Yep, it isn't the party it used to be. Probably why the head count is at a critical level.

She is of the opinion that ... "RULES DO NOT APPLY TO HER!"

But Hillary and her ilk, buddies and supporters sure do.

THAT is what we are fighting against.

called the New Dems.

They sure as shit ain't the old ones.

For that to be true a lot of people would have had to sign on to an illegal scheme.

While discussing the Sanders campaign’s allegation that Hillary Clinton and the DNC violated campaign finance laws, Mitchell said:

I’ve talked to as many experts as we could since this first evolved. PolitiFact says it’s mostly wrong. Larry Noble, who had been a general counsel at the FEC, and is an expert on this says that the allegation is not correct. They may be pushing the envelope, but that there really is no underlying corrupt nature to this relationship. I talked to the DNC, and they say that this is a joint campaign victory fund that was also offered to Bernie Sanders. That the Sanders campaign, they claim, signed an agreement, but they never exercised it, so they never engaged.

so perhaps it is not as black and white as you clearly desire it to be.

Pathetic, but not unexpected.

that's being investigated by the FEC. The same organization that Bernie should have notified if he actually thought Clinton was breaking the law. He knew they would laugh at him so he just sent a note to the DNC. How pathetic of you Bernie supporters to forget we have things called facts.

for illegal campaign contributions?

Contributions over the $2700 limit?
Contributions from foreign individuals?




Sid

...and it why he's deployed the "Look over there!!!" tactic.

People repeat the same indiscretions because the lesson here is that the winner gets the spoils.

If you win, you rise above the law. Your indiscretions don't count. We proved with Nixon that the president is actually above the law in any meaningful way. Reagan pushed the boundaries. Bush 2 punked them all.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Birds are territorial creatures.
The lyrics to the songbird's melodious trill go something like this:
"Stay out of my territory or I'll PECK YOUR GODDAMNED EYES OUT!"[/center][/font][hr]

Obama did the same thing. Kerry did the same thing. There is nothing new or underhanded going on here, this is the way it's been done for a while.

If you assert that Hillary is breaking the law, please point to the specific law she is breaking. Also, please explain how this slipped by the DNC's team of lawyers for all these years to finally surface now.

This line by Bernie is a political maneuver. He's trying to leverage faux outrage into more fundraising dollars. His campaign knows there's nothing illegal going out here.

Just to be clear, I don't think what Bernie is doing is wrong and I'm not upset with him about it. I think it's a rather shrewd political move. It takes the focus off of him not raising money for downticket dems by claiming that the mechanism by which it's done is corrupt. It takes the focus off of him and puts it back on Hillary.

talking about that, is he? Well my my. Isn't that odd?

The Democratic Party has ever had. The upside is Sanders is not a Democratic, so that is a bit reassuring.

Which specific law is being broken?

Rage Now, Think Later: Bernie 2016

there.

So good!

Oh, I beg to differ.

Send the evidence to the US Attorney.

DU is not an officer of the court.

explaining just how she broke the law.

"You know what’s funny to me about this is a lot of people in Liberal World today are using the Bush standard, something they normally find abhorrent on everything, including what you order for dinner. They’re using the Bush standard as the defense of Hillary. Bush’s e-mails were legally available to everyone. Hillary Clinton’s system was designed to defy Freedom of Information Act requests, which is designed to defy the law. The Freedom of Information Act and all this government transparency, which we obviously care about a lot more than voters do, that was a decades-long liberal crusade. It was liberals pushing on this from the Nixon administration forward to say, ‘There’s see much nasty stuff backstage, we have to find out how this is really working.’ So every one of these regulations– the regulation that Hillary Clinton was defying is a liberal regulation."

campaign finance 'scandal' which is the meme of the day, not (again) the e-mails.

as she is continually cleared because she ACTUALLY follows the rules and laws.

U.S. District Court Judge Royce Lamberth found "evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith" and specifically noted the "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials."

U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan (a Clinton appointee for those try to write off all of Hillary misdeeds as part of a "vast right wing conspiracy&quot had also previously found that the claims were sufficiently meritorious as to warrant the disclosure of the disputed emails.

And that Hillary has truly fucked up this time.

You're making a complete fool of yourself not even acknowledging that BERNIE is the one being investigated by the FEC. How pathetic of you to forget that fact and try and deflect from his desperation.

and for the Bernie Campaign to even go there, to insert themselves in something that will be known to pass the legal sniff test, when they were given a pass on stealing data, when Bernie's Group has their own $10M of FEC investigative money to answer for, when the timing is more suspect of being petty and vindictive, just shows how desperate they are. Lashing out out at any and all idiosyncrasies, kinda like a cornered rat.

Your bias trumps your credibility.

all day today. It is the NY Primary.

Sander is the one the FEC is looking into. They have been looking into his shady donations for a while.

FEC

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/619/201602250300038619/201602250300038619.pdf

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/988/201602110300034988/201602110300034988.pdf

This is worse than sour grapes, it is dishonest ratfucking.

One of us has facts. The other........

Highly unethical what the Sanders camp is doing here.

And the fact remains, that she did break Campaign Finance Law and she's going to be held accountable for it.

Sanders signed the same joint fundraising agreement with the DNC.

I'm very glad I'm not in your position. This doesn't look good.





FEC

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/619/201602250300038619/201602250300038619.pdf

http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/988/201602110300034988/201602110300034988.pdf

I do understand where you are coming from. Your issue isn't campaign finances, it's personal politics. That is why the links are not significant to you. You aren't looking for the truth you are looking to play partisan politics. That is abundantly clear as can be seen in your dismissal of serious campaign finance issues with Sanders.

For people screaming "bullshit" you sure are shoveling a lot of it.

These are "inquiries" not crimes. Literally, no crime was committed.
IF a crime had been committed, it would no come in the context of a polite email.

These were questions. No one has to read past the header to see that the "answer by" date has past.

Guess what? The inquiries were answered and concerns addressed. Your little scheme was foiled. The FEC has no current open inquiries or issues with the Sanders campaign. Thanks for playing!

I fully understand why you don't want to see them. They do outline some serious issues.

Inquiries, literally what they are called.
They have been answered. What keep harping on an situation that no longer exists???
Questions were answered. Records were corrected. Money was returned from the foreign source. The $10,000,000 thing was a clerical error.
The amounts and totals from that first quarter were public domain infomation.
You look foolish to keep harping on something that no longer exists.

I don't know enough about the concerns brought up by the Sanders campaign. I am more than willing to let the FEC or Justice Department or the whoever the responsible authorities with oversight are in this case, look into it and live with their decision.

I am not going to take the opinion of DUers, reporters or paid shills.

I appreciate it.

"Records were corrected. Money was returned from the foreign source. The $10,000,000 thing was a clerical error. "

Good thing the FEC has an eye on him.

I said they were questions, inquiries, as they wanted to make sure the campaign was aware there were mistakes. Not crimes.

Speaking of mistakes, I noticed you removed your DU rec on that nasty OP with the neo-Nazi, anti Semitic website source links. Good for you. We all make mistakes.

I thank you for backing off that dishonest claim. You have now backed off it twice. I appreciate it.

"Records were corrected. Money was returned from the foreign source. The $10,000,000 thing was a clerical error." angrychair

Glad the FEC has an eye on him. There are clearly issues.

It's the Sanders campaign that's being investigated by the FEC. Bernie was so sure Hillary was breaking the rules, he sent a note to the DNC - NOT to the FEC (because he knew they would laugh at it). How pathetic of you trying to change the subject and pretend up is down.

Sanders and the traitor Nader share a love of stating that there is no difference between the Democratic and Republican parties and have even used the same sad terminology. Sanders first used the same terminology of stating that there are no differences between the Democratic Party and the Republican party when he ran as a spoiler for governor. http://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/02/04/when-bernie-sanders-ran-against-vermont/kNP6xUupbQ3Qbg9UUelvVM/story.html?p1=Article_Trending_Most_Viewed

going. Don't think its gonna work.

the former we knew, the latter is an eye-opener, AND a repeat of 2008 when Clinton was loaning herself money to fund the campaign, so apparently things are not going that well -- wonder why

He's lost too many campaigns to lose another one. That would be the end of his career and kill the cash cow

Love Bernie, don't think much of Devine or Weaver.

And that's what they are paid to be. The accusations are baseless.

Please explain your understanding of the HVF, as you see it. Not a demand, just a friendly request. I really want to know what you know and believe.

The lame sounding part: Andrea Mitchell hates Clinton and would do anything to damage her. However she says Weaver's claim is bogus. If there was anything to it she would be promoting it non-stop.

---

And then I look at Weaver and Devine's track record. When Bernie's tech guys were caught digging in HRC's data, Bernie fired them. Which was the right and honorable thing to do.

Then Weaver spins the wrongdoing of a couple of fired employees into filing a lawsuit against the DNC. Which was unmitigated bullshit.

WhAt an honest man does is apologize when his employees did wrong. That's what Bernie did.

A dishonest man doesn't take responsibility and blames others and files lawsuits. That's what Weaver did.

I beleive Weaver's motivation is because Sanders campaign has run into some trouble with the FEC over contributions. So again he's avoiding responsibility and projecting on others.

I love Bernie, I think it was a mistake for him to hire Weaver and Devine. Weaver is not ready for prime time, Devine has a long track record as a failure. And neither of them have let Bernie be Bernie. IMHO those two have detracted from and damaged Bernie's campaign.

The premise is that Andrea hates Hillary and would be biased to do Bernie a service, but for the truth-- if I understand. Andrea is an Establishment reporter, working for an Establishment network constantly tilting for Hillary. Her corporate family has contributed to Hillary's campaign. They have constantly mislead by hundreds regarding the delegate count and Andrea's husband, an Establishment insider, was given the public dressing down of his life by Bernie. So your premise is so divorced from what I observe that I reject it. I take anything Andrea Mitchell says with a grain of salt without proof.

I have a lot more discussion about your points but let's leave it at that for now.

I really dislike him because of the choices he's made. Both he and Devine represent politics as usual to me. In my mind, Bernie is not politics as usual. He's a man of principle.

Points well taken about Mitchell of course. She's problematic in many many ways.

Nice talking with you.

He then fund raised off of it...no attacks not...the Bern(sarcasm). I am longing for the day when this sort of thing will not be tolerated.