Senator and Secretary of State elected, too.

Bernie is one of the HOSTS of that shindig. If he didn't want someone there, they wouldn't be there. He's a driver--not a passenger. And certainly not a victim.

The important thing, to my view, is that he does it too. He has been doing it for years. He is a member of the party establishment, raking in the coin with the rest of the crew. He goes down to Palm Beach in the frigid winter, and to the Vineyard in the hot summer, and he dances with the ones who have the money. He gives them a speech, he rubs shoulders with them, and he brings home the bacon.

And then he has breakfast with a nice rasher on the side!

In 2006, when Sanders ran for the Senate, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee pumped $37,300 into his race and included him in fundraising efforts for the party's Senate candidates.

The party also spent $60,000 on ads for Sanders, and contributed $100,000 to the Vermont Democratic Party ...Among the DSCC's top contributors that year: Goldman Sachs at $685,000, Citigroup at $326,000, Morgan Stanley at $260,000 and JPMorgan Chase & Co. at $207,000.

During that 2006 campaign, Sanders attended a fundraiser at the Cambridge, Massachusetts home of Abby Rockefeller -- a member of the same family whose wealth he had one proposed confiscating... Sanders was among the senators who met with Sen. Chuck Schumer's "Legacy Circle" donors who had given the legal maximum to the DSCC five years in a row or $500,000 over their lifetimes.

He paid dues to the DSCC, too, with his Progressive Voters of America political action committee cutting checks for $30,000 to the group during the 2014 election cycle.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/

He's definitely a party "insider." I'm betting a lot of people don't realize this.

[questionseverything]

37. i am amazed he is doing as well as he is without corrupt money

i didn't have a problem when obama decided not to do matching funds and i would of still supported bernie even if he took "evil" contributions

fighting fire with fire so to speak but bernie is a way better person than i am and AMAZINGLY he is making it work

the original link i gave you about the irs asking for info on 50,000 tax avoiders and hc getting them to settle for 5000 avoiders with a 1.5 mill "fee" to bill...that looks like the definition of quid pro quo to me...but again what do i know



poor siegleman rots in prison and he got notta,nothing,zilch

[MADem]

38. 25% of the attendees at his soirees and retreats over the years are from Wall Street.

I guess he only invites the "un-corruptable" ones? The hundred thousand dollar bundlers, the five hundred thousand lifetime donors, the 33K per annum crew, they're all like Caesar's wife, above reproach?



That's good to know!


But now we know WHY he talks about public financing, but he doesn't do it himself!

Pressed by MSNBC moderator Chuck Todd on why he hasn't accepted public financing in Thursday night's debate, Sanders said the system as it exists now is "a disaster" and "very antiquated" because it limits spending in early-voting primary states.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/

[MADem]

47. No, that's pretty factual, right there! nt

[John Poet]

48. That's almost an embarassing figure...

If Hillary's "worth" $675,000 ......


I guess they figured Bernie couldn't be bought, so they only covered (part of?) his travel expenses....

[merrily]

49. "Fee" is usually in different category from expenses. Either way, it's

not based on the quality of the speech or the speaker but on the fee set by the speaker.

Hillary's claim that the figure was set by the offeror was laughable. That was her minimum fee.

I believe Goldman Sachs was happy to pay it because they got a lot from Bill Clinton's administration and hope for a lot from Hillary's. It's not about her changing a vote. It's about the bent the Clintons bring to holding office.

[gyroscope]

7. Whoa that's a lot of vacuum pennies!

[nolabels]

25. I hope they don't do that penny for your thoughts thingy

I sent the campaign twenty thousand pennies in the last couple weeks, and that be would just way too much thinking

Never was much good at guessing #s, once i got the booby prize in second grade. The whole class had to guess individually how many seeds were in this small pumpkin the teacher brought to school. I guessed seventy-five and was only off by a couple of hundred

[Duval]

13. K&R!

How could he!!!

[avaistheone1]

14. Smelling salts....please!

[senz]

17. He's too clean! I can't stand it!

Great OP, UG.

[nyabingi]

21. I saw somewhere

that Bernie's net worth is just over $400,000 a year, which makes him one of (if not THE) poorest senator serving in Congress.

[demwing]

23. I KNEW IT

time to wake up from the dream

[Fearless]

24. Sounds like travel costs and hotel rooms to me

I'm fine with that.

[liberal_at_heart]

29. K&R

[ErikJ]

44. Brunch with Bernie!

Been listening to him for the past 7 yrs.

[PatrickforO]

51. Eighteen hundred sixty seven big ones!

Bernie is great.