Dirty Tricks? Bernie Sanders has no Pacs and has not approved of any Pacs.

[sabrina 1]

Last edited Sat Jul 4, 2015, 09:41 PM - Edit history (1)

I am editing this post to state that the headline of the article is where the problem is.

The pac has existed for a while and is for Progressive Candidates.

Why are we seeing false headlines to the contrary?

He is not associated with Pacs of any kind and has been clear that he has not approved of any pacs.

He has stated clearly that he does not like or want them.

So obviously someone is playing some dirty tricks here.

The next sentence was speculation on my part. The pac is legitimate, but is not Bernie's Pac as the headline implied so disregard that sentence, however I'm leaving it as that was the impression it created and was imo, intended to create.

Not hard to set up a pac then not follow the rules, THEN get your corporate buddies to finance some false reporting.

Donate ONLY to Bernie's Act Blue Account.

The following sentence still applies:

All pacs claiming to be for Bernie are NOT unless there is an official statement from the campaign!

[Rosa Luxemburg]

1. The campaign needs to scrutinize all funding

[sabrina 1]

5. The campaign has approved of ONLY one source of funding other than any fundraisers

that are endorsed by the campaign.

Bernie was asked about a pac that had claimed to be raising funds for his campaign.

He knew nothing about it and reiterated his dislike for them.

I am sure they are scrupulous about their funding.

He has no control over someone who starts a pac and then violates rules especially if that was its purpose.

His best bet is to refuse to accept any money from pacs.

Even his friends, BenCohen eg, has stated he has not started any fundraising for him though he has donated, not even the full permitted amount.

So I doubt there is much they can do to prevent something like this if they were not asked for approval.

[Agschmid]

19. No official announced candidate has control over their PAC.

Allegedly...

And it appears from the open source regularly posted here on DU that PAC's have donated/worked for his cause.

[wyldwolf]

2. Opensecrets.org says otherwise

https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00406553

Treasurer: FIERMONTE, F. PHILIP

He's a field director in the Sanders Campaign.

http://www.p2016.org/sanders/sandersorg.html

oops.

[sabrina 1]

8. Oops nothing, that pac was operating long before Sanders announced his candidacy.

And it is not just for him which that deceptive headline implied. I don't read anything that starts out with a lie.

Why not name all those who have received money from it?

Dirty tricks are dirty tricks, whether it was the pac itself of the reporting of it.

[Sheepshank]

37. Still, the PAC is associated directly with Bernie

The PACs chief financial dude...the person responding to the fine, the person responsible for forgetting to file the financial pepers....works for Bernies Campaign. There was nothing wrong with the headline, the two are affiliated.

This thread is simply diversionary and claims a lie on some other twisted aspect of the article. There was no lie in the original article or heading. It was absolutely correct.

[sadoldgirl]

3. Sorry, Sabrina,

PDA is a Pac and is working separately from Bernie's
campaign for his election. As far as I understand
Bernie does not want a super pac, which is quite
different from the much smaller Pacs.

The Pac mentioned Progressive Voters seems to
be a Pac for Congressional members to be used.
It is very small and therefore not much up to
snuff about all the Federal Regulations.

This is how I understand the situation.

[MADem]

4. PACS operate independently of candidates--it's not for candidates to like or dislike them.

That's CITIZENS UNITED for you....he can disavow all he wants, if people want to "tout" him they can band together and do that, and he can't do squat about it, save complain if he has a mind to so do.

It's not "dirty tricks." It's "Corporations are People" and "Free-dumb of Speech."

There's nothing illegal about what these PACS are doing--ask the Supreme Court if you don't believe me.

[sabrina 1]

6. I know that. So to say a pac is 'associated' with a candidate is not true.

That gives the impression that he approved of it, is working with them etc.

Now why would a pac that is supposedly 'associated' with Bernie Sanders violate any rules knowing how scrutinized they are going to be?

[MADem]

7. What's good for one candidate is good for ALL of them.....

Would that these admonitions were equally applied here, but they're not.

[sabrina 1]

9. Really? I disagree. Lies are never good for anyone. If a lie is told about any candidate, it should

be corrected. I don't post material that is deceptive about any of the candidates, so talk to whoever it is you have in mind.

Liars should be called out whether they are your favorite candidate or not.

What you are saying is that it's okay to lie in campaigns.

No, it is not.

[MADem]

11. Good grief. What I'm saying is don't lie about ANY candidate--how tough is that?

READ. You're obviously not doing that. Maybe start by looking up the word "admonitions."




Your post is a perfect example of what many complain about here....

[sabrina 1]

13. My post is about a deceptive headline. It was intentionally misleading at which point anyone is

entitled to correct it. Now I see just how deceptive it was since the pac is for Progressives and is a decent pac that has raised money for many Progressive candidates.

That doesn't excuse attempting to create a wrong impression about a candidate.

[MADem]

23. Your post was responding to MY post. Don't give me "deceptive headline." nt

[sabrina 1]

32. It was a deceptive headline. First it implied that the Pac itself was bad. Then it attempted to

connect a 'bad pac' to Bernie Sanders. It is neither a 'bad' pac, nor is it a Sanders pac.

Do you know anything about that pac?

[MADem]

39. You said "I disagree" in response to THIS comment:

What's good for one candidate is good for ALL of them.....

Would that these admonitions were equally applied here, but they're not.

I can't see why you would demand that one candidate be treated fairly, while another is not, and is routinely raked over the coals for the same "Citizen's United" business.

[zappaman]

41. Right again!

Nailed it!

[Sheepshank]

38. There was nothing wrong with the headline. Bernie and the PAC are affiliated.

I didn't see any implication that the PAC was bad...rather it made a reporting error for which it was fined

[zappaman]

22. Nailed it.

[sabrina 1]

33. Wrong again. Explain to me why you are supporting something that is an attack

on a whole lot of great Progressive Dems? Or do you even know that is what you are doing?

[sadoldgirl]

10. There is another fact

Let's say I were a billionar and I want VP Biden to win,even
though he detests this kind of support. He cannot stop me.
He is not allowed to be in contact with my super pac, and I
cannot use the money directly for his campaign. However,
I can use it for ads of any form, after giving it a name and
using that name in the ads.

These super pacs are supposed to contain mostly educational
materials, but that went out the door with Rove, and CU.

There is a fact that HRC as well as Jeb contacted their
super pacs before they declared. However the FEC is not
willing to lodge a complaint, because it is 3:3 partisan.

This is how I understand it at least.

[sabrina 1]

12. I'm objecting to a headline that says 'a pac associated with Bernie Sanders'. That is a

deceptive headline. I will edit my post as I see that the pac has been around for a while and apparently is for Progressive Candidates not just Bernie. Not a Super Pac however the headline I saw here implied that it was.

[madokie]

14. Not only deceptive but an outright lie

no two ways about it
It was a lie as it was worded in the post

[Enthusiast]

28. An outright lie!

No two ways about it!

Dirty tricks MFers!

[Sheepshank]

16. The head finance guy for the PAC works for Sanders campaign

There is a connection.

[sadoldgirl]

17. And HCR, before declaring was

clearly involved with her super pac and tried to
coordinate it with her campaign.

"There is a connection"!

[Sheepshank]

21. I don't understandthe purpose of your reply, " ....but your person did xxxx"

We are establishing that there is indeed a connection with this PAC and Sanders...and it's not as distant as some would like us to believe.

If this is truly the case, and clearly you seem to think its ok since you didn't bother to denounce it, then you should have no problem with any other candidate having a connection with their PAC.

You are trying to say it's ok for Bernie, but Hillary is guilty and therefore what she is doing is worse? Pretty flimsy defense imho

[sadoldgirl]

24. Before I reply, please. give me a credible

link that Bernie's financial advisor is really involved.
I have read a lot about this, but have not seen it
presented as an actual fact.

[Sheepshank]

25. Ok...here. From another thread here on DU today

This from the thread talking about the fine leveed agains the Bernie affiliate PAC


"The Burlington-based committee’s treasurer, Phil Fiermonte, a longtime Sanders aide and currently the field director for Sanders’ presidential campaign, received a letter from the FEC in December warning that the committee may have failed to file required...."

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20150704/THISJUSTIN/707049929

[sadoldgirl]

26. Okay, thank you for the link, and

just speaking for myself: H should be fired!

That is not up to me of course.

[Sheepshank]

27. Welcome

[sabrina 1]

31. Yes, and it is a good Progressive pac that raises money for Progressive Dems and existed long before

Bernie even thought about running for president. Why are you denigrating a pac that many DUers have donated to in the past to help support Democrats? Why would anyone do that?

This was a deceptive headline. Someone who decided to work for the campaign of a Democratic candidate and also works for a Progressive Pac, which raised money for many Progressives CONNECTS THE PAC TO EVERY Democrat they worked for.

Did they support Obama?

I notice you get that the Headline WAS deceptive, because you have changed the word that made the headline false.

Thanks for agreeing.

[Sheepshank]

34. I denigrated nothing.....you are pretty quick to jump to the judgement

you cannot deny a connection between Bernie and this PAC, and you cannot deny the hypocrisy of those that make the claim Hillary has connections with her PAC, while giving Bernie a pass.

You tried to turn your thread against the facts as presented in the post about the PAC to make it sound as if the whole thing was false. It was not. Your knee jerk reaction to a truth that doesn't paint Bernie with a glowing halo, made you post nonsense.

[bettyellen]

40. You're the one who denigrated the PAC w accusations of dirty tricks! Lol.

Last edited Sun Jul 5, 2015, 06:11 PM - Edit history (1)

Short memory? And now you blame others for agreeing it might be a bad thing?
Are you fucking serious?

[sadoldgirl]

15. I understand, and it should have

said " a pac advocating for Bernie Sanders", because all
of the advocate for one candidate or another.

I would not call the headline a lie, just a purposefully
implying of a possible connection.

[Sheepshank]

18. The other thread said "Sanders affiliated"

And...it WAS affiliated with Sanders the politician. I didn't read much into the connection in the first place realize the nature of PACs and what direct influence candidates don't really have over PACs for or against their campaigns.

[sabrina 1]

29. Bernie has no Super Pacs and he doesn't want or approve of them. That headline was intended

to imply otherwise. That is deception. Now it's been corrected and those who intend to lie about Bernie will find an army of his supporters ready to expose them

HE isn't going around lying about other candidates, and his supporters will make sure no one lies about him.

[Sheepshank]

35. Did you attempt to expose the real connection between Bernie and this PAC?

Of course you didn't. You'd rather hide the fact that the PACs chief financial officer responding to the fines and the reason for the fine, also works for Bernie's campaign.

[sabrina 1]

30. A lot of people do not read past the headline. I did not do so, and my impression was

that there was a pac set up to advocate for him. That turns out not to be true. That pac is for Progressive Candidates. Not set up especially for him. It already existed long before he ran for President.

Intentional deception = lie.

[BrotherIvan]

20. Bernie does not fundraise for pacs either

Those $2700 plates add up.

[PatrickforO]

36. Good point. According to Citizens United anyone can form a PAC.

Look at Colbert.

Unfortunately, those unknown people can put out whatever they want because 'hey, corporations are people too, my friend' and 'dollars are free speech.'

So let's not blame Bernie for egregious actions by PACS.