The Sanders Institute raised more than $361,000 last year from a total of 13 large contributions

[ehrnst]

More than a dozen high-dollar contributions funded Bernie Sanders’ policy institute the year before he launched his second presidential bid, including one donation totaling $100,000, according to tax forms filed this month with the Internal Revenue Service.

The Sanders Institute, a progressive think tank founded in 2017 by the Vermont senator’s wife, Jane Sanders, raised more than $361,000 last year from a total of 13 large contributions ranging from $5,000 to $100,000, the tax filing shows.

The institute's executive director, Jane Sanders’ son from a previous marriage, Dave Driscoll, provided a copy of the filing, which is subject to public inspection, and said that most of the high-dollar contributions came from organizations or family foundations and grants. Bernie and Jane Sanders also provided some of that funding, Driscoll said.

.....................................................

Driscoll declined to disclose further details, or identify the source of each contribution.

The group is in the process of suspending operations this month to avoid any possible financial conflicts of interest while Sanders competes for the Democratic nomination.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/bernie-sanders-institute-donations

[George II]

1. Almost one third of that was paid to Jane Sanders' son, David Driscoll.

[ehrnst]

3. Yep, his salary was $100,000 dollars a year. And very little original content was produced

by the Institute in at least the first year.

Under the organization’s “Research and Reports” section of its website, there are 18 posts, 16 of which are reposted from other sources, including from federal agencies and institute fellows. The remaining two posts are authored by Sanders Institute staffers. One is a breakdown of how citizens can contact their elected representatives; the text of the other — entitled A Freedom Budget For All Americans — is attributed to Wikipedia.

Driscoll defended the institution’s output.

“We have chosen our fellows to amplify their work, whether it is created by us, for us or done in their own professional capacities,” Driscoll said in an email. “We believe the content that we have produced on voting rights, budget parity, student loan debt, the federal jobs guarantee and the climate crisis, to name a few, have been significant in creating awareness and shifting the debate, therefore moving towards change.”

Driscoll declined to respond to further questions about what content he was referring to.

.........................

IRS documents lay out another bold goal of Jane Sanders’: writing a report on “eradicating poverty for the United Nations’ sustainable development goals stories initiative.” Driscoll said in an email that the UN report had been completed, but did not respond to VTDigger’s request for a copy of it. The report was not found in online searches, and a UN spokesperson didn’t respond to a request for the report.

https://vtdigger.org/2018/07/29/sanders-institute-little-show-first-year-500k/

[sheshe2]

6. All in the family. nt

[ehrnst]

9. Yep.

https://vtdigger.org/2017/06/13/one-family-two-schools-questions-swirl-around-another-sanders-deal/

[George II]

20. ...

[sheshe2]

22. Yep.

Sigh.

[grantcart]

77. At the time I spent hours trying to find out more about Driscoll

I couldn't find out anything about his education and any post graduate work, something that every other "think tank" Executive would have with a history of peer review published material.

All I could find out is that his previous employment was at a small shop that sold snow boards.

[betsuni]

2. Interesting.

Thanks for posting!

[sheshe2]

4. holy shit!

[Hoyt]

5. Warren and Sanders apparently think no one will find out.

[ehrnst]

8. Does Warren have an Institute?

Or a dark money PAC?

https://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/will-the-revolution-be-monetized-bernie-sanders-dark-money-org/Content?oid=27314628

Not familiar with them.

[Hoyt]

12. She's had some funky campaign contributions in the past, even though

she acts like she’s not like other candidates.

She’s also caved to medical device manufacturers, a big business in Massachusetts. And her criticism of Obama over global trade, not to mention her “economic patriotism” junk, helped give us trump. Folks are catching up with her and Sanders, at least I hope.

[ehrnst]

14. Warren "helped give us Trump?"

Not sure that I could draw a line straight from her to Russian interference, rampant misogyny on the right and left, voter suppression of Democrats in the three key states where HRC lost by a sliver, the statistical improbability of a party holding the WH for more than two consecutive terms, bigotry ginned up by 8 years of a black man living in the White House.

I call false equivalency.

[Hoyt]

31. When she criticized Obama -- and Clinton by association -- right up until November 2016 election

over trade agreements, just like trump was doing . . . . . . Yeah, she helped defeat Clinton. Sorry.

[ehrnst]

32. So if Warren hadn't criticized Obama, it would have been a major deciding factor in Hillary winning?

Last edited Wed Dec 25, 2019, 11:30 AM - Edit history (2)

[Hoyt]

34. Gotta admit, it didn't help, especially with Sanders joining in with same misguided criticism.

[ehrnst]

39. But that's not what you said - you said her criticizing Obama was a major factor in Trump winning.

Dialing that back now?

[dansolo]

41. "Major factor" was your wording, not theirs

The other poster said "helped Trump". Why are you misrepresenting what they said in order to attack them, instead of addressing the point being made? You are downplaying the impact that the attacks from the left made on Hillary's campaign.

[ehrnst]

42. No, I'm refuting the massive impact that the poster put on Elizabeth Warren's

words on Trump's victory.

Nice of you to jump in to assist Hoyt, but here it is again.

Hoyt wrote:

And her criticism of Obama over global trade, not to mention her “economic patriotism” junk, helped give us trump.

My response:

Warren "helped give us Trump?"

Not sure that I could draw a line straight from her to Russian interference, rampant misogyny on the right and left, voter suppression of Democrats in the three key states where HRC lost by a sliver, the statistical improbability of a party holding the WH for more than two consecutive terms, bigotry ginned up by 8 years of a black man living in the White House. I call false equivalency.

Then Hoyt doubled down::

When she criticized Obama -- and Clinton by association -- right up until November 2016 election

over trade agreements, just like trump was doing . . . . . . Yeah, she helped defeat Clinton.

When I called Hoyt out on how that sounded like he was saying she was a "major factor," Hoyt didn't cry foul or refute... Hoyt simply backpedaled when shown just how extreme Hoyt was being in their accusations of Warren's blame:

Gotta admit, it didn't help, especially with Sanders joining in with same misguided criticism.

And no, I never downplayed anything that was really harmful coming from the left - just the extreme blame by Hoyt attributed to Warren, who, unlike other self-described progressives, actually, unreluctantly, fully and full throatedly supported HRC from the time of her nomination.

Because of that support Warren threw behind HRC, she was and is still being dismissed - and often attacked- as a "corporatist" and "Wall Street sellout" by self-described leftists for not getting on board with Sanders instead from the beginning of his run, by many who swore up and down that misogyny didn't play any part in their bashing Hillary because they would TOTALLY support Warren if she was running.

Lumping in Warren with Sanders in that aspect is what is really misguided.

When you show me a photos, or any evidence of similar enthusiastic support by Sanders for HRC, like these, then you can maybe you and Hoyt can make the case that they "hurt HRC" or "gave us Trump" in a similar way.








Is that clearer?

[karynnj]

47. Hillary Clinton herself came out against TPP - so, how can you say she came out against HRC

on that. (disclaimer - I think HRC should have continued to be for TPP, saying that their are some changes she as President would want to make it better. )

[Hoyt]

49. Thanks to the misrepresentations from folks like Warren, Sanders, etc.

Heck, misinformed Warren was saying Obama wouldn’t release the final agreement until 5 years after enactment, even though law required its release months before vote and it was already available to anyone who took the time to look.

Agree with your Disclaimer, though.

[karynnj]

52. I think both Warren and Sanders were expressing their honest opinions

On many issues, Warren impressed me a lot - especially on her genuine fight against corruption and the work she did on the consumer bureau. I "chose" Warren for a few months earlier this year after reading what was supposed to be a position paper on trade, where she did not seem completely against trade deals. One reason I became undecided again, was that she seemed to move back to the left on this and because she initially insisted that we had to go immediately to MFA -- which would never pass Congress. Her current position - ignoring messaging - is no different than that of Biden, Klobuchar, Mayor Pete etc.

Lost in the noise is the fight against corruption. In fact, the nonsense of the attacks on others raising money to fight the primaries, made her look hypocritical - on an issue where she is likely very sincere. The problem is the NEED to raise huge sums to have a chance to run for President. She, as a Senator with $10 million in her Senate campaign account, can take a high road not available to others.

In a way, THAT seemed to a limited degree like what troubled me about HRC when she went from being for TPP in 2013 and 2014 (including in her Goldman Sachs speeches - when she was NOT in the Obama administration, then changing to being against it. The 2 arguments from her team - that when she was for it, it was as a team player in the Obama administration and that the terms became worse are simply not true and not believable. As a Democrat, I was still going to vote in the 2016 general election- and vote for her. What it did though was to further decrease my opinion of her.

With Warren, that stupid brouhaha unfortunately hits at one of her major strengths - her honesty, integrity and the genuineness of her fight against corruption. As the primaries go on, I might return to actively supporting Warren - No candidate is ever going to be what anyone thinks is perfect. (A 30 year younger John Kerry - with all his accomplishments as SoS might come close, but is not possible.)

[Hoyt]

54. I get it, but her anti-global trade and so-called "economic patriotism" is too close to an ideology

that considers poor foreign workers -- like Mexicans and Asians -- as scabs. Not my thing.

I agree about Kerry. He would have been wonderful, and Clinton too.

[Demsrule86]

83. Sorry hold the 'honest opinions' until after an election...there is not doubt that this shit helped

elect Trump.

As for the TPP...this from Huffington Post...

"In last night’s debate among Democratic presidential candidates, moderator Anderson Cooper criticized Hillary Clinton’s opposition to the recently concluded “Trans-Pacific Partnership” (TPP) as mere “political expediency.” Along with her opposition to the massive new trade deal, Cooper mentioned a few other issues on which Clinton’s views have supposedly “evolved” over the last few decades and asked, “Will you say anything to get elected?”

Clinton’s response was cool and collected. She reminded Cooper that the TPP negotiations were only concluded earlier this month, and stated that the negotiated deal “didn’t meet [her] standards.” When she was Secretary of State, she had hoped that the TPP would represent the “gold standard” in new trade deals, as she expressed in a speech in 2012. But as anyone who has studied these trade deals knows, the devil is in the details — and Clinton was not in charge of the final talks that produced the details of the TPP. Now that Clinton knows what was negotiated, she has decided she doesn’t support the agreement. As she explained, “I want to make sure that I can look into the eyes of any middle-class American and say, ‘this will help raise your wages.’ And I concluded I could not.”

[karynnj]

84. The changes made to TPP made it MORE, not less progressive

Clinton was NEVER in charge of the agreement -- not just the final deal. That is not the job of the Secretary of State. (If it was, do you honestly think that John Kerry, life long environmentalist, would have called for less than Clinton, who really does not hold a candle to Kerry on that issue? ) Obama added protections for worker rights and environmental agreements.

Your excerpt does not prove anything. Do you honestly think any politician would answer - yeah, it was all political. Also note that I said that she could have agreed with TPP, but argued that she would insist on changes. This would have avoided attacks on both sides.

Also, had she ONLY spoken in 2012, you could give her a pass as it is normal within an administration to support the administration's goals. She also praised the deal in those Goldman Sachs talks in 2013 and 2014 - and did not criticize it. Her position changed during the primaries. (I defended Clinton to Republicans who argued that the transcripts that Wikileaks put out from Podesta's email did NOT show her saying one thing behind closed doors and another to voters. Her position changed a year of so after those talks.)

It was not mostly what Sanders or Warren said during the primary, it was what CLINTON said in the primaries versus what was said in 2013 and 2014 that hurt. For one, the emails revived the issue that she gave those talks, which though both legal and lucrative were a political liability and SHE KNEW SHE WOULD RUN FOR PRESIDENT. In addition, when praise of TPP at the talks came out - many people saw it as saying 2 things to 2 audiences. It was her change that caused that rather rude question - and she answered it as well as she could.

[Demsrule86]

89. It was a bad agreement...and allowed slave owning countries to participate...Hillary was correct.

[karynnj]

92. That is your opinion

My opinion is that trade is global whether we like it or not. Companies can and will contract to make items in low wage countries. In fact, in some industries it would be near impossible to compete doing otherwise.

One example is clothing, especially things like women's dresses. If you go to any department store that still exists and look at the tags, you will not easily find a dress that is not made somewhere like Sri Lanka, Vietnam etc. The US dress companies all use foreign made material and production of the dresses.

There have been only two ways that the foreign plants have been pushed to provide better conditions for workers. One is that a trade deal can demand a minimum.

The other is when customers, who here of bad conditions in places making clothes for specific manufacturers, boycott that brand. In the 1990s, long before TPP, such a campaign did have an impact - both on the actions of the targeted companies and others, who wanted to avoid ever being targeted. One result was that (I think an NGO) wrote a list of promises that a plant could sign - and by inspected for compliance that many US companies required their suppliers to comply with.

Because my husband worked in IT for a dress manufacturer and our daughter did a study abroad for her world religions undergrad degree, we actually saw the factory their supplier ran when we visited Sri Lanka as our daughter's study was finishing. My husband had mentioned that we were going to go when he met him in NYC and the owner invited us for dinner and a tour.

As we entered the building, we saw a plaque in English and Sinhalese that listed the values they had agreed to. Our daughter, as part of her studies had learned basic Sinhalese. There also was a list of companies that they manufactured dresses for. I have no idea whether complying with the standards changed their conditions or how they treated their employees.

The factory had very high ceilings, was extremely white and clean and surprisingly calm and quiet. It was interesting to see the assembly line. The factory had the patterns laid out as they were to be cut on huge sheets that were printed out on special printers. The NYC office created the pattern and determined how to efficiently cut the pattern correctly. The factory placed the pattern on something like 30 layers of cloth - all positioned per directions to get the pattern correct - and were cut by a tool moved remotely following the pattern.

The pieces were then distributed to stations on the assembly line. The assembly line had more people for more time consuming tasks, so as we watched things moved smoothly. At the end - and when someone on the line called them over earlier - there were quality control people who could reject problem pieces. We were told there was a group of more skilled workers who fixed most of the rejected dresses.

While knowing that we saw what they wanted us to see, this was not the Triangle Shirtwaste Factory, Sri Lanka version. Sri Lanka was in the midst of a civil war and their economy was depressed. These were likely considered good jobs.

As to TPP, the pact did have consistency plans that countries - like Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei had to meet BEFORE they could enter the agreement. This was similar to what the Obama administration did earlier with the Peru, Columbia and Panama agreements. As this article suggests that was based on the lack of ability to enforce agreements once the trade agreements were in place. The article faults TPP for not having a Mexico plan, but the difference was that Mexico was already in NAFTA, which TPP was to replace. https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/01/tpp-mexico-labor-rights/426501/

[Demsrule86]

93. Any agreement that allows slave owing countries to participate is a bad one period...and no one

should support it...but that being said we need to tear up those agreements and start over because they don't benefit us in terms of jobs...you want to fix income equality that would be a start.

[Demsrule86]

94. I would also add...any Democrat who goes to MI, WI and PA ...any rust belt state

and pushes for more trade agreements is dead in the water...I have long believed that one of the most important reasons that Warren can't win the Mid West is her stance on trade...she wants to level the playing field abroad by raising wages, adding environmental rules for foreign workers and their companies. These agreements are never enforced anyway. Trade agreements as practiced now screw our working people and lose good paying jobs in this country. General Motors closed four plants this year...and went to Mexico-paid no taxes either A big no thanks to more trade agreements that are completely worthless.

[karynnj]

96. It is not the trade deals, but globalization itself that has led to loss of jobs in the rust belt

In fact, before many auto jobs went to places like Mexico, they went to the non unionized southern states. The problem now is that a huge part of the labor market has become globalized. Now, it is not just manufacturing, but many white collar jobs, including high skill ones - anything from telephone customer service to programming to accounting.

The problem HRC had was that she had already been on record - and not just during her SoS days as in favor of the deal. She had a choice - support what she obviously had believed in, which might have helped her on the character questions by standing up and explaining why a trade deal was to our advantage - it was the center point, crown jewel of her whole turn to Asia, which was her biggest SoS accomplishment or follow say she was against TPP. She chose the latter, but people thought both Bernie and Trump(!) more sincere.

[Demsrule86]

97. Globalization is the excuse for not protecting American workers...you could do both...compete

in a global market and protect workers as does Germany, France and Canada for example....again any candidate that promises more of the same in terms of free trade is dead in the water in the Mid West...and we need to find a better way IMHO than worthless trade agreements that are never enforced for our competitors

[ehrnst]

106. Automation is responsible for half those job losses.

[Me.]

79. PLease Don't Change The Subject

This is not about E. Warren. She doesn't have a foundation nor does she funnel big money to her children.

And by the way, this is not the first time the Driscoll kids have been handed big paychecks. Her daughter was paid huge bucks...I think...$500,000. for a woodworking class from a college that went bankrupt due to Jane's mismanagement.

[sheshe2]

7. Kick

[Cha]

10. We want "Transparency", Driscoll! Not a good look for

ya'll to be grousing about Wine Caves..

BS Surrogate Shaun King on EW and the Wine Bottles

Link to tweet

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287391153

Driscoll declined to disclose further details, or identify the source of each contribution.

Thank you, ehrnst

[ehrnst]

11. The cries of "look over there" often have a less pure purpose than shedding light on

wrongdoing on the part of someone else.

It's often to distract or diminish one's own similar or identical "misdeeds."

Pre-emptive whataboutery.

[Cha]

16. Exactly! "Pre-emptive Whatabout"!

[myohmy2]

13. old news...

"The group is in the process of suspending operations this month to avoid any possible financial conflicts of interest while Sanders competes for the Democratic nomination."

...lot's of people raise money for lot's of different things...does this have anything to do Bernie's campaign or support?...guilt through association?


...new news...

...no bite, no fight, just hugs and kisses on Christmas Eve...

[sheshe2]

19. In the process?

myohmy2
13. old news...

"The group is in the process of suspending operations this month to avoid any possible financial conflicts of interest while Sanders competes for the Democratic nomination."

They said they did it in March. Was that not true?


PRESS RELEASE: Sanders Institute Stops Accepting Donations and Suspends Operations During 2020 Presidential Election

Burlington, Vermont (March 14, 2019) - The Sanders Institute is no longer soliciting or accepting donations and is winding down operations in light of Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign. According to David Driscoll, the Institute’s Co-Founder and Executive Director, the organization has taken these actions to avoid confusion or even the misperception of any overlap between the organization and the campaign.

snip

The Board of Directors of the Sanders Institute passed a resolution on February 28thsupporting the Executive Director’s recommendationto suspend operations, to cease donations and to fulfill all existing financial, legal and programmatic obligations over a period of transition. Driscoll said he decided to recommend the pause in operations to the Board because “continuing our active role in policy development may create the false impression that the Institute is part of the campaign.”

https://www.sandersinstitute.com/resources/press-releases/press-release-sanders-institute-stops-accepting-donations-and-suspends-operations-during-2020-presidential-election?fbclid=IwAR2IoIOutNInh7-cM88xpHmmpVei1zP7uO6H5_AtogoRzQpeyVj7t7OIPrk

I am unclear what is true. They suspended in March according to their statement. You state they are in the process in 12/19.
Which statement is true?

[karynnj]

48. They need to file various tax documents

The document put out in the OP is obviously one.

I would guess what they did in March was to stop soliciting and accepting donations, stopped planning or scheduling events, stopped enlisting new fellows. I know little about non-profit think tanks. The statement says " to fulfill all existing financial, legal and programmatic obligations over a period of transition." I would guess this means if they made someone a fellow and gave them a grant to produce some product - ie a position paper, they would honor the offer and there might be actions they need to take - even as they are proceeding in closing the Sanders Institute.

[Cha]

23. NOPE.. Current NEWS!

[ehrnst]

33. ...so that makes all that fundraising and family benefit OK...

[div class="excerpt"...]lot's of people raise money for lot's of different things...

...does Bernie state that about anyone else courting very large donations?...

...and goodness me, you've really done a 180 about POTUS candidates' past high dollar fundraising "for years" since this post...

"Warren embraced the high-dollar fundraiser circuit for years"

...the pot calling the kettle black...

...

...guilt through association?...



...or perhaps you always see certain cast iron "pots" as lilly white even as they rant about the color of kettles....


..."old news?"...

..you mean like, "...he released the aid to September so him witholding it is old news, so what he did before that doesn't matter now"....

...not being able to rebut yet another revelation that Sanders has done some of the very same things to raise money that he and his fans have been railing about about being unacceptable on the part of any other candidate must have really been deeply upsetting...

...relax....take a break from the news...it'll be much more comforting on this special day...

..no. bite, no fight, just hugs and kisses on Christmas Day...

[myohmy2]

56. spin it...

...twist it, rearrange it any way you want...

...here are the FACTS that even Biden first-responders can't deny,

...shifting, shuffling and dancing is not going to change anything or make a difference...

...voting will commence shortly and we'll see who voters believe is the most honest, the most upright, with the best vision for themselves, the Democratic Party and America...

...my money's on Bernie, I think your money should be on Bernie too...

...together, we can do it...

[ehrnst]

59. ..."Biden first responders...

...talk about twisting..




....looks like the "shifting, shuffling and dancing" is on your part...

...relax... not good for your blood pressure...you seem worried that the facts will sink Bernie...

...yes, indeed voting will commence shortly and we'll see who Democratic voters believe is the most honest, the most upright, with the best vision for themselves, the Democratic Party and America... like we have before...

...you'll be OK when he doesn't get the nomination...

...I have confidence in you...

...chin up!...together you'll get through it...just don't put too much money on it...

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

69. Oh, they'll deny it alright... and that's no malarkey!!

My money's on Bernie too... he's been shining the light on progressive issues longer than most of his Democratic colleagues...




Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[ehrnst]

73. Speaking of "malarkey..."

Showing up on a thread simply to express outrage about repsonsible journalism that doesn't flatter one's favorite politician.

[George II]

55. This is awkward, one of the founding Fellows:

https://www.sandersinstitute.com/about/gabbard

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard

FELLOW

Tulsi Gabbard spent her life growing up in beautiful Hawai‘i. As a teenager, she co-founded an environmental non-profit called Healthy Hawai’i Coalition, focused on educating children about protecting Hawaii’s environment.

An advocate for environmental policy, Tulsi was elected to the Hawai‘i State Legislature in 2002 when she was just 21 years old, becoming the youngest person ever elected in the state. A year later, she joined the Hawai‘i Army National Guard to serve Hawai‘i and our country. In 2004, Tulsi volunteered to deploy with her fellow soldiers, becoming the first state official to voluntarily step down from public office to serve in a war zone.

Tulsi served two tours of duty in the Middle East, and she continues her service as a Major in the Army National Guard. Tulsi’s 2005 deployment was a 12-month tour at Logistical Support Area Anaconda in Iraq, where she served in a field medical unit as a specialist with a 29th Support Battalion medical company. She was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal at the end of this tour.

In between her two tours, Tulsi served in the U.S. Senate as a legislative aide to Senator Daniel Akaka (D-HI), where she advised him on energy independence, homeland security, the environment, and veteran issues. While working for Senator Akaka in 2007, Tulsi graduated from the Accelerated Officer Candidate School at the Alabama Military Academy, where she was the first woman to finish as the distinguished honor graduate in the Academy's 50-year history. Tulsi was commissioned as a Second Lieutenant and again assigned to the 29th Brigade Special Troops Battalion of the Hawaii Army National Guard—this time to serve as the Military Police Platoon Leader.

Tulsi continued to work for Senator Akaka until 2009, when she again voluntarily deployed with her unit to the Middle East. During this second deployment, in addition to leading her platoon on a wide variety of security missions, she also conducted non-military host-nation visits and served as a primary trainer for the Kuwait National Guard. Tulsi was one of the first women to set foot inside a Kuwait military facility and became the first woman to ever be awarded and honored by the Kuwait National Guard for her work in their training and readiness program.

In 2010, Tulsi was elected to the Honolulu City Council, serving as Chair of the Safety, Economic Development, and Government Affairs Committee and Vice Chair of the Budget Committee. In 2011, she visited Indonesia as part of a peacekeeping training with the Indonesian Army. Tulsi was elected in 2012 to the United States House of Representatives, serving Hawaii’s 2nd District. She is one of the first two female combat veterans to ever serve in the U.S. Congress, and also its first Hindu member.

Now in her second term in Congress, Tulsi brings with her a broad range of real world experience, a storehouse of personal strength, and tested leadership as she represents the people of Hawai’i and our nation in Congress. As she works on the challenges that face our country, she remains focused on bringing her pragmatic approach to working in a collaborative, bipartisan fashion to find real solutions that best serve the people. Tulsi serves on the House Armed Services Committee and House Foreign Affairs Committee where she is a strong advocate for veterans, our service members, and making smart strategic decisions that best secure our nation. Tulsi is working every day to make sure we have a sustainable economy that works for all families, with access to affordable health care, good jobs, and a quality education.

[myohmy2]

58. so...

...people change...

...some even for the better...

[ehrnst]

60. ...but only if they learn from their mistakes...

...politicians who think that they never make mistakes don't see much reason to learn from new information, have issues working well with other like minded politicians, and therefore don't accomplish as much for their causes as they might if they were more self aware...

...even after decades as a career politician....

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

75. Since when is that a reason not to bash Bernie?! Under the "Bernie Standard"...

anything and everything is fair game, regardless of how irresponsible.


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[Tiggeroshii]

15. Oo. Reaching

[ehrnst]

17. Oo. Severe discomfort upon hearing facts doesn't mean that someone stating the facts is "reaching."

Perhaps you want to take it up with the author of the article if her reporting is inaccurate.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/author/rubycramer

Let us know what she says.

Or maybe you can just cut right to the chase, and tell us what part of the article is "reaching," and how that is differs from your discomfort with the facts relayed in the article concerning the fundraising practices of the Sanders Institute.

[Cha]

21. Zing! "..reaching.."

seems to be a thing/meme.. I've seen it before when there was No "reaching" done.

[sheshe2]

18. Please explain. nt

[Tiggeroshii]

27. Non profits are not political campaigns.

And the implication that he is somehow hypocritical because he has a non profit is even more hilarious.

[ehrnst]

35. Well...The Clinton Foundation is a non-profit as well.

Last edited Wed Dec 25, 2019, 10:32 PM - Edit history (1)

Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vermont, said he is concerned by the millions of dollars flowing into the Clinton Foundation at a time when he thinks money plays too strong a role in politics.

“It tells me what is a very serious problem,” Sanders said in an interview with ABC News’ Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl. “It's not just about Hillary Clinton or Bill Clinton. It is about a political system today that is dominated by big money.
.....................................

“So do I have concerns about the Clinton Foundation and that money? I do.”
..........................................................................

“I am one of the exceptions," he said. "I am not going to start a super PAC. I’m not going to go around the country talking to millionaires. Now I'm saving my time because they wouldn't give me any money anyhow and that's fine."

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/senator-bernie-sanders-calls-hillary-clinton-foundation-money/story?id=30687863

You're upset because you think that the article in the OP is implying false hippocrisy on the part of Senator Sanders?

[Tiggeroshii]

44. .

Merry Christmas!!!!!

[ehrnst]

67. Thought you wouldn't have a rebuttal to that.

[Tiggeroshii]

68. I will tomorrow.

But today, Merry Christmas!!!

[ehrnst]

70. I look forward to it.

Merry Christmas!

[ehrnst]

91. How was your Christmas?

Waiting for the promised rebuttal.

[Tiggeroshii]

98. You're right. You win no rebuttal.

Dont be mad at me.

Christmas was good! But dang I am exhausted. Yours?

[ehrnst]

99. Pretty damn good, thanks.

Relatives finally stopped sending parcels, and donated to charities in my name instead.

[Tiggeroshii]

101. Love it!!

[betsuni]

50. +1

[sheshe2]

76. +

[Skidmore]

95. Yup.

Funny how some don't even blush at spouting hypocritical BS.

[OldRed2450]

24. They said they suspended operations in March but...Still active in April.

https://www.sandersinstitute.com/resources/press-releases

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

38. I wonder if David Driscoll was still getting a paycheck at that time. (nt)

[ehrnst]

81. I find nothing on their website about operations being currently suspended. David Driscoll and one

other person are listed as staff.

[Gothmog]

25. This is amusing

I love purity tests that are ignored ny the person pushing such test

[BannonsLiver]

86. Otherwise known as hypocrisy

[Gothmog]

88. From the Hoarse Whisperer

Link to tweet

[mudstump]

26. I thought speaking negatively about candidates were forbidden on this site?

[Cha]

28. It's called Vetting in the Primaries.

And, it's news.

[ehrnst]

64. Attacks on responsible journalism are really getting thick, and not just from Trump supporters.

[ehrnst]

37. Bashing and sharing facts that make some uncomfortable are very different things...

Last edited Wed Dec 25, 2019, 12:22 PM - Edit history (2)

Facts are facts, even when they are uncomforatable for some, and that's not bashing.

So I noticed you're "undecided" for a POTUS candidate this time around.

May I ask why?

[mudstump]

45. If the same post were about Hillary it would have been taken down by now.

I have had a couple of comments deleted for this very same thing.

I have decided exactly who I will vote for in the primary. I will vote for the nominee in the general...just like I did last time around.

[ehrnst]

62. So, you aren't 'undecided' after all.

Why do you feel the need to keep it secret?

You seem to have some lingering issues about Hillary Clinton and DU.

Is that why?

[betsuni]

53. Not if it's true.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

71. You do realize this is about Bernie, right?!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[ehrnst]

72. Yes, facts and reporting about Bernie. Good, responsible journalism

concerning Senator Sanders.

I understand that's distressing for certain supporters.

Facts are facts, however, and journalists have a duty to report the facts on all candidates, no exceptions.

[Me.]

80. Truth Isn't Forbiden

[lutherj]

29. Wow. Almost half a million bucks! Talk about serious corruption! Puts Trump to shame!

Guess I better toe the line and support the Patriarchy. Whew!! Glad you set me straight.

Man! That was a close call. Hey, what’s the low down on Warren? Want to make sure I got my DU PC ducks in order. Thanks!

[nini]

30. Lol

Facts don’t amuse I see.

[ehrnst]

36. Whataboutery for the win!

[rzemanfl]

40. Bookmarking. n/t

[ehrnst]

74. Good choice. (nt)

[George II]

46. So I guess it's not the act itself, it's the magnitude of the act....

So what's the level we should be concerned about - half a million? One million? Ten million?

[Cha]

57. WINE CAVE!!!!!

[ehrnst]

61. Serving wine in a cave. At a winery where there's a cave. THAT's the dealbreaker, apparently. (nt)

Last edited Wed Dec 25, 2019, 09:51 PM - Edit history (1)

[Cha]

66. Sez them..

Mele Kalikimaka, ehrnst

[ehrnst]

65. Watch out for those moving goalposts. They're zipping around the field now.

One could get run over...

[NYMinute]

43. Shameless nt

[alittlelark]

51. ........so.....13 groups or people each gave $27K......OMG !!!!!

27K OMG !!!
.
.
.
.
.
I am not a Sanders supporter - but I gotta say this is a VERY high bar.

Reeks of hatred and bile.

We r better than this.

[ehrnst]

63. Facts "reek?" You think that the journalist has 'hatred and bile" because she reported

on the Sanders Institute in a way that didn't flatter him? And documented the source of the information contained in the article?

Can you point out where the "hatred and bile" is in the text of the article?

[Me.]

78. So What Do They Do With The Money They Raise?

[R B Garr]

82. Thanks for exposing this hypocrisy yet again.

Why don’t the Sanders get more questions about the cushy $100,000/yr job Jane’s son got. The hypocrisy being how they attack others for much less...

[ehrnst]

104. You make a very interesting point. (nt)

[BannonsLiver]

85. Hypocrite. What a surprise.

[Cha]

90. Shocking actually..

[Scurrilous]

87. ...

[ehrnst]

100. ...

[Scurrilous]

102. ...

[TidalWave46]

103. Dark money organization funneling money to family, maintaining political email lists,

and maintaining future Presidential campaign staff.

Is his base now starting to understand the con job?

[Gothmog]

105. More dark money is flowing towards sanders

Link to tweet