Yet another demand from the FEC for information from the Sanders Campaign.

[George II]

He has already received four or five letters totaling about 750 pages of questionable or inaccurate of impermissible contributions and disbursements.

This latest one was issued yesterday, and it's a whopping 645 pages!


http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/847/201605100300045847/201605100300045847.pdf

[onehandle]

1. The Trump and Sanders campaigns aren't very transparent, are they? nt

[puffy socks]

2. Whoa!

It will be conveniently ignored by the Bernie Sanders crowd
OR they'll make up a new conspiracy theory on how the establishment is in it for Hillary!

[NurseJackie]

3. Wow! If they're having this much trouble with compliance ...

... it certainly doesn't bode well as an indicator of how Bernie would do running an entire country.

Do they feel the rules don't apply to them? Or are they in over their heads?

Were they not prepared? Or do they just not care?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but they're fair questions that deserve to be answered. Obviously the FEC feels that the questions deserve to be answered too.

Whatever the correct answer may be, the fact that the questions are being repeatedly asked doesn't reflect very well on the candidate's ability to choose responsible and capable individuals, or his ability to delegate and take charge, or his ability to prioritize and accept responsibility, or his ability to quickly address and resolve problems.

[George II]

5. I didn't even notice this the first time I read it, this is a request for additional information...

....for their MARCH Amended Report, not their April report!

[NurseJackie]

6. Would the FEC consider this to be neglegence or incompetence? And ...

... is the Sanders campaign breaking any laws by not responding?

I don't know the details of such things, that's why I'm asking. It seems logical that there would be some penalty (either criminal or fines) for non-compliance.

The FEC is enforcing actual LAWS, right? These aren't just "optional guidelines and suggestions" that campaigns are permitted to ignore because they're inconvenient, right?

The FEC's authority isn't based on some "honor system" among campaigns or the fear of being "publicly shamed" for willful non-compliance, right?

From my perspective (and I could be wrong) it appears that Bernie's campaign isn't taking this matter as seriously as does the FEC.

[George II]

20. Perhaps both, but this isn't something to be ignored or laughed away.....

....Just looking at the first three contributors (more than five pages alone), each of them have exceeded the $2700 limit:

Abdelmeguid, Ahmed $12,604.05 (9 contributions)
Abramowitz, Jeremy $4,536.86 (125 contributions!)
Abramowitz, Nancy $3,013.66 (26 contributions)

This also shows how the Sanders campaigns can boast that his average contribution is $27.00, he just gets his contributors to donate $27.00 100 times or more.

This just scratches the surface, there are about 640 more pages of similar stuff.

I have been a treasurer for about 10 campaigns, and one of the cardinal rules is that if you're not sure that a contribution is legal or withing the limits, you don't cash the check until you're sure it it okay. Even cashing it could be prosecuted.

The FEC or state agencies (to whom I submitted my reports) will overlook a few errors, but certainly not 50,000 of them.

[NurseJackie]

21. Who would the FEC hold to be criminally responsible? The donor or the recipient?

How are these things generally resolved? (With a fine? Or by reimbursing the donor? Or both?)

And what happens if the money has already been spent? What if the campaign doesn't have enough on-hand funds to actually refund the donor for their illegal contribution?

Then what?

[George II]

22. See above, I just added to my post, but to answer your question - the treasurer and the candidate...

....are responsible for making sure the contributions are legal and within the limits.

[scscholar]

27. Or, how about holding the FEC responsible...

for not putting a stop to this sooner. That's their job. They have one job, but they didn't do it.

[Iliyah]

4. Also it seems like neither T-rump and BS want to

disclose their years of taxes.

[AgingAmerican]

7. Freaking out over a 'Monthly report'

Every campaign submits one every month.

Too funny!

[George II]

8. It's not simply a "monthly report", it's 650 pages of impermissible contributions and expenditures.

[AgingAmerican]

10. Oooooo! 650 pages!

lol like the Starr Report!

[bahrbearian]

11. 650 pages is that more than 30,000 e-mails?

[George II]

17. It's more than 22,000 questionable, impermissible, or even illegal contributions that have been....

....accepted by the Sanders campaign.

Add to that the 750 pages he's already received, it comes to about 50,000 total.

This isn't just a few mistakes, this is "YUUUUUGE".

[Jitter65]

9. Can you imagine the threads here if this were Hillary's campaign? nt

[bahrbearian]

12. Get back to Us when its the FBI asking for interviews.

[George II]

14. Has nothing to do with campaign finances. Start your own thread please....

.... (although there are plenty already to choose from)

[misterhighwasted]

15. Why is bernie's campaign the ONLY ONE with FEC problems

No one else but campaign bernie has the mess of finances he has.
Who donated the $10 million mystery money?
FEC asked for that explaination months ago

Ignoring ithe FEC won'make them go away.

[WhiteTara]

13. Don't worry. Jane does all the books.

[Sheepshank]

16. I suppose $27 doesn't buy a decent accountant anymore

...not when Devine must be paid first and foremost, then of course there is Weaver, the family on the payroll and ads, gotta outspend Hillary on those state ads.

[seabeyond]

18. Ah George, Sanders doesn't have to follow any rules or laws. He is special, dontcha know. Nt

[mcar]

19. That doesn't seem very honest

[Cali_Democrat]

23. K&R

[NurseJackie]

24. It appears that they are accepting FOREIGN contributions. That's ILLEGAL right?

Or am I mistaken?

[George II]

25. It is illegal. And if they accept contributions from Americans with foreign addresses, they....

....are required to DOCUMENT it in advance, not wait for the FEC to ask for it.

[silvershadow]

26. Probably figured while they were investigating Hillary's blatant FEC violations when she

Hired a whole bunch of staffers and built out a headquarters, not filing the paperwork timely, colluding, all while continuing her $250,000.00-a-pop "speaking tour" (wink, wink) to Wall Street- (the transcripts of which, if released, would end her campaign within 24 hours)- they would go ahead and tidy up some clerical issues, none of which rise to the level of Clinton's violations. Non-issue, non-story, just another in a string of such "stories".

[George II]

28. False.

[Vinca]

29. Better FEC than FBI.

[pat_k]

31. A single problem, easily remedied.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1944280