2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forummsongs
(67,436 posts)Y'all lost. Your predictions were wrong. You just need to eat the crow y'all deserve and move on. Otherwise y'all just look worse and worse.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)pat_k
(9,313 posts)The trip was certainly not a campaign event. But, nevertheless, he needed to charter a plane to get there from the debate (a campaign event), and get back to NY ASAP for more campaign events.
Seems to me the travel is a legitimate campaign expense.
Just like travel from a campaign event back home and back out on the trail would be. Your home isn't a campaign stop either.
Does the FEC demand that candidates make no plans other than to go from one campaign event to another?
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Only travel from one campaign stop to another. Detours can't be paid for in campaign funds.
If campaign paid for it legally is a campaign trip.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)So, you are saying a candidate who flies to a campaign event, flies home, and then flies to another campaign event, can't use campaign funds to cover all the travel?
Ridiculous!
When I traveled for work, flights from wherever I happened to be -- at home, on vacation, whatever -- to a business meeting, and from the business meeting to wherever I needed to be next (whether personal or not) were covered.
The "detour" is the business meeting, and travel to and from it is covered.
To assert that a company should only pay the expenses for an employee that flies from one business meeting, to another business meeting, to another business meeting, is absurd.
Sanders had campaign events he had to get to on both sides of the his time in Rome. The expense of getting him to and from those campaign events is a legitimate campaign expense.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Flying to another continent is.
If he flies to Vegas for a campaign event, but wants to go skiing in Tahoe, he has to pay all expenses traveling to and from Tahoe.
That is crystal clear in the law. Under your way of doing things, every vacation could be paid for by campaign funds. Ridiculous.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Can't have it both ways--pay with political campaign funds then say nope no politics here.
pat_k
(9,313 posts)OK. So i'm a candidate. I have critical events in LA Thursday evening and Friday evening. I get word an hour before the event on Thursday that my mother in NY has hours to live. It's not an event I really "have" to be at, but it is a once in a lifetime thing, If the only way the campaign can get me to be with my mother between the critical events on Thursday and Friday is to charter a plane, then the plane is a campaign expense.
The campaign pays for travel required to enable me to meet my obligations to the campaign, while meeting the other obligations I have taken on in my life.
My mothers death is not a "campaign event," but the travel to and from is a campaign expense. It was necessary to allow me to fulfilly the obligation I felt to my mom, while fulfilling my obligations to the campaign.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)See page 80 of the PDF (listed as page 70 at the bottom):
http://www.fec.gov/pdf/candgui.pdf
pat_k
(9,313 posts)If the report that the travel was covered by the campaign is correct (I suspect it may not be) do you really think they would have taken as a campaign expense without clearing it first?
If the report is wrong, this discussion is moot.
If your assertion that the expense is being unlawfully taken as a campaign expense is true, we'll know soon enough. (But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for vindication if I were you.)
pat_k
(9,313 posts)If I'm in the UK visiting family and my work needs me at a meeting in NY in a hurry, they pay to get me there. They don't require me to go home to Seattle first so they can fly me from Seattle to NY (which would probably make me miss the meeting anyway).
And if they are interrupting my vacation to get me to that meeting, they are going to pay to fly me back to where I was. As I said, the meeting is the detour.
OK. So i'm a candidate. I have critical events in LA Thursday evening and Friday evening. I get word an hour before the event on Thursday that my mother in NY has hours to live. It's not an event I really "have" to be at, but it is a once in a lifetime thing, If the only way the campaign can get me to be with my mother between the critical events on Thursday and Friday is to charter a plane, then the plane is a campaign expense.
The campaign pays for travel required to enable me to meet my obligations to the campaign, while meeting the other obligations I have taken on in my life.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)jfern
(5,204 posts)uponit7771
(90,359 posts)... to gain and a lot to lose
DrDan
(20,411 posts)BS-supporter version I've read here
pat_k
(9,313 posts)If there is such a misrepresentation (and I'm not saying there might not be), I'm sure you can supply:
1. Knowledgeable authority confirming the exact circumstances of the encounter.
2, Direct quote from Sanders misrepresenting the confirmed circumstances.
uponit7771
(90,359 posts)pat_k
(9,313 posts)uponit7771
(90,359 posts)..the pope "greeted" bernie from afar?
Back to requirement one:
1. Knowledgeable authority confirming the exact circumstances of the encounter.
And still waiting on requirement two:
2, Direct quote from Sanders misrepresenting the confirmed circumstances.
Without both 1 and 2 there is no way to determine if 2 is a "misrepresentation" of 1.
pangaia
(24,324 posts)ViseGrip
(3,133 posts)uponit7771
(90,359 posts)... this primary.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And got smacked down for lying within a matter of hours?
Methinks you are projecting.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)(Germany to be exact) in 2008.
The reaction has been unreal
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)I can't even do that one with a straight face! They've been wrong about so much!
Did you see the one where HILLARY is now joining in the Arizona voter suppression lawsuit? After HOW MANY posts where her supporters were insisting NOTHING WAS WRONG IN ARIZONA BERNIE LOST SO QUIT CRYING FOUL?
Except for those pesky facts which prompted Hillary AND THE DNC to sue on behalf of the disenfranchised voters.
Even money says they only joined because Bernie pushed the issue/would have done it without them and made them look like fools.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Before the other two.
It was funny
uponit7771
(90,359 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)On the topic a few weeks ago right after the (if I recall correctly) the Illinois primary. It started with "Obama says" and was debunked hard by his press secretary the same day. I'm on my phone - can you google or search the site yourself? And if you can't, is there a reason for me to spend my time (your gratitude or something)?
uponit7771
(90,359 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Oddly enough named "Freaking Good Burgers" - and you had to snark?
Five seconds of site search in GDP with Obama turned up the threads:
Obama Privately Tells Donors That Time Is Coming to Unite Behind Hillary Clinton
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511517088
followed by
Obama NEVER backed Clinton at private fundraiser (Bloomberg)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511519681
It went down the week of the Illinois primary, and those threads are from Thursday, March 17, 2016. Both were posted in various incarnations multiple times for several days. As I said, it was a poutage attack, quickly replaced by the next faux outrage.
You're welcome.
SDjack
(1,448 posts)he did.
mcar
(42,372 posts)athena
(4,187 posts)I'm not sure why Bernie's supporters should be paying for Bernie's four children and four grandchildren to get a free trip to the Vatican.
http://www.dailynewsbin.com/opinion/bernie-sanders-campaign-contributions-paid-for-his-family-vacation-to-rome/24482/