Sen. Bernie Sanders response to Russian indictments.

[liberalnarb]

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[panader0]

1. There are many on this board who are now trying to equate Bernie

with tRump. Shame.

[scheming daemons]

3. He's not equated with Trump except in this regard.... the Russians worked to help him win.

[leftstreet]

5. What did Sanders win?

or maybe I'm misreading your post

[scheming daemons]

14. They worked to help him win.... they ultimately failed.

but the race was closer than it would have been without their help, that's certain.

[askyagerz]

16. They divided us

To help trump win. And it obviously did work

[EffieBlack]

21. And they damaged Hillary

by using Republican talking points and accusations against her in the primary - giving the media an excuse to say, "See, this is partisan. Democrats are saying these things about her, too. She's got problems in her own ranks."

By the time Trump turned his sights away from Cruz and Rubio to Hillary, she was already softened up and he just piled on with accusations that had already started to stick.

Nevertheless, she persisted and STILL beat his sorry ass.

[EffieBlack]

29. Yes, you're flat out wrong.

Did you even bother to read the indictment before you decided to try to turn this into a Hillary v. Bernie foodfight?

And, fyi - that's NOT how primaries always worked. You really should go read the indictment before you comment any further.

[askyagerz]

35. Give me a break

You're all still throwing food... Like I said nothing would have changed if you swap Hillary and Bernie. Hillary's people would have been just as fooled. That was the point. But if you want the Russians to continue to divide and conquer be my guest.
I have never tried to hurt any democrat and have always voted for whatever dem is on the ticket. I suspect most of us do. You're all letting the few speak for the majority... hmmm...

[EffieBlack]

41. Why are you so defensive?

Good Lord - take a breath and calm down. And then go read the indictment.

[askyagerz]

44. Sorry but when you're talking about

Hillary beating his sorry ass. Yeah I get a little defensive. Bernie doesn't deserve that. So i guess the question is why are you still talking like that? Because you have decided to stay divided. Just like they want

[EffieBlack]

45. Read my post again.

I was talking about Trump, not Bernie.

[stevenleser]

32. Nope, that is not how it has always worked. One look at JPR should tell you that. The kind of

acrimony that Sanders and his campaign cultivated and allowed to fester against Hillary is unjustifiable.

Sanders and his campaign should have put a stop to that early on.

[Eliot Rosewater]

53. Duck ! LOL

Dear god, when will people wake the fuck up and smell the coffee and look at who did what on russian sanctions, etc.

I cant believe how complicated people make it.

[global1]

60. What Does JPR Stand For?....nt

[sheshe2]

80. Jack Pine Radicals.

A name they took from a deceased DUer...not sure he would be thrilled with their using his name at a Russian /Bot site that trashed Hill with every Russian fed Conspiracy theory.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

63. Who festered hatred against Hillary in 2008? Seriously now.

Was it the Russians who called her "the Debby downer of politics"?

Was it the Russians who said she was unfit to serve?

Was it the Russians who accused her of fomenting the assassination of Barack Obama?

Was it the Russians who posted memes calling her a liar about sniper fire?

Good grief

[stevenleser]

119. And that has what bearing on the discussion now? None.

You might want to try a new joke, saying that one for the eleventy billionth time isn't clever or interesting, it's pathetic.

[Jim Lane]

77. About these "accusations that had already started to stick" -- what were they?

There had long been a medley of bullshit Republican accusations against Hillary Clinton. There was Benghazi, murdering Vince Foster, whatever. None of those were advanced against her in the Democratic primaries. Bernie famously told her that he was sick of hearing about "your damn emails!" (Some of his supporters were disappointed that he didn't attack her on that score, but he took the high road.) Did any media outlet push that kind of rubbish with the claim that "Democrats are saying these things about her, too"? If so, it was a lie.

The criticisms that were actually lodged against her in the primaries turned on subjects like the Iraq War Resolution, single-payer health care, reinstating Glass-Steagall -- in other words, substantive policy issues. Did the nomination fight leave Hillary "softened up" for Trump's piling on those issues? Of course not. Hillary was being criticized from the left during the primary campaign and from the right during the general-election campaign.

The only exception I can think of was the TPP. That issue didn't fall neatly onto the left-right spectrum. Each major party had a significant internal division about it. Trump's position was closer to that of O'Malley and Sanders than was Clinton's. Maybe the debate about the TPP during the primary campaign helped Trump a little bit in the general. Even if that happened, though, it's not a basis for saying that the Democratic debates had to avoid all such issues. If the general election had been Trump versus Sanders, then Trump would have gotten a lot more mileage from Clinton's issue-based attacks during the primaries. That would have been unfortunate, but it's no basis for saying that Clinton was required to refrain from such attacks. It's perfectly proper for all the candidates to debate the issues.

[stevenleser]

120. The "what" is not important. What is important is that Sanders could have done a lot to help

from day 1 he should have been saying, look, I have differences with Hillary on issues and policy but she is a good person and the slanders against her character are wrong, no one should believe them.

The fact that he didn't is why we have raving lunatics like the folks over at JPR, many of whom were erstwhile mostly sane DUers.

[Jim Lane]

125. You seem to think that differences over issues and policy made no difference at all.

The minority of Sanders supporters who then refused to vote for Hillary were precisely those who were not influenced by Bernie's personal appeal. They focused instead on the substantive differences. Their reaction to Bernie's endorsement was not "Gee, maybe I should consider voting for Clinton despite our differences." It was, instead, to condemn Bernie for having sold out. At least one person speculated that Bernie made the endorsement out of fear of losing his position in the Democratic caucus -- as if, in a closely divided Senate, Harry Reid or Chuck Schumer would throw away a key vote out of spite.

During the general-election campaign, I was posting on JPR, as one of the minority of members there urging a vote for Clinton. I was reading the site just about every day. Based on my familiarity with the anti-Clinton posters there, I can state with complete confidence that there was nothing more Bernie could have done to win them over.

[stevenleser]

139. Regarding the discussion we are having they don't matter at all. This is about Russian collusion

and whether one of the Democratic candidates was a willing dupe for Russian collusion and could have done more to combat it.

[Jim Lane]

143. I was responding to your #120.

The way I interpreted that post (if I've misinterpreted you, please correct me) was that there was something Bernie was supposed to have done about Russian involvement, and that his failure to do it was why some people, such as those at JPR, refused to vote for Clinton. I say that's absurd. The people who voted for Stein did so because of their disagreements with Clinton over issues and policy. I believe that, in weighing those disagreements more heavily than the horrors of Trump, they made a grievous error, but it's an error unrelated to (and not subject to correction by) anything Bernie might have said about the Russians.

Bernie's actual pitch to his supporters was to emphasize the progressive policy goals that would fare much better under Clinton than under Trump. That was obviously the right way to go. (It was why I voted for Clinton, despite my disagreements with her.) It's why the overwhelming majority of Bernie's primary supporters then joined him in voting for Clinton in the general.

[stevenleser]

144. Yes, while willfully ignoring the context of it. I know. nt

[R B Garr]

157. The Russians supported Bernies campaign

“pitch” because it was divisive. If you don’t want to read the indictments, just say so. They are reality now—criminal indictments. You don’t get to rewrite history about his campaign.

[marybourg]

22. Yes! nt

[ananda]

39. Sanders was NOT part of the Russian collusion.

But the Russians touted him to hurt Clinton.

That was NOT his fault.

[Me.]

58. IMHO

he was a willing participant and all his talk about corrupt HRC fell right in line

[MrsCoffee]

83. And his ineffectiveness at reigning in his supporters.

His milquetoast response to his supporters chanting lock her up and all the other nasty attacks will not be forgotten.

[Me.]

107. Quite

[stevenleser]

140. It was his fault, either he colluded, or he allowed Russian backed memes to drive some of his

supporters into raving lunacy against Hillary.

[Eliot Rosewater]

151. period

[kstewart33]

136. Anyone remember how hateful our community became to each other?

It was Hillary vs. Bernie and things got awful.

So we were among the Russians' targets.

They supported Bernie because they wanted to sow chaos among us. And it worked.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

172. So they were geniuses in regard to beating Hillary with Trump

but not so effective with Sanders. Interesting theory.

[askyagerz]

15. It was all about dividing the left

To help trump in the end. Of course they would run propaganda on both sides. Anyone who thinks that the Russians wanted Sanders to win is lying to themselves. They would have helped a dead fish if it would have helped elect their puppet

[Amsterdammer]

37. Precisely!!

...and most certainly a devicive tactic honed & perfected while Pukin' was head of KGB.

[askyagerz]

38. Hell look at the forum tonight

It's still working...

[Chemisse]

47. And you're helping it. n/t

[Demsrule86]

111. There are a couple of possibilities...first...Putin despises Hillary and wanted anyone but her to

win. Maybe he thought Trump could beat Sen. Sanders more easily...maybe the entire thing was to sow division and damage Hillary and help elect Trump and if that failed she would be damaged goods...I doubt we will ever know.

[George II]

135. Not at all. Read the indictment. They promoted two candidates and denigrated...

...all the others, including Cruz, Rubio, and other republicans.

Here, directly from the indictment:

They engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.

Specialists were instructed to post content that focused on “politics in the USA” and to “use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump—we support them).”

It's all there in black and white.

[bettyellen]

52. A bunch of voters indoctrinated to hate Hillary. I know quite a few.

And they fell for - and spread the FB shit after the primary was over. Anyone who was suppressing the dem vote after the primary is an idiot or a bot.

[leftstreet]

61. I just don't understand it

The only 'Hillary haters' I encountered (in the real world) were GOPers and never-librals! voters

But I'd come online and find 'hillary hate' among normally Democratic party supporters. It was all very strange and I'll never really get it

[bettyellen]

97. Angry young men, mostly -in a very liberal areas around NYC... have

I was kind of shocked by political newbies being so sure they knew the score- because Wikileaks told them what t was. Have heard many college campuses had a similar or worse vibe. I met idiots who thought college would be free in 2017, HA! There was a hateful echo chamber and it was just exhausting and impossible to reason with.

[George II]

134. They helped him to win, and he lost anyway.

[ProfessorGAC]

12. Grossly Flawed Logic

Identify the correct enemy please!
It's not terribly difficult!

[Autumn]

13. Have you seen the list of groups Russia used to "help" Bernie?

It was compiled from the Indictment by Law&Crime and posed here.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10141989543

This is the link in the OP. A lot of interesting groups mentioned there. Some obvious, some not.

https://lawandcrime.com/trump/the-russians-apparently-infiltrated-these-hashtags-and-handles-in-the-2016-election/

[tblue37]

17. No. They worked to help Trump win by undermining HRC, and supporting Bernie was

about weakening her for the general, not about helping Bernie win.

[Blue_true]

19. They wanted Trump to win all along.

They used the Bernie campaign to divide democrats. I don't believe that Bernie was involved with the effort in any way.

Their goal was to divide us and demotivated some, it worked. I hooe that we are smarter during the future.

[tecelote]

40. Exactly!

"Their goal was to divide us and demotivated some, it worked."

Didn't matter if it was Bernie or Hillary. What mattered was getting us to fight among ourselves and lose faith in our Democracy.

[Chemisse]

42. I'm not so sure they wanted him to win.

I think they wanted him to damage Clinton and to divide the Democrats. And that is what happened.

It's not his fault, but the result was just what the Russians wanted it to be.

[leftstreet]

4. +1

You'd think we only dreamed DU wasn't supposed to keep re fighting the primary

[BoneyardDem]

8. there were many that equated Hillary with Trump. They left in a huff and joined JPR...then came back

[Codeine]

43. . . . and brought their bullshit with them. nt

[Eliot Rosewater]

55. Arent many people to this day threatening not to support moderate democrats and

doing everything in their power to primary them?

I wouldnt normally care, but there are Nazis and KGB agents in the WH . so


jesus christ

[BoneyardDem]

65. Yup...been reading it all right here

Either they unwittingly bought the bot propoganda, or they are part of the propoganda.

[mcar]

72. I've been reading that here for the last months, Eliot

It hasn't ended.

[CountAllVotes]

30. +1,000

n/t

[FarPoint]

51. Well.....

Bernie was used......then again, Bernie used the Democratic Party ..

[MrsCoffee]

85. And is talking about using them again...

[George II]

57. Not "equating", but from the indictment one can't deny that the Russians attempted to help him.

[panader0]

62. Do you have a link to the indictment?

And yes, I've seen posts equating the campaigns.
Like 99% of the Bernie supporters on this board, I voted for HRC.
Like most of us, I hope he does not run again, but not because of this
news. He is too old, maybe still healthy and sharp, but too old to be
an attractive candidate. He is also innocent of collusion with the Russians.
I think the Russians were trying to hurt HRC more than "help" Bernie.
They wanted to sow division and it certainly worked.

[George II]

66. https://www.justice.gov/file/1035477/download

[panader0]

67. Thank you George

[panader0]

76. I saw Sanders name mentioned once, section 43, page 17.

No mention of how he was helped. Perhaps it will come out someday.
Interesting indictment, if you are a lawyer.....

[George II]

78. He was mentioned twice, and show how he was "helped". Both on page 17

They engaged in operations primarily intended to communicate derogatory information about Hillary Clinton, to denigrate other candidates such as Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio, and to support Bernie Sanders and then-candidate Donald Trump.

Specialists were instructed to post content that focused on “politics in the USA” and to “use any opportunity to criticize Hillary and the rest (except Sanders and Trump—we support them).”

That's fairly explicit. Of course it doesn't go into all the evidentiary details, but I'm sure Mueller has all the background details and evidence. This is an indictment laying out the charges, not what would be used in the actual court case should it reach that point.

[Zen Democrat]

71. I'd vote for Jimmy Carter today!

[Generic Brad]

2. No mention of the bots supporting him?

He has no stance on that?

[liberalnarb]

6. What should he have said?

[Generic Brad]

7. Bad, bot! Bad!!

[Me.]

59. Couldn't Because He Isn't

[mcar]

74. How about

"I'm appalled that my campaign was used, however inadvertently, to promote Putin's campaign to undermine the sanctity of our democratic elections. I have asked the DOJ to conduct a full review of my campaign to determine if there was any collusion. I will immediately release my tax returns and all related financial and other information toward this goal."

[mopinko]

26. yeah. imho his hands are as dirty as anyones.

he should have smacked down the bernie bros, but he never said word one.

[Jim Lane]

82. Your statement is simply false.

You write, "he should have smacked down the bernie bros, but he never said word one."

Here are some facts about Bernie's response to those "Bernie Bros":

Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernard Sanders said Sunday that he doesn’t want support from “Bernie bros,” a group backing the Vermont senator who often attack his rival Hillary Clinton in crude and sexist ways.

In an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Mr. Sanders disavowed the largely online group that has tried to raise him up by bashing Mrs. Clinton for being a woman.

“I have heard about it. It’s disgusting,” Mr. Sanders said. “Look, we don’t want that crap. We will do everything we can, and I think we have tried.” [Source: "Sanders addresses ‘Bernie Bros,’ says he doesn’t want support from sexists"]

His ability to smack them down was blocked by legal technicalities. (It turns out that a political candidate can't override the First Amendment and prohibit people from endorsing him with bogus arguments.)

[bettyellen]

54. No mention that he signed the same agreement with the DNC? Or got the same email from Brazile?

Not thrilled about the lack of transparency.

[sheshe2]

84. Then there is the tax returns.

[Jim Lane]

87. Sigh.

The Clinton campaign and the Sanders campaign each signed an agreement with the DNC.

In addition, the Clinton campaign signed a separate agreement that, for example, gave the Clinton campaign veto power over one or more DNC hires. I think it included the DNC's Communications Director.

Bernie's campaign sure as hell was not given the opportunity to sign that agreement.

[bettyellen]

118. Wasnt the second agreement after she won the primary?

So how would he know what agreements he’d be able to negotiate. Oh wait, probably not a great one becasue he didn’t fundraise for them. That’s how shit works. If Hillary had leverage, its becasue she fundraised like hell for them. She tried to get a lot of senators and dem governors in too.

[Jim Lane]

124. I'm talking about the 2015 agreement

It certainly wasn't disclosed until after she won the primary -- indeed, it was kept secret even then, and wasn't publicly known until Donna Brazile's book last year. But it was signed on August 26, 2015 and was definitely in effect. For a discussion and full text, see "Clinton Campaign Had Additional Signed Agreement With DNC In 2015". Key excerpts from the agreement between the DNC and Hillary for America (HFA):

1. With respect to the hiring of a DNC Communications Director, the DNC agrees that no later than September 11, 2015 it will hire one of two candidates previously identified as acceptable to HFA.

2. With respect to the hiring of future DNC senior staff in the communications, technology, and research departments, in the case of vacancy, the DNC will maintain the authority to make the final decision as between candidates acceptable to HFA.

Bear in mind that the context here is not whether HFA was noble and selfless in helping the DNC raise money. Nor is the context here even the issue of whether it was reasonable for the DNC, in return, to make a secret arrangement to give the Clinton campaign extraordinary power over DNC operations, at a time when she was not the nominee and in fact not one single vote had been cast. Rather, the context is your assertion in #34 that Bernie "signed the same agreement with the DNC".

Apparently you're asking whether it's something he should have mentioned in connection with the Mueller indictments. I don't follow that connection, but, in any event, he did not sign the same agreement. The DNC most assuredly did not offer the Sanders campaign veto power over "the hiring of future DNC senior staff ...."

You're probably thinking of Tom Perez's statement that the DNC had a joint fundraising agreement with each campaign. The linked NPR article explains:

That may be true — but two Democratic officials tell NPR that Brazile and Perez are referring to two different things. In addition to that joint fundraising agreement the DNC reached with both campaigns, the party and the Clinton campaign struck that separate memorandum of understanding giving the campaign staffing and policy oversight.

[bettyellen]

146. The thing is- Sanders created an adversarial relationship with the DNC. Stealing data, suing them

And refusing to do any fundraising for the general- while using their funds for the primary. And he would have taken them, and made the best deal he could to utilize their help for the general should he have had the opportunity. He did a great deal to suppress fundraising for the DNC and misled people about what went on there allowing them to think- as Wiki propaganda falsely put out- that he was put at a disadvantage before he lost the primary.
Just as he allowed people to think Brazile favored Hillary w debate questions when she also sent them to him. The reason this is relevant today? He refuses to talk about how Russian influence favored him and aimed to divide the party- and many of his fans went along with it. His silence this week is damning. Like Trump, he can’t admit that a portion of his support were bots.
Instead, he allows his supporters to believe the fake narrative that things were “rigged” against him even when it was revealed this week that the story was planted by Russians. Like it or not, the Russian propaganda is still being flung on his behalf. It’s ugly to watch him allow this.

[Jim Lane]

147. You spew out lie after lie and ignore the secret 2015 agreement.

I'm not going to bother going through your vitriol and refuting point by point. Your silence concedes the actual subject we were discussing -- that, in 2015, before Clinton was the nominee, there was a secret agreement between her campaign and the DNC, that the agreement gave the Clinton campaign extensive power over DNC operations, and that nothing remotely comparable was ever offered to any of the other campaigns.

If you're perfectly OK with that arrangement because Russians Russians something Russians, fine, your choice. My consolation is that, because of the welcome although belated disclosure of this travesty, it's unlikely to be repeated next cycle.

[bettyellen]

148. It gave her the power IF she should become the nominee. And so fucking what.

You accuse me of lying when you can’t refute a single one of the bullshit propaganda that Sanders was happy to benefit from- largely AFTER he had lost. You can’t refute a single part and make it all about a smart agreement she made when Sanders did jack shit to help the party he used. Instead he worked tirelessly to damage the DNC while Looking the other way knowing Russians were helping him- and downplaying it as an issue.

All that after he knew all of that would help Trump becasue he had lost the primary. That’s on him. And you’ve no defense. Just a silly and totally legal agreement for her to have more power if she was the nominee. Inconsequential to any other candidate except Trump. She raised a fuck ton of money and spent a lot of time and effort on downticket and governors races. That Sanders hates the idea of fundraising itself, does not actually make any of this a bad thing. If he had any integrity, he’d never take DNC money. But he did.

[Jim Lane]

149. Your subject line is just flat-out false.

Please refer to my post #124 and try actually reading the excerpt that I posted, even if it upsets your comfortably self-satisfied worldview.

To take just the first numbered paragraph, the agreement expressly required the DNC to hire a Communications Director "identified as acceptable to HFA." Furthermore, it required that this hire be completed "no later than September 11, 2015...."

Clinton was not the nominee as of that date and had zero chance of becoming the nominee by that date.

[bettyellen]

152. Well good for her, becasue she had already been raising big money for them...

While watching others do jack shit for the party. Someone had to step up, and I can’t blame her for wanting a reward for it. It’s not as if Sanders had any plan to do anything supportive for the DNC, that much was always clear.

But the lies he allowed to stand after he lost will always taint him. It became obvious that he didn’t mind treacherous lies if it helped boost his image- long after that was the only thing he had left.

[Jim Lane]

153. You're pretty free with your accusations

At least, when I pointed out a falsehood, I gave the specifics and presented proof.

Anyone with a keyboard can sling smears about "treacherous lies" that "he allowed to stand". Evidence just slows you down.

[bettyellen]

154. He allowed her to be accused of cheating w April Ryan when Ryan sent him the same email....

He allowed all the misunderstanding about the Wiki email shit alone aimed at the DNC to stand too. He knew it was happening, and he knew it after he had lost becasue the “damning emails” occurred after he lost. Why the DNC would have anything to do with him is beyond me. But you know, April Ryan just had to grab headline slamming the DNC too, I guess there’s money in it.

[Jim Lane]

155. You probably won't believe this but...

I honestly have no idea what horrible scandal you're talking about.

I did a few minutes' research and came up empty. My work didn't go far enough to qualify as due diligence, but it was as much as I'm willing to do.

If you choose to continue this subtopic, I'd like to see at least one link, along with a specification of the act or omission by Bernie that shows, uh, whatever it is it shows. Otherwise, since we both know you despise Bernie Sanders and you're not going to change your mind, we can just agree to disagree.

Have a pleasant holiday weekend.

[bettyellen]

156. Im sure you can google better than that, but you can keep your head in the sand.

Suffice to say, once he lost the primary he fucked up big time. Again and again.

[Cha]

116. Bernie Sanders response to Mueller indictment does not address that this Russian operation tried to

help his campaign, per indictment.

Link to tweet

[Me.]

126. No One Is Going To be Able To Dodge This

with innocuous statements that don't, as Ari says, address the issue fully and honestly. This matter isn't going away and will only garner more attention. Anyone looking to run for anything, including the SEnator, is going to have to ante up.

[Cha]

141. Yes, "..address the issue fully and honestly.."

Thank you, Me!

I don't know how I missed your post before.. just happened to see it now.

Exactly right, "it's not going away".. and it's getting more attention that he isn't acknowledging it now.

Don't who would have advised him on that.

Link to tweet

A pertinent question.. that needs to be addressed by sanders.

[Nevernose]

163. Tons of American bots supported Hillary

(And all the other candidates). Social media campaigning somehow manages to be even slimier and corrupt than regular campaigning.

[BannonsLiver]

9. Didnt he vote against the Russia sanctions as well?

[NurseJackie]

20. Wow! I wonder why. What a strange thing to do.

Very strange.

[panader0]

24. The sanctions were not only against Russia but included Iran and N Korea as well.

Sanders was worried about the Iran deal and tRump's blustering about backing out.


https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-statement-on-new-iran-north-korea-russia-sanctions

[NurseJackie]

27. Lord.

[BoneyardDem]

28. so purity was more important than sanctions on Russia? too bad about those purity standards.

[panader0]

31. Whooosh----

[BoneyardDem]

33. excuses from any apologetic...not buying 'em

[Chemisse]

50. Honing your Dem Party dividing skills for the midterms? n/t

[karynnj]

122. The Iran deal isimportant.

[BoneyardDem]

128. Our threatened Democracy was paramount...even over Iran

[sheshe2]

86. All but two voted for the sanctions

One Independent and one Republican.

[R B Garr]

89. Wow, so three people only against Russian sanctions

Trump, Bernie, and another Republican.

It’s not surprising why the Russians helped him. smh

[sheshe2]

94. Lol!

I forgot to include Trumpie. Ya ...pretty sure the other was Cruz...to lazy to check... Okay I checked it was Rand Paul.

Hmmm

[R B Garr]

98. Thx for checking! I have to say it appears more

than coincidental that both Trump and Bernie were against sanctions, and both got help from Russia...

Hmmm is right.

[sheshe2]

99. Oh yeah.

[panader0]

91. I find his reasoning curious. I also don't like him lumped in with Rand Paul.

I read his statement, but he had to know he would be the lone dissenter in
the Senate, so I don't really understand his vote.
Everyone else voted for the sanctions and still tRump won't impose them.

[sheshe2]

95. Curiuos, yes.

Yes it was.

[Cuthbert Allgood]

174. You know why. Just stop it.

He explained it when he voted against it. But, yeah, just keep pushing the talking points.

[karynnj]

121. The Russian and Iran sanctions were together and the

Iran sanctions could jeopardize the Iran deal. Note they, not the Russian ones were implemented. Bernie explained his vote when he cast it

[BoneyardDem]

129. Bottom line, while Iran is important, USA democracy is MORE important

....but not to Bernie. Or you, so it appears

[karynnj]

150. No it was a PROTEST VOTE on the sanctions, knowing it would pass

He voted FOR the Russian sanctions before the Iran amendment.

[BoneyardDem]

10. So why vote against the Russia sanctions, Bernie?

[Snotcicles]

18. .

[link:https://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/sanders-statement-on-iran-and-russia-sanctions|

[BoneyardDem]

25. purity stand, so no vote on Sanctions...got it.

[Snotcicles]

36. Just an answer to your question. nt

[liberalnarb]

73. Wait, wanting to protect the Iran deal is purity?

If so then I guess I’m a “purist”.

[Jim Lane]

88. Please count me in on your purity caucus.

I also think that endangering the Obama administration's Iran deal was a bad idea.

[karynnj]

123. Me too

[BoneyardDem]

130. Yes, Bernie's stuck on one pet project and he ignored the threat to US Democracy

Or Bernie decided that Iran was more important than fighting for US Democracy.

Often there is a choice in votes...Bernie chose to ignore the need of the USA, the hacking, the assault on our democracy. He chose poorly. Iran nuclear deal would have had many other future avenues for addressing, look at what we have with Trump. Giving Trump and Russia a pass and the message that they should move full steam ahead because everything is more important than our Democracy. You are admittedly not siding with your own country's dire needs. Your choice of course, but for the group that constantly touts they would never vote for the lesser of two evils, they just assessed what they assumed was the lesser of two evils.

[Kentonio]

159. Heres a crazy idea

How about you stop attacking a figure half the party adore? You’re doing the Russian’s work for them.

[BoneyardDem]

161. NO, not half the party adores your candidate

Not even close...unless you are going to tout the flawed and biased polls that have been debunked a dozen times already.

More than half of the party preferred Hillary, but that didn't seem to stop the Bernie fans from criticizing, insulting, and undermining her. I remember.

[Kentonio]

166. Is there a reason youre still refighting the primary?

[BoneyardDem]

167. Is there a reason you are promoting a false meme?

[Kentonio]

168. We have Trump in the white house, the GOP in both house and senate

We're being attacked at every turn by the Republicans and we're only 9 months away from a make or break midterm that with a possible Trump impeachment and an aging SCOTUS could determine the future of the country for decades to come.

And what are you doing? Attacking Bernie Sanders and his supporters..

Maybe you should have a good think about your contribution to the actual war we're fighting.

[BoneyardDem]

169. Ha, you question my contribution and ignore what Bernie and his followers have done

The USA doesn't thank you. I'd like to move in a different direction than being told to bow down at the Bernie altar.

[Kentonio]

170. Ok, so you care more about petty in-fighting than about stopping the GOP.

Great, I can only hope the number of people like yourself is small enough to not have any impact in November otherwise we're completely screwed.

[BoneyardDem]

171. Projecting much?

[Kentonio]

175. Read your own posts.

[Blue_Tires]

11. Meanwhile his campaign people are singing a different tune:

Link to tweet

[JI7]

49. Yup, people like her are angry at the influence non whites have in the party

And well, the country. So it's similar to trump supporters.

[Starry Messenger]

162. God, she's so fucking stupid.

It's like listening to a brick talk.

[denvine]

46. Really people! Get over it!

This doesn't give my much hope for the mid-terms!

[jalan48]

48. Thank you Senator Sanders. We need more like you.

[PatrickforO]

56. You're darned right, Bernie.

Us, not Putin and the Cozy Bears.

[getagrip_already]

64. where was the outrage last year?

The fact is he appears to have encouraged divvision, even after the primaries. He certainly didn't tamp it down.

[Codeine]

68. He believed his own hype.

Ego transformed him from a thoughtful and progressive candidate into an angry, doddering old simpleton.

[getagrip_already]

69. I wouldn't go that far, but does ......

he doubt they will push his candidacy again in 2020? It makes perfect sense. If he is the nominee, it will be simple to divide us again. Just look at the responses. There are probably trolls in here playing both sides right now.

Will he acknowledge and disavow that? Or just run with it?

We need a new batch of contenders. Please, nobody from 2016.

[Jamaal510]

108. I think Martin O'Malley

could be OK to run again, considering his record seems to be clean and he gained very little media exposure last time.

[getagrip_already]

109. true, but not really progressive.....

I don''t have anything against him, but think we can do better.

[FSogol]

173. Not really progressive? WTF?

You are behind on your reading:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/12813600

[liberalnarb]

75. Division?

Do you have an example? I seem to remember him campaigning his ass off for Dems in 2016.

[lapucelle]

137. "Campaigning one's ass off"...

...is a relative measure of effort and engagement. But yes, by some people's standards and definition of working hard, it appears that the assertion might be reasonable.

[NurseJackie]

138. Nicely worded and exceedingly accurate.

John Charles Daly would be proud of your eloquence and sentence structure.

[lapucelle]

145. Sorry it took me so long to respond...

I needed a nap after working my butt off feeding the cat.

[Jim Lane]

90. Bernie "encouraged division" by campaigning for Hillary?

Well, yes, there was some division. There was division among Bernie's supporters between the overwhelming majority of us, who agreed with him and voted for Hillary, and a dissident minority, who denounced him for "selling out" by endorsing her and making speeches on her behalf.

I don't know what more he could have done to tamp that down. Some people were just not going to vote for Hillary Clinton no matter what Bernie or anyone else said.

[George II]

102. He barely and reluctantly campaigned for Clinton, and didn't make his first appearance....

....until Labor Day.

[Jim Lane]

112. You call it "barely and reluctantly", fine.

My recollection is that he campaigned more for the Democratic ticket than anyone else, except for those actually on the ticket and their immediate family members.

I see the doughnut and you say the glass is half empty.

[George II]

113. Sorry, my recollection is entirely different. The campaign began the day after the Convention.....

....not Labor Day.

There are no logs or itineraries available, so we'll never know.

[getagrip_already]

103. Well...

If you are a bernie supporter, I have no doubt, and I mean this sincerely, that you absolutely believe what you said. Just as I believe pretty much the opposite.

I don't think either position is fully defensible, nor truly wrong. It's a case where more than one opinion can be correct.

My lens was comparring bernies campaign efforts for hillary in the perspective of hillaries campaign efforts for obamma. In that lens, bernie fell far short.. Sure, he campaigned, though a lot of his effort was down ticket.

I just don't believe he was at all effective in convincing either his supporters or undecideds. And, I believe he could have done a lot more.

Now I'm sure his supporters don't see that. I understand that. I don't have a problem with your position.

I also have no doubt that a lot of the noise I heard from his supporters who became bernie or busters were actually bots. They were all over this and other progressive sites. They are probably still here.

So thats why I said he didn't try, and actually ended up inciting some of his supporters to be busters. You don't see that, and thats fine.

[George II]

106. My observation too. In 2008, when the Convention closed Clinton took a day or so off....

....and if I recall correctly she went on a bus tour with Obama and enthusiastically campaigned with and for Obama from then through Election Day. So did Bill Clinton.

On the other hand in 2016 Sanders didn't begin campaigning for Clinton until about six weeks after the Convention, and made few appearances for Clinton. The only disclaimer is that in 2016 the Convention was at the end of July, in 2008 it was late in August.

[ehrnst]

105. Donna Brazile's book stated that Weaver came to her with Bernie's offer to replace Hillary

when Hillary got dehydrated on 9/11.

[getagrip_already]

110. donna brazille is part of the problem....

She needs a new career. Just sayin.

[Nevernose]

164. Are you blaming Muslims and African Americans, too?

Because according to the indictment, those groups were targeted just as hard, but no one was targeted as strongly as the MAGA hat wearing motherfuckers.

[Demsrule86]

70. Good statement Sen. Sanders...I had hoped for such...People as many of you know, I am not a Sen.

Sander's fan. I would vote for him in a general but not in a primary. However, just because the Russians favored Sen Sanders as well as Trump does not mean Sen. Sanders participated. It means the Putin level of Hatred and yes fear of Hillary was very high. I do not believe Sen. Sanders participated. He would have gone straight to the FBI in my opinion. I may not support his candidacy in 20 ( for a number of reason that would bore you no doubt) during the primary (of course I would vote for him in an general election) but I do not believe he would betray this country.

[Jim Lane]

92. Thank you!

I've often disagreed with you in the past, and no doubt will do so in the future... but I appreciate your rising above the black-and-white thinking that's all too common in online discussions.

On both sides of the Clinton-Sanders divide, there were people whose attitude was "My candidate is perfect, no criticism has any validity, but the other candidate is Evil Incarnate, and any criticism must be supported regardless of its basis." I'm glad to see that at least one person who disagrees with Bernie on many issues can rise above that kind of simplification.

I disagree with Hillary on many issues and I try to do the same thing.

[R B Garr]

96. You should have stopped at Thank You.

Your “both sides do it” distortion is totally bogus. It wasn’t both sides ascribing good and evil. No one claimed Hillary was perfect and above reproach. We know who was deemed evil and who was deemed good. The Criminal indictments should clear that up for you, too. They helped Bernie’s smear campaign against Hillary. She was the target. That is a proven fact.

[Demsrule86]

100. I didn't see you bash Hillary even when you could (hehe)...and while we disagree on some

things,we do agree on the big things. I don't believe Sen. Sanders had anything to do with this. He would have gone to the FBI. I look forward to many spirited discussions where I gently try to show you the error of your ways...and you reciprocate in kind.

[LonePirate]

79. Where is Sanders' recognition of and apology for the assistance Russia gave him per the indictments?

I am glad he is denouncing the Russian involvement but he needs to address its impact on his campaign and on Clinton. His complete omission of mentioning that is quite telling and certainly tarnishes his image. Yes, even if he received assistance which he did not cultivate or want, he should have at least mentioned it.

[meadowlander]

158. If he wasn't involved in it, he has nothing to apologise for.

[Tarheel_Dem]

81. It was clear to many of us. Some others? Not so much. I remember it being downplayed from...

certain quarters, and I don't think I need to name names.

[frogmarch]

93. My take on it is

that Russia was trying to put Trump, not Sanders, in the White House. By not attacking Sanders, Russia was going after loyal Democrats who would never vote for a Republican, much less Trump, to get them to vote for Sanders instead of Hillary.

[babylonsister]

101. I still love Bernie!!! nt

[realFedUp]

165. And some people never learn

Maybe it's like having a crush on David Cassidy....

[enid602]

114. Investigation

You know the Donald is in deep dark trouble when even Bernie concedes the Russia Investigation might be worthwhile.

[Cha]

115. Bernie Sanders response to Mueller indictment does not address that this Russian operation tried to

help his campaign, per indictment.

Link to tweet

Of course, not

[Me.]

133. Can't Escape It

and there will be a continual call for him to address this matter truthfully but not holding out hope...that address will probably be found with those tax returns. It also makes me wonder about that unaccounted for 10 million.

[Willie Pep]

117. Good on Bernie.

Most of Bernie's supporters voted for Hillary in the general. Sadly the Russians knew that some Bernie supporters were susceptible to "Never Hillary" propaganda based on their unhappiness with the political system. I hope Bernie's followers don't get tagged with the Russian shill label because most of us weren't on the "Never Hillary" train and voted for her and other Democrats in 2016.

[George II]

127. Don't forget - the Senate voted 98-2 to impose sanctions on Russia. Guess who one of those two was?

[BoneyardDem]

131. I'm sure Trump and Putin appreciates the assistance

[Me.]

132. But, But, But.....

waiting for all the reasons why he was right to do so

[Johnny2X2X]

142. Bernie fans shared fake Russian Hillary stories millions of time

More damage was done in the primaries than the GE.

[Kentonio]

160. The lack of self awareness in the replies here is quite incredible.

We’ve had it confirmed that Russia invested heavily into dividing us, so how do people respond? By renewing the attacks.

We definitely either have Russian trolls here or a few really stupid people.