HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » FEC releases damning 639 ...

Wed May 11, 2016, 11:33 PM

FEC releases damning 639 pages of violations by Bernie Sanders campaign May10

tsk tsk

FEC releases damning 639 pages of violations by Bernie Sanders campaign
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/5/11/1525428/-FEC-releases-damning-639-pages-of-violations-by-Bernie-Sanders-campaign



By Brysynner



Wednesday May 11, 2016 ∑ 11:10 AM CST



The Federal Elections Commission
released a letter [May 10, 2016] to the Bernie Sanders campaign detailing campaign finance issues they have with his campaign with the latest forms Bernie 2016 filed. Now to be fair to Bernie, his campaign has refunded some of the people who donated more than $2,700 back in December and January, however there have been no listed refunds since then. To note this paperwork requires a response by 6/14/16 which just happens to be the day of the final primary so IF Bernie responds it will be as DC is filling out the last votes of the primary.

Some highlights include:
............
......................

........

.............Now the fun part comes from pages 595 through 638 which are all foreign donations to the campaign and.................


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

Just so everyoneís aware this is not just a problem with Bernieís March filings, he also had a problem back with his February filing as well.
In February he had a 264 page attachment with all his campaigns illegal donations received. That attachment has pages 1-241 have illegal donations over $2,700 that were not refunded and pages 241-263 of illegal donations and again the last page was money returned without an itemized reason.

By the way these are problems that Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump do not have at all. This is a uniquely Bernie Sanders problem, one that brings questions about his understanding of campaign finance laws, his teamís understanding of those same laws and whether or not there is a knowing plan to deceive the FEC in order to raise funds. This is why a Bernie Sanders campaign is dangerous because he and his team are making such rookie mistakes that it brings into question things that should not be questions. How can Bernie rally against Wall Street when it is clear he and his team have no clue how to follow existing laws. How can Bernie complain about money in politics when itís obvious he and his team have no clue how to follow those existing laws. Or is Bernie saying money in politics, through any means necessary, is good for him but not for anyone else which is a similar stance from his campaign on superdelegates. Also while Bernie complains about what the Hillary Victory Fund and SuperPACs do with their money, he is actively violating campaign finance laws and the only question that remains here is is he doing it willing, is a member of his team doing it willingly and which person will fall on the sword when it comes time to answer questions about how much fraud is going on in the Bernie 2016 campaign...............

64 replies, 2044 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 64 replies Author Time Post
Reply FEC releases damning 639 pages of violations by Bernie Sanders campaign May10 (Original post)
riversedge May 2016 OP
TM99 May 2016 #1
fasttense May 2016 #36
George II May 2016 #63
George II May 2016 #56
Fawke Em May 2016 #2
George II May 2016 #60
TheBlackAdder May 2016 #3
oasis May 2016 #4
Logical May 2016 #7
DURHAM D May 2016 #5
pat_k May 2016 #6
FourScore May 2016 #50
Silver_Witch May 2016 #8
NurseJackie May 2016 #9
NCTraveler May 2016 #12
NurseJackie May 2016 #13
NCTraveler May 2016 #15
NurseJackie May 2016 #17
leveymg May 2016 #37
George II May 2016 #62
timmymoff May 2016 #64
George II May 2016 #58
NCTraveler May 2016 #59
George II May 2016 #61
hellofromreddit May 2016 #21
NurseJackie May 2016 #23
hellofromreddit May 2016 #33
NurseJackie May 2016 #35
hellofromreddit May 2016 #48
NurseJackie May 2016 #49
hellofromreddit May 2016 #51
NurseJackie May 2016 #52
hellofromreddit May 2016 #53
NurseJackie May 2016 #54
hellofromreddit May 2016 #55
George II May 2016 #57
TCJ70 May 2016 #22
NCTraveler May 2016 #10
SidDithers May 2016 #11
B Calm May 2016 #14
hobbit709 May 2016 #16
NCTraveler May 2016 #18
phleshdef May 2016 #19
NurseJackie May 2016 #24
phleshdef May 2016 #25
NurseJackie May 2016 #26
phleshdef May 2016 #27
NurseJackie May 2016 #28
phleshdef May 2016 #30
NurseJackie May 2016 #31
phleshdef May 2016 #32
NurseJackie May 2016 #34
phleshdef May 2016 #39
NurseJackie May 2016 #40
phleshdef May 2016 #41
NurseJackie May 2016 #43
phleshdef May 2016 #44
NurseJackie May 2016 #45
phleshdef May 2016 #46
NurseJackie May 2016 #47
LaydeeBug May 2016 #20
dchill May 2016 #29
UglyGreed May 2016 #38
workinclasszero May 2016 #42

Response to riversedge (Original post)


Response to TM99 (Reply #1)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:26 AM

36. Yes it really is easier all around to accept donations from 1 or 2 corporations

 

Then to let we the people fund your campaign. It's a kin to having to pay doubled medicare and Social Security if you are self employed. It's done to discourage the practice of accepting small donations or being self employed. The rich have rigged the system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to fasttense (Reply #36)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:20 AM

63. That story is getting old - you should know that it's illegal for corporations to contribute to....

....political campaigns.

If it's true, can you come up with a single example? Just one? Eh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TM99 (Reply #1)

Fri May 13, 2016, 09:56 AM

56. ActBlue's system is automated and computerized, they don't make mistakes. No, it's because...

....their "system" and/or people are incompetent.

The second contributor on the list, some guy named Jeremy Abramowitz, had 125 contributions totaling $4500, $1800 above the limit.

When I was a campaign treasurer, I set things up so that once a contributor reached the limit there was a flag that said so. It's not rocket science - it's ONE number, $2700. Simple!

Also, this whole fiasco belies Sanders' magnanimous claim "our campaign is finance by "SMALL" contributors" - well that whole story is unraveling more and more as they have to account for their contributions. $4500 is NOT a "small contributor", nor is it legal.

This was just one, Abramowitz' wife, Nancy, gave more than $4000, and there are hundreds of others that are over the limit.

The laws apply to EVERYONE, regardless of the candidate.

It seems that more and more we're seeing that the Sanders campaign and they way they operate and the way they gather money is extremely flawed, whether by accident or intentional.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 11:41 PM

2. This happens when you receive millions of small donations.

They'll pay it back and fix their records. As the poster said above, Bernie's campaign is unique in the way it fund-raises and it's testing the traditional FEC requirements in its shear volume. Bernie once gave back a meager donation from an underage supporter when he was mayor. He'll set it right - it's who he is.

Meanwhile, we may never know what Russian hackers saw in our former Secretary of State's email server.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fawke Em (Reply #2)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:10 AM

60. No, that's not true. This is what happens when you don't do things properly....

And, it's not "testing the traditional FEC requirements" - those requirements are simple - don't accept any contributions above $2700 from a single person, don't accept foreign contributions. It's the responsibility of the campaign to keep track of their own finances and sources of money. You're acting like it's the FEC's responsibility to do it for them.

And just what does that last snarky comment have to do with Sanders' incompetent record keeping?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Wed May 11, 2016, 11:45 PM

3. How many copycat OPs are allowed in one day? Others have claimed the attention of this hyperbolic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:03 AM

4. Bernie continues to disappoint.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oasis (Reply #4)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:06 AM

7. Lol, yet has better favorables than hill!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:05 AM

5. He thinks the FEC is establishment so naturally he

ignores the rules.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:05 AM

6. A single, common, problem -- one that is easily remedied.

There is a single problem cited. People who gave many small donations that add up to more than limit.

"This happens all the time in campaigns, and the FECís rules explicitly allow 60-days from receipt of an over-the-limit contribution for campaigns to remedy the excessive portion of the contribution," Briggs wrote.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/02/26/bernie-sanders-campaign-contributions/80999298/

The problem will be remedied, just as was the same problem in previous months.

With so many donations coming in by multiple avenues, it is unsurprising. If Hillary only took small donations, she's have the same problem. Because he has so many small donations, his monthly reports are close to 20,000 pages. Clinton only need to keep track of a fraction of that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pat_k (Reply #6)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:27 AM

50. Exactly. Trying to make a scandal where there is none. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 12:11 AM

8. Who gives a shit......the common man has limits and the wealthy do as they please?

 

PACs can donate as much as they like - us people, the regular ones can only donate $2,700. Koch's donate MILLIONS cause they use all sorts of crazy loop holes and PACS, but normal people NOPE...

Sorry I could give a rats ass about this shit and I think your gloating over it shows more about you than Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:52 AM

9. Has a CRIME been committed? Could ...

... someone be PROSECUTED for these violations? Is this serious enough to warrant FINES or PRISON if someone is found to be GUILTY?

Does the FEC have investigatory or prosecutorial powers ... or do they only recommend such actions to another agency?

How powerful is the FEC? Or is it a toothless organization?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #9)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:59 AM

12. The way they have ignored it for months shows complete negligence. Nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #12)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:04 AM

13. That sounds criminal to me ...

... but that's just my opinion, since I'm not a lawyer. It's likely that many other non lawyers have come to the same conclusion and that's not good news for Bernie.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #13)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:13 AM

15. I have seen it claimed here that Clinton is strong arming the FEC.

 

With that level of desperation it's clear this concerns them as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #15)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:24 AM

17. If I was supporting a candidate whose campaign was BREAKING THE LAW ...

... I think I'd be concerned as well. They have EVERY REASON to be concerned.

Either Bernie's campaign is FLAGRANTLY and WILLFULLY ignoring and disregarding the LAW, or, Bernie's campaign is SO over-their-heads and INCOMPETENT when it comes to COMPLYING with the law, or, they DON'T CARE any more.

After that, they're running out of excuses and justifications to choose from, and the ones I've already mentioned DO NOT look good for Bernie's campaign.

In my opinion, SOMEONE is going to be PROSECUTED. And I'll emphasize for clarity that this is just my opinion, since I'm not a lawyer.

But I wonder, when a campaign is found GUILTY of BREAKING THE LAW, who is it that pays the penalty? Is it the campaign treasurer? The candidate?

Obviously, you can't lock up the entire campaign staff, so the "buck-stops-here" philosophy must apply to SOMEONE... so I wonder who it is.

As the old saying goes ... the "shit's about to hit the fan."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #17)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:27 AM

37. You are, Nurse Jackie. But, these aren't felonies like the Section 793 violations of HRC.

As you say, the "shit's about to hit the fan," but your camp is the one that's about to be splattered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #37)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:18 AM

62. Which laws have been broken by Clinton or her campaign?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #13)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:21 AM

64. More criminal than national security and an e-mail scandal?

 

Doubt it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #12)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:06 AM

58. Negligence or simply disdain for the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #58)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:09 AM

59. The law is "establishment".

 

This is an anti-establishment revolution. Get with it.

Four individual users, twenty-five searches, eleven states, information downloaded.

Rules do not apply to them as rules are for establishment fascists.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #59)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:17 AM

61. A total of about six hours of "mistaken access"! Funny thing, the day after that happened....

...I started getting two or three emails a day from Sanders' campaign via DFA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #9)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:38 AM

21. Not a crime.

 

A campaign has limited options for preventing excessive donations. So then they have three options for what to do with the money: redirect to the party or charity or whatever, redesignate for another campaign by the same candidate, refund to the donor.

The long list included in the letter shows many negative amounts. Those are refunds to deal with excessive donations. It shows that the campaign is working on the problem. As long as they're working on it, there's no reason to prosecute them. I don't think it's a crime sat all to donate excessively, so those people wouldn't be prosecuted either.

The people posting this with "damning" titles are desperately trying to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #21)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:46 AM

23. Saying "oops, sorry...it'll never happen again" becomes meaningless when it keeps happening anyway.

It's pretty clear to me that they're not "working on it" at all if there are repeated violations like this. When a pattern is clearly visible, it's not "oops" any more.

It certainly suggests CRIMINAL behavior and DISREGARD for the law, or it could suggest INCOMPETENCY. One is only slightly better than the other, but neither are good news for someone who wants to run the entire country.

I'm less concerned about the "one-automatic-donation-too-many" folks and more concerned about the FOREIGN donors.

(These are my opinions. Other people may have different opinions but these are mine.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #23)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:17 AM

33. It's the same with foreign donations

 

The campaign has little to no ability to keep that from happening. All they can do is deal with it once it has happened.

Nobody's saying oops, this is just the order in which they have to deal with things. They doesn't become either nefarious or incompetent unless they refuse or fail to deal with the problem. The letter laid out a date for response and that date is still in the future.

Mischaracterizing it like you do doesn't make them the liars.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #33)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:24 AM

35. Obviously they're failing ... it keeps happening.

(So, you're suggesting that the FEC are liars?)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #35)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:22 AM

48. It's not the sort of thing you do once and it's over. It's a continuous issue to manage.

 

Like mowing the lawn. The grass growing back isn't evidence of failure. It's just normal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #48)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:29 AM

49. Analogy fail. Why doesn't Hillary's campaign have these problems?

The law is there to be complied with ... not as a mere "guideline" that can be ignored repeatedly. I'm sure it didn't become law with the notion of it being disregarded and ONLY complied with whenever someone notices and makes a stink about it.

Bernie's "gardeners" should be out there mowing the "lawn" every day, continuously, not allowing these weeds to keep popping up and grass to become overgrown.



(I did like the "lawn" analogy, though.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #49)

Thu May 12, 2016, 10:33 AM

51. The Sanders campaign is not ignoring the law.

 

The refunds shown in the tables in the letter from the FEC prove that much.

To answer your question, there is no evidence that she doesn't. Kinda obvious since you can't prove a negative. But that also means the lack of a complaint doesn't prove anything one way or another either, so it's a misleading question. The reason Sanders' campaign received this latest notice is apparent; Brock's group filed the complaint.

The sheer volume of donations the Sanders campaign receives makes it a difficult problem to manage, as was discussed way back in February, the last time people tried to blow this up into criminal activity. The campaign addressed the problem and met the deadline back then, so their intent is clearly proper. http://linkis.com/docquery.fec.gov/pdf/zMCqX

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #51)

Thu May 12, 2016, 11:20 AM

52. There's also no evidence that she does. Do you honestly think that the FEC is colluding with ...

... Hillary's campaign to hide similar violations of law? There's nothing misleading about that at all. It's reasonable to assume that the FEC would also cite Hillary's campaign (or any other campaign) for flagrant and repeated violations, yet they haven't. What can rational people conclude from that?

I haven't said that Hillary's campaign hasn't made mistakes, surely they have. But it's pretty clear that they run a much tighter ship compared to Bernie, and they're able to AVOID breaking the law before it happens. Bernie's campaign is clearly having a problem with that.

The sheer volume of donations the Sanders campaign receives makes it a difficult problem to manage, as was discussed way back in February, the last time people tried to blow this up into criminal activity.

And in all this time, they still haven't figured out how to be proactive and prevent these types of things before they happen? Wow.

The campaign addressed the problem and met the deadline back then, so their intent is clearly proper.

When caught red-handed with their hand in the cookie jar, what choice do they have? It's either that, or jail, or fines. Of course they're going to sheepishly put the cookie back. (Until the NEXT time they think they're clever enough to get away with it.)

But, based on the fact that these things keep happening, it's obvious to me that they have no "intent" on getting it under control. They'll just keep pushing the limits as much as they can and continually correcting their "accidental" mistakes after the fact.

If only speed-trap highway patrol officers were as repeatedly lenient as the FEC appears to be. After all, leniency encourages strict compliance with the law. The no-penalty "honor-system" works so well.

Happy Thursday!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #52)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:18 PM

53. It is not actually a crime to receive prohibited contributions. It's a crime to keep them.

 

As already explained, there is a grace period the campaign is allowed to deal with prohibited contributions, and the vast majority of contributions are legitimate (you'll note that the letter does not list millions of entries).

And in all this time, they still haven't figured out how to be proactive and prevent these types of things before they happen?

They do not need to and they probably just can't. No campaign is expected to control the actions of their donors and refunding prohibited donations has been normal for a very long time. You keep framing this as if the Sanders campaign is intentionally breaking the law and this situation is novel, but that's not actually the case. They are not the ones making the donations. All they can do is deal with those donations and all evidence available shows that they have been.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #53)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:33 PM

54. Letting the FEC do the campaign treasurer's work ...

... by proxy is lazy and they're not meeting their obligations. They're keeping everything, legal or not, until sometime else comes in and does their job for them? Outsourcing bookkeeping to the FEC? Wasting taxpayer money on something they should be doing themselves? That seems fraudulent to be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #54)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:38 PM

55. Nice goalpost move, but they are clearly doing their own bookkeeping as proven by the refunds.

 

Done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hellofromreddit (Reply #21)

Fri May 13, 2016, 10:04 AM

57. Yes, a campaign has "limited options for preventing excessive donations" - actually one option.....

....STOP ACCEPTING donations when the contributor reaches the legal limit! It's simple.

They're not keeping track of their revenue on the back of an envelope - hopefully they're using one of the many sophisticated software packages available (remember, this IS a $139M campaign!) that are relatively inexpensive.

Just the cost of a fraction of that trip to Rome would have paid for software that would prevent tens of thousands of impermissible and/or illegal contributions.

With all the letters Sanders has received now from the FEC, the list of questionable (to be nice....) contributions is now about 50,000.

It's not like this is a surprise to the Sanders campaign, this is the fourth or fifth letter from the FEC, going back 5 months now. You'd think after the first, or even the second, they'd be a lot more careful about their record keeping, but as each letter goes out the lists get longer and longer - first was about 95 pages, second was 150 pages, then over 200 pages, now up to 650 pages!

There are NO excuses or rationalizations that can logically explain these major screw-ups.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #9)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:39 AM

22. Wow...this must be totally new information you've never seen before!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:57 AM

10. They have known about this for months and have ignored it.

 

Money trumps all. Weaver has won the battle of control over Sanders and now Sanders owns this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 06:59 AM

11. Rules don't apply to revolutions...nt

Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:08 AM

14. Predatory Capitalists have a problem with Bernie. .

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:16 AM

16. for you

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:28 AM

18. #berniemath nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:29 AM

19. Theres nothing damning about it. Its to be expected when you are the greatest fundraiser in history.

 

And by greatest, I mean the most individual contributions ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #19)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:57 AM

24. They've had MONTHS to address the issues and prevent them from happening... yet it continues.

They've had MONTHS to correct the violations of law that have already happened... yet they haven't.

The excuse that they were "surprised" or "caught off-guard" can only buy his campaign a limited amount of goodwill and leniency.

At this late date, and with the repeated violations of law, and the obvious disregard and unwillingness to do anything about it ... well ... it's pretty clear that there's something MORE going on that meets the eye.

Its to be expected when you are the greatest fundraiser in history.

That excuse really doesn't cut it any more.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #24)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:59 AM

25. Nope. Its a giant nothing burger which will be sorted out.

 

No one actually cares about it. Though I know you love to pretend to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #25)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:04 AM

26. I see you're worried and hoping it will go away... and I don't blame you.

You know ... if something like this was happening that showed Hillary's campaign of being incompetent, or of willfully violating campaign finance laws ... well ... I know I'd be as nervous as you guys are.

And, just like you guys, I'd be posting dismissive "nothing burger" replies as well ... in the vain hopes that it would all just go away.

I get it ... it's actually pretty embarrassing, isn't it? I almost feel sorry for you guys.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #26)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:06 AM

27. I'm about as concerned about it as I am Hillary's email server bullshit.

 

...which is not concerned at all, whatsoever. I'm fair and objective like that. You should try it sometime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #27)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:10 AM

28. I see you're also self-conscious about appearing to be worried. That's fine. I get it.

And I don't fault you for that one single bit. It's just human nature. We're all humans here. Appearances count. No worries, I'm not judging you personally. It's all about the incompetence of Bernie's campaign to follow campaign finance laws, not you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #28)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:12 AM

30. LOL. Consider your attempt to be condescending to me completely no sold.

 

And its not incompetence. A fraction within a fraction of Sander's donations have come up as presenting an issue. I'm not even stretching the truth one bit. Its literally next to nothing. 99% of his massive pile of contributions are not a problem. But you are too pig headed to give his campaign credit for that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #30)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:14 AM

31. I understand how you feel ... it can't be easy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #31)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:15 AM

32. I feel just fine and its very easy.

 

However, you are so desperate to get under my skin, I'll pretend that you are just to make you feel better about yourself. Obviously, you need the self esteem boost.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #32)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:21 AM

34. It's unclear why you want to make this about me ...

... oh wait, never mind ... now that I think about it, I see you want to attack me to distract from the embarrassing issue of Bernie's campaign and its violation of campaign finance laws.

Understandable.

Well, anyway ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #34)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:29 AM

39. Um, you've spent every single response trying to make it about me.

 

The cognitive dissonance on your part is embarrassing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #39)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:36 AM

40. Don't worry ... I get it. No need to defend how you feel when someone criticizes Bernie.

Based on what I've seen here, whenever Bernie or his campaign is criticized, many of Bernie's fans take it as a personal attack on themselves. In my opinion, these fans are the ones who appear to believe they have a "personal" or "emotional" connection or attachment with the candidate. As a result, any "attack" on their candidate results in an almost instinctive lashing-out at others (again, in my opinion.)

It's not nice, and some might describe it as being wrong ... but it's a "natural" response, and understandable when viewed in that context. I know you don't have anything against me personally, so I forgive you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #40)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:40 AM

41. I don't have an emotional connection to any candidate this cycle.

 

I supported Bernie. I'm fine with Hillary. I'll vote for her in November. That fact alone, which I've expressed many times on DU, is why you are coming off so ridiculous and petty right now.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #41)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:44 AM

43. As I said, it's not about me. But I understand your apparent desire to make it such ...

... and I still forgive you.

Wishing you much happiness and contentment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #43)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:47 AM

44. As I said, you tried to make it about me with your imaginary psychoanalysis of my feelings.

 

Now you realized you've stepped in it and have resorted to nonsense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #44)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:56 AM

45. Well, it's always been about Bernie's incompetent campaign & how it violates campaign finance laws.

You're the one who took this detour to try and distract from how poorly his campaign is being run. I could see that it was an emotional and personal thing to you and simply acknowledged your feelings as a courtesy and a gesture of sympathy and understanding.

But, I see that even that's not good enough and you now want to make THAT an issue as well.

I'm sorry you feel that way. There's not much I can do to reason with you if you're going to let emotional responses cloud the discussion. In spite of everything, I'm sure you're actually a nice person.

Once again, I wish you peace and happiness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NurseJackie (Reply #45)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:05 AM

46. You argue like a right winger. Total gibberish.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phleshdef (Reply #46)

Thu May 12, 2016, 09:16 AM

47. Again, I'm sorry you feel that way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 07:31 AM

20. It looks like he has his own investigation to worry about. 'Tis no matter

 

tick tock goes the clock and Bernie is done in four weeks no matter what. (I mean, he's *done* already, but his ass will be handed to him then).

See you at the convention!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:11 AM

29. What a YUUUGE waste of time!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:27 AM

38. Release the transcripts

Hillary, that is what truly leaders do, they LEAD BY EXAMPLE!!!!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riversedge (Original post)

Thu May 12, 2016, 08:43 AM

42. When are all the DU Bernie email truthers going to jump on this massive scandal?

 

I would guess...never.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread