Latest Breaking News

Hortensis

(58,785 posts)

84. Respectfully disagree, Pragmatic. Jane probably did understand

Mon Jan 8, 2018, 09:33 AM

Jan 2018

her legal vulnerability pretty well, and thus also his as a public figure.

But very importantly, Jane did not create this situation because she dishonestly claimed that Hillary and the party were corrupt. Jane's in trouble because of her own previous actions as president of Burlington College.

Hillary and the party have nothing to do with her legal troubles. And how we feel about indictment and damage to the party that Sanders briefly joined are also irrelevant to this case.

When headed by ethical people, the U.S. attorney's office has always been largely independent of political influence. That's how it was set up to be. Even now, under the Trump administration, that holds for most legal cases. We can't tell Van de Graaf or his boss to back off. Even Trump might have to find a way to fire two or three people to put it away. Not going to happen.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

242 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Grand jury empaneled in Burlington College case [View all] George II Jan 2018 OP

Interesting. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #1

Post removed Post removed Jan 2018 #2

Local journalism at its best! mcar Jan 2018 #3

Damn! Not a good development at all. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #4

Yep. There is little tolerance for "flaws" in candidates now. ehrnst Jan 2018 #13

Well in the future if a candidate is going to run basically being squeaky clean, than they PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #15

I understand she told him she didn't want him to run for POTUS ehrnst Jan 2018 #18

Yes, you're right. That certainly makes sense now that I think about it... NurseJackie Jan 2018 #19

... ehrnst Jan 2018 #20

I didn't know that. But this brings up an old lesson that she should PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #21

"I made it clear I didn't want him to run," ehrnst Jan 2018 #22

Welcome Back to DU! nt RandiFan1290 Jan 2018 #82

Respectfully disagree, Pragmatic. Jane probably did understand Hortensis Jan 2018 #84

+1000 (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #109

Thank you. Eliot Rosewater Jan 2018 #177

Excellent reply! Truthful. Accurate. Clearly stated! NurseJackie Jan 2018 #188

So she's guilty then eh? KPN Jan 2018 #72

Who said that? (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #86

Really? KPN Jan 2018 #110

Yes, really. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #111

You seem to have missed this post ehrnst Jan 2018 #117

No, I saw that yesterday. What's your point? KPN Jan 2018 #123

In the end the real question is whether her actions were legal or not. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #134

Did that GOP attorney "orchestrate" a federal judge to impanel a grand jury? ehrnst Jan 2018 #136

Yes. I've already addressed this in another post here. No lawsuit involved. KPN Jan 2018 #149

Again with the name calling. ehrnst Jan 2018 #156

My Oh MY Me. Jan 2018 #5

It is not a very complicated case so if they are reporting on it now then we should know soon what PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #6

Thanks Me. Jan 2018 #7

I think Grand Juries only meet once a week, and with the holidays it probably can take time. George II Jan 2018 #10

every dem who could be a frontrunner..... getagrip_already Jan 2018 #8

Who says this is a hit squad? murielm99 Jan 2018 #11

there is something there to be sure... getagrip_already Jan 2018 #24

Nonsense -- that's the same kind of "Hillary is guilty on Benghazi" whathehell Jan 2018 #29

He's not the subject of the Grand Jury George II Jan 2018 #33

But being a liberal/progressive, if his wife is guilty of anything he will be also by association groundloop Jan 2018 #63

It's his wife..Similar "gotcha" for the Bernie haters. n/t whathehell Jan 2018 #91

Not seeing how a grand jury is a "gotcha" ehrnst Jan 2018 #107

You win the internet for today. There will not be a response however. Eliot Rosewater Jan 2018 #178

It's the law shenmue Jan 2018 #148

It's the Sanders.. whathehell Jan 2018 #152

And "the emails!" that gripped the left. ehrnst Jan 2018 #87

This November. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #89

That's as sensible as saying the Benghazi Investigations whathehell Jan 2018 #26

Was there a grand jury convened for Benghazi? ehrnst Jan 2018 #90

Congressional Investigations... whathehell Jan 2018 #99

Evading the question. Must have hit a nerve. ehrnst Jan 2018 #108

Nice try, dear, but since prosecutorial "agendas" aren't unknown either, whathehell Jan 2018 #124

I see you have a lot of evidence to back up your claim. ehrnst Jan 2018 #161

LOL..You don't get it, do you? whathehell Jan 2018 #173

EXACTLY what the right is saying about Russia. Only us liberals care. Eliot Rosewater Jan 2018 #179

WhatTheHell, YOOOGE difference between congressional Hortensis Jan 2018 #116

Yep. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #121

Um, yeah, I know there's a difference, but guess what? whathehell Jan 2018 #131

True. All efforts of man fail of perfection because Hortensis Jan 2018 #143

Yes whathehell Jan 2018 #151

I wanted Warren, and then Sanders to be good choices. Hortensis Jan 2018 #158

For a great many of us, Sanders was a great candidate, but if you whathehell Jan 2018 #166

Another "I know you are but what am I?" evasion of an ehrnst Jan 2018 #162

Lol. I stepped aside. Hortensis Jan 2018 #169

Post removed Post removed Jan 2018 #172

Red herring GaryCnf Jan 2018 #32

Not really, they could have handed down sealed indictments like Mueller's GJ did with Manafort.... George II Jan 2018 #35

Do you have even the foggiest idea GaryCnf Jan 2018 #38

Oh, like Benghazi? KPN Jan 2018 #73

There was a grand Jury convened for the Benghazi charges? ehrnst Jan 2018 #92

Oh come on. This is based in the same old KPN Jan 2018 #112

You seem to want to avoid talking about the difference between a grand jury and ehrnst Jan 2018 #115

Why would I be worried about that? It's irrelevant to my point. KPN Jan 2018 #118

Because you keep desperately trying to avoid/change the point when asked.... ehrnst Jan 2018 #119

Thanks for the psychology lesson. KPN Jan 2018 #125

You're welcome ehrnst Jan 2018 #130

Oh my! KPN Jan 2018 #132

Post removed Post removed Jan 2018 #139

Funny. KPN Jan 2018 #150

You're welcome. (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #155

No, I think what's going on, is that we're not all salivating at the idea whathehell Jan 2018 #138

I think perhaps you are projecting ehrnst Jan 2018 #140

I think, perhaps, you are.. whathehell Jan 2018 #157

"I know you are but what am I?" ehrnst Jan 2018 #159

It's more like grand hypocrisy being exposed. nt R B Garr Jan 2018 #213

Exactly...I'll never understand the hatred of Bernie whathehell Jan 2018 #135

By the federal judge that empaneled the grand jury? ehrnst Jan 2018 #141

Who said anything about a federal judge hating Bernie? KPN Jan 2018 #146

Only the judge didn't "empanel" a Grand Jury. Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #183

That's what the witness being questioned said, though. Jeff Weaver interjected R B Garr Jan 2018 #211

If nothing else, it's subjective. KPN Jan 2018 #144

..and it''s not the sentiment of the majority, imo whathehell Jan 2018 #147

The existence of a grand jury is not subjective. ehrnst Jan 2018 #160

No, neither is the existence of the earth. KPN Jan 2018 #185

If you think long time liberals, democratic party supporters who have spent blood, sweat, tears Eliot Rosewater Jan 2018 #180

Ummm ... since you chimed in, allow me. KPN Jan 2018 #224

Few ... really? KPN Jan 2018 #225

Not Exactly Me. Jan 2018 #12

Sanders hasn't been subject to the same negative treatment as Democratic frontrunners ehrnst Jan 2018 #16

that was because... getagrip_already Jan 2018 #23

correct Skittles Jan 2018 #25

Plain as the nose on one's face BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #194

Excellent point, ehrnst. Cha Jan 2018 #67

No it's not melman Jan 2018 #68

I second that. KPN Jan 2018 #75

Yes it is ehrnst Jan 2018 #85

Is. betsuni Jan 2018 #94

Yes it is ! stonecutter357 Jan 2018 #228

agreed....good point BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #195

.. Cha Jan 2018 #198

+1000 stonecutter357 Jan 2018 #227

.. Cha Jan 2018 #236

I'm going to reiterate my Cha Jan 2018 #69

And I'm going to reiterate melman's KPN Jan 2018 #76

Yes it is (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #88

you seem very desperate . stonecutter357 Jan 2018 #229

Why do you say that? KPN Jan 2018 #230

And I triple thumbs it up Eliot Rosewater Jan 2018 #181

.. Cha Jan 2018 #196

That sounds reasonable to me. NurseJackie Jan 2018 #70

Very reasonable.. Reality.. Cha Jan 2018 #77

Do you have any idea what you are talking about.? KPN Jan 2018 #74

Yes, I do have an idea of what I am talking about - as a Democratic Presidential Candidate ehrnst Jan 2018 #93

I've always known this to be true. You've been very clear... NurseJackie Jan 2018 #95

I see more anxiety than contempt in those posts. ehrnst Jan 2018 #98

Now that you mention it... YES!! :-D Like a long-tail cat in a room full of rocking chairs. NurseJackie Jan 2018 #103

LOL!!! (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #104

Hah! NastyRiffraff Jan 2018 #187

Your sight isn't very good then. Has nothing to do with anxiety. KPN Jan 2018 #113

Facts are facts, and no one is above the law. ehrnst Jan 2018 #120

Yes, facts are facts. KPN Jan 2018 #126

Well perhaps you have learned something about the justice system ehrnst Jan 2018 #127

Don't be silly. KPN Jan 2018 #129

True ehrnst Jan 2018 #133

OK. I'll address your point. KPN Jan 2018 #142

I think that your passion is getting in the way of answering why ehrnst Jan 2018 #145

Too silly. You can have the last word. KPN Jan 2018 #153

Better than continuing ehrnst Jan 2018 #154

This post didn't age well. VTDigger recanted the "empaneled" claim -it didn't happen. Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #205

So in other words... NastyRiffraff Jan 2018 #189

No. Was initiated politically. KPN Jan 2018 #201

The guys name is Brady Toensing. Son of Victoria Toensing and Joe DeGenova. Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #184

Thanks for the name and chiming in. KPN Jan 2018 #203

Wouldnt it be great if the Sanders used this opportunity R B Garr Jan 2018 #207

I've notice that almost every single reply you make has a snide insult BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #199

Probably true. I wasn't always this way, KPN Jan 2018 #204

The challenge, as I see it is to continue voicing your opinon while maintaining humanity. BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #206

Been there, done that ... for too long. KPN Jan 2018 #209

This is true. betsuni Jan 2018 #78

Exactly NastyRiffraff Jan 2018 #186

I believe this investigation started well before the trump admin took office. 7962 Jan 2018 #27

Thanks for the update. murielm99 Jan 2018 #9

That's very interesting. Looks like VT Digger is on it. NurseJackie Jan 2018 #14

Thanks for the update from the VT Digger. sheshe2 Jan 2018 #17

Post removed Post removed Jan 2018 #28

It doesn't say the grand jury was done in October. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #31

The grand jury sits for 18 months GaryCnf Jan 2018 #34

It seems wishful thinking on your part to think this case is over. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #37

OR it seems I've practiced in federal court GaryCnf Jan 2018 #43

Then you should know an investigation going for over a year and a half will use a grand jury from ti PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #45

*Crickets* lunamagica Jan 2018 #79

..... (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #97

It appears that the grand jury GaryCnf Jan 2018 #164

How do you know that? If you truly are a lawyer like you say you are, you would know PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #165

(!) "VTDigger pushing its right wing anti-Sanders agenda," Hortensis Jan 2018 #137

vtdigger is anything BUT "right wing". George II Jan 2018 #36

Yea, it's rated "leans left" GaryCnf Jan 2018 #41

Can you point out something they got wrong? PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #42

Other than the GaryCnf Jan 2018 #44

Can you point out something they have gotten wrong? PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #47

You got a simple answer GaryCnf Jan 2018 #53

So in other words you can't point to something they got wrong. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #54

Snore GaryCnf Jan 2018 #57

You would think a lawyer could make an argument. PragmaticDem Jan 2018 #59

Ha! You'd think! :-D NurseJackie Jan 2018 #96

LOL!!! (nt) ehrnst Jan 2018 #106

so what year did you pass the bar? snooper2 Jan 2018 #114

They report on events that occur in Vermont, and present the facts they come across. That... George II Jan 2018 #100

Reporting that there is a grand jury is a "smear?" ehrnst Jan 2018 #105

This message was self-deleted by its author ehrnst Jan 2018 #128

Why are you being so negative? George II Jan 2018 #48

No, that part is correct GaryCnf Jan 2018 #58

The Burlington Free Press has also reported on this: George II Jan 2018 #175

Wrong. Grand juries often only meet for a limited time each week, pnwmom Jan 2018 #46

Google law degrees GaryCnf Jan 2018 #55

I was on a GJ for 18 months. I suspect different localities have different practices, pnwmom Jan 2018 #61

Is that where you got yours too? OilemFirchen Jan 2018 #64

LOL... Okay. Stand and Fight Jan 2018 #49

I don't think VTDigger has a right wing anti-Sanders agenda. lapucelle Jan 2018 #51

News stories on Vermont's senator GaryCnf Jan 2018 #56

Exactly. Publishing accurate news stories of local interest lapucelle Jan 2018 #60

You should take your own advice about getting past the primaries. This FBI R B Garr Jan 2018 #210

VT Digger? Right wing? LOL. ehrnst Jan 2018 #102

If there's a trial, the timing could hardly be worse, with Bernie's Senate re-election in November. pnwmom Jan 2018 #30

They'd probably set it back, right? Anyway, he won by 71% Hortensis Jan 2018 #167

Wow. SunSeeker Jan 2018 #39

This will become a case zentrum Jan 2018 #40

He would be the first to deny being "one of our guys." Hortensis Jan 2018 #168

Don't you mean another case? KPN Jan 2018 #200

Yes. zentrum Jan 2018 #202

Thanks for the update George. Wwcd Jan 2018 #50

K&R betsuni Jan 2018 #52

K&R Gothmog Jan 2018 #62

K&R Jamaal510 Jan 2018 #65

Thank you, George Cha Jan 2018 #66

Thanks for the update, George. nt brer cat Jan 2018 #71

K&R. Thanks, George lunamagica Jan 2018 #80

Post removed Post removed Jan 2018 #81

"Do not oppose the DNC's pre-selected candidate" CONSPIRACY!!!!11111!!!!! betsuni Jan 2018 #83

Apparently, All Progressives Aren't That Pure dlk Jan 2018 #101

Many here on DU said that HRC used "very bad judgement" in doing something that ehrnst Jan 2018 #122

And no one yet has mentioned how this may affect family woodshop Mayoral aspirations? n/t BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #163

Sanders Family Disputes Report of Escalating Burlington College Probe Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #170

Oh, well that settles it then! NastyRiffraff Jan 2018 #191

Don't let the source updating (correcting) their story get in your way! Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #193

UPDATED: Grand jury takes sworn testimony in Burlington College case. January 8, 2017, at 6:58 a.m Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #171

Why is the distinction important? lapucelle Jan 2018 #208

This reply says it better than I can Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #212

Yes, lapucelle Jan 2018 #214

Why jump the gun on speculation Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #215

Given that there's a document headed "US Department of Justice, District of Vermont lapucelle Jan 2018 #216

Questioning ONE person that refused to talk to the FBI Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #217

Records and documents were subpoenaed by a grand jury lapucelle Jan 2018 #218

I'll wait for the official results Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #219

"different motivations" They state what the investigation is about. R B Garr Jan 2018 #220

So was Benghazi, a foundation, etc... Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #221

So nice to see the heartwarming understanding and sympatico with R B Garr Jan 2018 #223

I voted for Hillary Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #237

Great! So nice to see the concern for all the lies told about the Clintons. R B Garr Jan 2018 #238

Benghazi ! lol stonecutter357 Jan 2018 #231

I don't like Bernie very much but this investigation strikes me as bogus. StevieM Jan 2018 #174

They're NOT investigating Bernie Sanders, they're investigating the circumstances.. George II Jan 2018 #176

George why don't you update the title and story since the source did? Omaha Steve Jan 2018 #182

"The FBI is a partisan organization" NastyRiffraff Jan 2018 #190

Yeah, except I am saying it accurately while he is saying it inaccurately. StevieM Jan 2018 #192

Yes, that RW talking point isn't well masked. BoneyardDem Jan 2018 #197

Where have we heard that before? Right here one DU. Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #222

It's truly heartwarming to see this sudden about-face regarding the Clintons! R B Garr Jan 2018 #226

About face by whom? Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #235

I love this! I must be mistaken about all the scorn heaped on the Clintons, R B Garr Jan 2018 #239

. Hassin Bin Sober Jan 2018 #241

Oh, the same for you, absolutely. It's wonderful to see that the R B Garr Jan 2018 #242

K&R stonecutter357 Jan 2018 #232

To me this matters, because Jane Sanders supposedly was the tax preparer in her family LisaM Jan 2018 #233

Bazinga! My thought exactly. Thanks. George II Jan 2018 #234

Exactly! No more double standards, especially if criticism of others is the R B Garr Jan 2018 #240