Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:09 PM Jan 2016

Group calls for fraud investigation into Jane Sanders' land deals

Source: WCAX

BURLINGTON, Vt. - A group of Catholic parishioners want the U.S. Attorney for Vermont to investigate Jane Sanders, the wife of Bernie Sanders, for alleged bank fraud stemming from a land deal she secured as President of Burlington College.

"It appears that Ms. Sanders misrepresented confirmed donations in order to get that loan," said Brady Toensing, an attorney and Vice Chair of the Vermont Republic Party.

Toensing is representing a group of Catholic parishioners. He alleges Jane Sanders cost the Diocese between $1.6 and $2 million dollars in 2010 and 2011. He says she misrepresented the amount of money Burlington college could raise to support a land purchase from the Catholic Church. A loan from People's United Bank was contingent upon Sanders and the college coming up with more than $2 million dollars. "The bank understood it as confirmed donations," Toensing said.

The documents sent to U.S. Attorney Eric Miller suggest Sanders never secured the donations she told the bank she already had.

Read more: http://www.wcax.com/story/30935632/group-calls-for-fraud-investigation-into-jane-sanders-land-deals



This has been discussed before on DU:

Jane Sanders overstated donation amounts in loan application for Burlington College
September 13, 2015 by Morgan True


Former Burlington College president Jane Sanders overstated donation amounts in a bank application for a $6.7 million loan that was used by the college to purchase a prime 33-acre property on Lake Champlain in 2010.

Sanders told People’s United Bank that the college had $2.6 million in pledged donations to support the purchase of the former Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington property on North Avenue. The college, however, received only $676,000 in actual donations from 2010 through 2014, according to figures provided by Burlington College.

That’s far less than the $5 million Sanders listed as likely pledges in the loan agreement, and less than a third of the $2.14 million Sanders had promised People’s Bank the college would collect in cash during the four-year period.

<...>

Two people whose pledges are listed as confirmed in the loan agreement told VTDigger that their personal financial records show their pledges were overstated. Neither were aware that the pledges were used to secure the loan.

<...>

People’s United Bank stipulated that at the time of the closing in December 2010, the school would provide a report as part of the loan agreement detailing “fundraising collections, commitments and grants equal to $2,270,000” and information that would satisfy the bank that pledges were “valid and enforceable commitments of the respective donors and granting parties.”

Read more:

http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/

106 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Group calls for fraud investigation into Jane Sanders' land deals (Original Post) Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 OP
Lemme guess..... DFW Jan 2016 #1
Rodent carnal knowledge. MeNMyVolt Jan 2016 #85
This is interesting. I wonder if anything will come of it. NurseJackie Jan 2016 #2
Yes, it sounds very, very serious!!! CoffeeCat Jan 2016 #51
You ought to call Ken Star! Sounds like white Water or something! Dustlawyer Jan 2016 #65
Sure you do. Alert the media. 840high Jan 2016 #72
Yeah, how dare she say she had donations and not had them so the college had to pay part. trillion Jan 2016 #96
It's a conspiracy! Blue_Adept Jan 2016 #3
this has been handmade34 Jan 2016 #4
Sanders supporters like to blather about Hillary's baggage, but at least her baggage has been well Metric System Jan 2016 #6
you can trust handmade34 Jan 2016 #8
fester enid602 Jan 2016 #39
I was suggesting handmade34 Jan 2016 #40
Most people in Vermont means a few hundred thousand people - he's now running to be the leader..... George II Jan 2016 #41
If you read the entire article, you will see that this particular issue notadmblnd Jan 2016 #38
Not by the national press or the national GOP. pnwmom Jan 2016 #55
Especially when the resources of the billionaires are available to make mountains out rhett o rick Jan 2016 #70
You think so, do you? You think all of Hillary's baggage is on the table? DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #98
Whatever else one may say about her, Jane Sanders does NOT have the KingCharlemagne Jan 2016 #106
Hadn't heard of it until now. joshcryer Jan 2016 #13
2011? handmade34 Jan 2016 #28
The Church's connection to this land deal is one worth exploring. nt msanthrope Jan 2016 #97
They needed the money because they raped children. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #99
Yes. The Archdiocese had settlements to pay. Jane Sander's role in acquiring this particular msanthrope Jan 2016 #101
I guess this is supposed to remind me of Whitewater and the Clinton scandal. valerief Jan 2016 #5
Whitewater was investigated for years and turned out to be nothing. pnwmom Jan 2016 #7
And yet bringing up this reminds me of the Clinton scandal. nt valerief Jan 2016 #10
If Bernie is the nominee, this will be Jane Sanders' Whitewater, pnwmom Jan 2016 #14
It actually reminds me of lots and lots of Clinton scandals. I'm remembering more every hour. nt DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #50
....x10+ 840high Jan 2016 #73
aka the Great Right Wing Conspiracy. joshcryer Jan 2016 #75
Yeah, but this is likely nothing, too. joshcryer Jan 2016 #16
Too early to say. But it doesn't matter. If he's the nominee they'll use it against him, pnwmom Jan 2016 #17
I can't argue with that. joshcryer Jan 2016 #20
Right. The scandal is never about the facts. Just announcing the scandal makes valerief Jan 2016 #19
They need a nice sounding name for it. joshcryer Jan 2016 #22
LOL. n/t Smarmie Doofus Jan 2016 #9
OMG, the catholic church closed on a loan without all the relevent info on financing passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #11
The information provided the Church apparently contained false information. pnwmom Jan 2016 #18
Does not sound like the charity was the problem, even if pledges fell through passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #27
Cali on DU posted an article about this last March, before Bernie even announced. pnwmom Jan 2016 #37
Posted by The Daily Caller because Sanders was hinting at a run passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #45
The Cali who posted about this in March is a strong Bernie supporter. pnwmom Jan 2016 #46
She posted it to show it was a false story passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #58
The VT. Digger has written quite a bit about this and they're not a RW rag. n/t pnwmom Jan 2016 #69
And they have no more proof than Daily Caller passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #71
Because Hillary's campaign is shitting their pants. pangaia Jan 2016 #21
It's not 'only being investigated now', the investigation has been going on since 2014 anigbrowl Jan 2016 #79
where is the "investigation" from your first link. passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #84
An audit is a financial investigation. anigbrowl Jan 2016 #87
You are correct, I shouldn't have broad brushed. passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #90
as I mentioned in my last reply passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #92
Oh sorry, I did not realize you meant a criminal investigation anigbrowl Jan 2016 #94
I am a Hillary supporter but two words: Victoria Toensing Kingofalldems Jan 2016 #12
It's a heads up. If Bernie is the nominee, this stuff will be all over the place. pnwmom Jan 2016 #23
Lots of false crap was flung about Obama too, and none of it stuck. He still won. passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #60
If Bernie wins, anyone who thinks he won't be subject to the same mudslinging pnwmom Jan 2016 #66
I didn't say it won't be flung at him passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #68
I am actually surprised that Victoria didn't hold this back. DURHAM D Jan 2016 #30
Victoria Toensing. That indeed does say it all. emulatorloo Jan 2016 #31
....! KoKo Jan 2016 #91
I have not heard about that duet of liars in ages. asjr Jan 2016 #34
Thank you Uponthegears Jan 2016 #35
Bingo- catnhatnh Jan 2016 #105
This thread will be alerted on and hidden in a matter of minutes. A similar one was just closed due Metric System Jan 2016 #15
It won't matter. This is already going to make national news. leftofcool Jan 2016 #26
Thats pitiful. Why? Is the story not true? Is there no call for an investigation? 7962 Jan 2016 #29
Nah...to good for a laugh. (nt) paleotn Jan 2016 #43
this seems like a panic button being pushed nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #24
It's just the GOP preparing for the possibility of Bernie being the nominee. pnwmom Jan 2016 #25
I just love cutting and pasting notadmblnd Jan 2016 #32
good essay... handmade34 Jan 2016 #36
thanks for posting this passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #63
Overstating loan amounts still constitutes bank fraud Cali_Democrat Jan 2016 #47
I just love this game! notadmblnd Jan 2016 #53
You're leaving out the $1 million "pledge" to be paid out over the subsequent 6 years, pnwmom Jan 2016 #56
Oh you want particulars on who was supposed to raise what. notadmblnd Jan 2016 #59
As the President of a tiny college, the buck stopped with Jane. Any million dollar pnwmom Jan 2016 #67
If you've read what I've posted notadmblnd Jan 2016 #88
I read what you posted and it doesn't discuss the million dollar bequest. pnwmom Jan 2016 #89
Then you did not read the article. notadmblnd Jan 2016 #102
You just had your lunch taken from you below. Why you no reply? DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #100
the same group that is now saying fraud investigation being requested by Vermont GOP official passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #49
And in another VTDigger story passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #57
LOL. Not worthy of more than that. nt silvershadow Jan 2016 #33
I love the smell of Uponthegears Jan 2016 #42
+1000 (nt) paleotn Jan 2016 #44
+1 Yes it does! Bernin Jan 2016 #48
One can just SMELL the panic Plucketeer Jan 2016 #81
One word.....Whitewater blackspade Jan 2016 #52
Yup. That was used against Hillary -- though it amounted to nothing -- and this pnwmom Jan 2016 #54
So pounding this bullshit at DU is a public service announcement? blackspade Jan 2016 #62
So many people here think Whitewater, etc is a strike against Hillary, and a reason pnwmom Jan 2016 #64
Whitewater was bullshit. blackspade Jan 2016 #76
What a coincidence that this breaks just when Bernie closes up in the National polls. Indepatriot Jan 2016 #61
Heehee - they are pure. 840high Jan 2016 #74
Jane Sanders was, at minimum grossly incompetant RandySF Jan 2016 #77
200K? That's it? snoringvoter Jan 2016 #78
It's not the amount, it's the fact she took it. RandySF Jan 2016 #80
Piffle. snoringvoter Jan 2016 #82
If you can't get anything to stick on Bernie, harass Jane. Shame, shame. marble falls Jan 2016 #104
this college only had a $150k endowment when she became President anigbrowl Jan 2016 #83
According to articles posted here, the college disagrees with you passiveporcupine Jan 2016 #86
Bring it. Bring everything you've got. DisgustipatedinCA Jan 2016 #95
Hmmm...., yes, but lexington filly Jan 2016 #93
If they are paying the bank mortgage on time for the property, the bank should shut the fuck up. Sunlei Jan 2016 #103
 

trillion

(1,859 posts)
96. Yeah, how dare she say she had donations and not had them so the college had to pay part.
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 04:09 AM
Jan 2016

Actually, no i doubt anything will come of it. Hillary actually has dirt all over her and blood on her hands - Iraq war.

handmade34

(22,755 posts)
4. this has been
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:20 PM
Jan 2016

somewhat of an issue in Vermont for some time... Bernie in the spotlight just makes it a National issue... we'll see where it goes??

Metric System

(6,048 posts)
6. Sanders supporters like to blather about Hillary's baggage, but at least her baggage has been well
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:25 PM
Jan 2016

rummaged through over the years. We don't know what Sanders surprises await.

handmade34

(22,755 posts)
8. you can trust
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:29 PM
Jan 2016

there will not be much baggage... most people in Vermont know about Bernie (my late husband told stories of parties at his house in the Northeast Kingdom... ahh, the days when the flatlander hippies ruled!)

enid602

(8,524 posts)
39. fester
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:02 PM
Jan 2016

This is more than just baggage. Specific dates, amounts, people, documents, acts, etc. Bernie should have put a lid on it long ago by explaining it, and not letting it fester. I guess Wall Street transparency starts at home.

handmade34

(22,755 posts)
40. I was suggesting
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:06 PM
Jan 2016

Bernie's baggage... not his family's ...and hey, I'm neutral in this... I adore Bernie but I am working for Hillary in the primaries (and will vote for any Democrat that wins)

this is pretty good article about Jane Sanders
http://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/jane-says-sanders-secret-weapon-or-a-political-liability/Content?oid=2670992

George II

(67,782 posts)
41. Most people in Vermont means a few hundred thousand people - he's now running to be the leader.....
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:10 PM
Jan 2016

....of 320 million people. Welcome to the big time, Senator Sanders.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
38. If you read the entire article, you will see that this particular issue
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:01 PM
Jan 2016

has been rummaged through pretty thoroughly.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
55. Not by the national press or the national GOP.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:42 PM
Jan 2016

If Bernie becomes the nominee, he will get the same treatment the Clintons and the Obamas got.

People shouldn't fool themselves into thinking he'll somehow be exempt.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
70. Especially when the resources of the billionaires are available to make mountains out
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:35 PM
Jan 2016

of mole hills. This is called SwiftBoating and it's exactly what we are fighting. We need a change from the corruption of the existing system that is funded by the wealthy 1%.

 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
98. You think so, do you? You think all of Hillary's baggage is on the table?
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 06:19 AM
Jan 2016

I guess we will see about that over the next several long months. I'm already remembering things I had forgotten.

 

KingCharlemagne

(7,908 posts)
106. Whatever else one may say about her, Jane Sanders does NOT have the
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 11:26 AM
Jan 2016

blood of a million innocent Iraqis dripping from her scheming hands.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
101. Yes. The Archdiocese had settlements to pay. Jane Sander's role in acquiring this particular
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 06:55 AM
Jan 2016

property is an interesting one.

valerief

(53,235 posts)
5. I guess this is supposed to remind me of Whitewater and the Clinton scandal.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:25 PM
Jan 2016

Forget the facts. They never matter in a scandal.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
7. Whitewater was investigated for years and turned out to be nothing.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:27 PM
Jan 2016

The national media has barely gotten started on Jane Sanders and Burlington College.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
14. If Bernie is the nominee, this will be Jane Sanders' Whitewater,
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:34 PM
Jan 2016

except on a grander scale.

The Sanders won't be exempt from the GOP mudslinging.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
16. Yeah, but this is likely nothing, too.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:34 PM
Jan 2016

Whitewater was just a typical fishing expedition by the Republicans.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
17. Too early to say. But it doesn't matter. If he's the nominee they'll use it against him,
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:36 PM
Jan 2016

just like they used Whitewater against Bill.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
20. I can't argue with that.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:38 PM
Jan 2016

It does surprise me this has been talked about locally. When I have computer access I'll look in to it. If it's played out on the local level then it's nothing.

joshcryer

(62,265 posts)
22. They need a nice sounding name for it.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:40 PM
Jan 2016

And not a blank-gate type of name. I'm sure they are thinking of something.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
11. OMG, the catholic church closed on a loan without all the relevent info on financing
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:33 PM
Jan 2016

And couldn't back out when financing fell through?

Somehow I don't believe this story at all. And why, oh why, is it only being investigated now?

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
18. The information provided the Church apparently contained false information.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:37 PM
Jan 2016

How would the Church know that pledges Burlington College reported weren't real?

One of the pledges actually turned out to be a bequest -- not to be paid out in the next six years, but only upon the person's death (at some unknown date in the future).

http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/

Two people whose pledges are listed as confirmed in the loan agreement told VTDigger that their personal financial records show their pledges were overstated. Neither were aware that the pledges were used to secure the loan.

Burlington College also cited a $1 million bequest as a pledged donation that would be paid out over six years, even though the money would only be available after the donor’s death.

Burlington College President Christine Plunkett leave a board of trustees meeting Friday. Photo by Laura Krantz/VTDigger
Burlington College President Christine Plunkett leave a board of trustees meeting just before her resignation in December 2014. File photo by Laura Krantz/VTDigger

People’s United Bank stipulated that at the time of the closing in December 2010, the school would provide a report as part of the loan agreement detailing “fundraising collections, commitments and grants equal to $2,270,000” and information that would satisfy the bank that pledges were “valid and enforceable commitments of the respective donors and granting parties.”

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
27. Does not sound like the charity was the problem, even if pledges fell through
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:48 PM
Jan 2016
©2008 Perlman & Perlman LLP
Legal Issues Related to Unfulfilled Charitable Pledges
In today’s challenging economic environment, where large amounts of wealth are
“disappearing” overnight, the fulfillment of charitable pledges can no longer be taken for
granted. Charities, donors, professional fund raisers and third parties such as banks,
landlords, and suppliers are increasingly asking whether pledged funds will in fact
materialize, and what to do if they do not.

Accord
ing to the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), charities are required to record enforceable pledges as assets when they are made, just like any other debt obligation. If a pledge is not fulfilled, the charity must write off the unpaid amount of the pledge.

Alternatively, courts will enforce a pledge if the charity has suffered some detriment by taking action in reasonable reliance of the pledge, even though such detriment was not requested as consideration. This legal principle is known as “promissory estoppel” or “detrimental reliance.”

Actions that constitute detrimental reliance include soliciting other donors based on the pledge, incurring costs, entering into contracts, or borrowing money based on the expectation that the donor’s promise will be kept. This principle is currently the law in roughly 30 states.

There are certain defenses that can be raised to avoid enforcement of oral agreements,
including if the agreement is not one that is capable of being performed within one year from the time of the agreement. This defense against enforcement is called a “statute of frauds” defense. However, a party may be barred from raising the statute of frauds as a defense if the charity has relied on the promise to its detriment or the donor has performed part of the agreement (i.e., made payments).


http://www.perlmanandperlman.com/publications/articles/2008/LegalIssuesRelatedtoUnfulfilledCharitablePledges.pdf

But if it fits your case of trying to prosecute Sander's wife, then I totally understand.

Again, why wait till now to investigate this?

I'll try to fix the text (it was a PDF file) when I come back. Gotta go feed goats.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
37. Cali on DU posted an article about this last March, before Bernie even announced.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:01 PM
Jan 2016
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026421966

It's been an issue confined to VT till recently, but if he's the nominee the Rethugs will certainly use it in the general.

Whitewater was never an issue till Bill Clinton ran for President.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
45. Posted by The Daily Caller because Sanders was hinting at a run
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:14 PM
Jan 2016

OK...I get it. You guys will go after anything. If it was news back in 2010, when it supposedly happened, but nothing happened, I guess we need to try to make it news again now.

Really loved this part:

According to Jonna Spilbor, an attorney who reviewed the documents for TheDCNF", “the college APPEARS to have committed a pretty sophisticated crime” by exaggerating donor commitments in order to secure financing for the deal.


* DCNF is The Daily Caller News Foundation.

What? Their own attorney determined says they "appear" to have committed sophisticated crime?



Sorry guys. You are going to have to do a lot better than this. Oh my sides hurt.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
46. The Cali who posted about this in March is a strong Bernie supporter.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:26 PM
Jan 2016

So do you think she's part of some deep conspiracy? An undercover Hillary agent, maybe?

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
58. She posted it to show it was a false story
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:53 PM
Jan 2016

She posted the same story I just referenced...that Bernie was hinting at running, so the daily caller came out with this phony fraud opinion piece by Tucker Carlson, with nothing to back it up.

Do you always base your beliefs on conservative rags and the nasty stuff they post?

I guess it if is against Sanders, you don't care?

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
71. And they have no more proof than Daily Caller
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:38 PM
Jan 2016

I've read a number of their stories. They are mostly just opinion and no identifying sources of people who are claiming fraud. If there were fraud involved, this would have already been investigated and taken to court.

Sorry...you are really trying too hard. Be careful. You might break something.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
21. Because Hillary's campaign is shitting their pants.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:39 PM
Jan 2016




Notice, I did NOT say HILLARY, I said her campaign.

 

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)
79. It's not 'only being investigated now', the investigation has been going on since 2014
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:52 PM
Jan 2016

Here's a 2014 news article about it: http://www.wcax.com/story/26284478/burlington-college-president-responds-to-critics

And here's a recent one from the Cahtolic Church bishopric in question denying that it's a big problem notwithstanding the financial loss they suffered: http://digital.vpr.net/post/catholic-church-rejects-claim-sanders-wife-caused-financial-harm#stream/0

That the church was the counterparty in this transaction is largely irrelevant, as it would have no bearing on Dr. Sanders' fiduciary responsibilities as President of the Burlington College. Of course the timing of this move is blatantly political, but her tenure as head of the small college was quite controversial going back to at least 2008, and it seems like she resigned in 2011 as an alternative to being forced out. I'm not surprised that the GOP would seek to make an issue out of her tenure there.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
84. where is the "investigation" from your first link.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:07 PM
Jan 2016

they mention an audit, not an investigation.

Nor is their any insinuation of fraud by Sanders. That story says they had financial difficulties that they are dealing with, but no mention of fraud. Only of one donation that turned out to be a bequest (unbeknownst to them at the time they were citing it for the loan).

And from the second link:

The vice-chairman of the Vermont Republican Party says Bernie Sanders’ wife has exacted a severe financial toll on the Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington. But the bishop who oversees the Catholic Church in Vermont says the accusation is without merit.


Both those links pretty much absolve Sanders of any intent of fraud.

I'm sure that was your intent in posting those stories (thank you). I hope some of the accusers here read them. It looks like the Hillary supporters and the Republicans are working in lock-step on this.
 

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)
87. An audit is a financial investigation.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:27 PM
Jan 2016

Misclassifying a bequest as a donation isn't necessarily fraud, but it is almost certainly negligent and I would not conclude from those two articles that she was absolved of it. People with fiduciary responsibilities are subject to different legal standards of responsibility from individuals acting on their own behalf. Learn a bit more about what being a fiduciary means here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/fiduciary_duty

Now having said that, I don't see how the GOP hack who filed the suit has any standing to sue and nor do I see any evidence that the parties to the transaction intend legal action against her, so the chances she ends up on trial for this seem pretty low.

I'm sure that was your intent in posting those stories (thank you). I hope some of the accusers here read them. It looks like the Hillary supporters and the Republicans are working in lock-step on this.


I'm a Hillary supporter you know. Suggesting that the Clinton campaign is in cahoots with the GOP on this is just the sort of unsubstantiated allegation you yourself are complaining about. Reality is that any credible political candidate for high office will see their past examined under a microscope, and it only took me 10 minutes to find multiple potential controversies related to Dr. Sanders' tenure as President of Burlington. You can bet the GOP is working a lot harder for dirt than I am and won't have any reservations about flinging it about as long as Sanders' run continues. So my advice is don't take it seriously, but all the same, get used to it.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
90. You are correct, I shouldn't have broad brushed.
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 12:02 AM
Jan 2016
Suggesting that the Clinton campaign is in cahoots with the GOP on this is just the sort of unsubstantiated allegation you yourself are complaining about


I should have said some and some of them are right here in this thread. (not you). And working in cahoots, does not necessarily mean coordinating efforts, but feeding off each others efforts. The people pushing this by posting from conservative hack sites and passing it off as true, are the ones I'm talking about.

Sorry about that. I'm usually more careful about the broadbrush thing.

From your first link, the news agency said they were able to obtain an audit, but who requested the audit? If this was a legal investigation, who is behind it. That's what I've been looking for, and can't find.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
92. as I mentioned in my last reply
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 12:16 AM
Jan 2016
From your first link, the news agency said they were able to obtain an audit, but who requested the audit? If this was a legal investigation, who is behind it. That's what I've been looking for, and can't find.


Later in the article is says:

They come on the heels of the college being put on probation by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges for a two-year period due to financial problems. The college's most recent audit reveals Burlington College is $1.7 million in debt.


This is the audit they were referring to. It was not an investigation of wrong doing, but an audit of the financial standing of the college and being allowed to remain in the association of schools and colleges.

I still see no indication of any kind of legal audit concerning the issue of the land purchase.
 

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)
94. Oh sorry, I did not realize you meant a criminal investigation
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 01:03 AM
Jan 2016

I was thinking of the media investigation of the story and did not pick up on the context you meant the first time you read it. I certainly do not think there is any likelihood of Jane Sanders being charged with fraud, sorry if I gave the opposite impression.

I don't see this as being a very serious problem for the Sanders campaign, I just expect that it will stick around like a bad smell while he is running because it makes for good political theater. If Jane Sanders were a candidate herself I'd regard it as much more serious but since that's not the case it's merely embarrassing rather than something anyone should change their vote over.

Kingofalldems

(38,361 posts)
12. I am a Hillary supporter but two words: Victoria Toensing
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:33 PM
Jan 2016

Right winger with a permanent sneer on her face. Wife of filthy repub DiGenova of Fox news.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
23. It's a heads up. If Bernie is the nominee, this stuff will be all over the place.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:40 PM
Jan 2016

They shouldn't pretend only the Clintons would be subject to mudslinging.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
60. Lots of false crap was flung about Obama too, and none of it stuck. He still won.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:55 PM
Jan 2016

Don't get your hopes up too high. I'd hate to see you suffer from a big downer when Bernie wins.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
66. If Bernie wins, anyone who thinks he won't be subject to the same mudslinging
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:17 PM
Jan 2016

will be grossly disappointed.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
68. I didn't say it won't be flung at him
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:20 PM
Jan 2016

I said he will probably shake it off like Obama did.

And then he'll win the general!

asjr

(10,479 posts)
34. I have not heard about that duet of liars in ages.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:56 PM
Jan 2016

I never watch Fox news so I had forgotten them. To me it is as if they just crawled out of their cave.

Metric System

(6,048 posts)
15. This thread will be alerted on and hidden in a matter of minutes. A similar one was just closed due
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:34 PM
Jan 2016

to Sanders jurors.

 

7962

(11,841 posts)
29. Thats pitiful. Why? Is the story not true? Is there no call for an investigation?
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:49 PM
Jan 2016

What rules did the story violate?
Although I have seen many hides that didnt violate anything but someones sensitive feelings. I've had one myself some time back.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
25. It's just the GOP preparing for the possibility of Bernie being the nominee.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:45 PM
Jan 2016

This is just the beginning if he wins the primaries.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
32. I just love cutting and pasting
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 07:53 PM
Jan 2016
Jane Sanders overstated donation amounts in a bank application for a $6.7 million loan that was used by the college to purchase a prime 33-acre property on Lake Champlain in 2010



The school paid $10 million for the land,



Members of the college’s board of trustees have never publicly explained why Sanders was asked to leave, but former trustee Robin Lloyd told Seven Days that Sanders’ difficulty meeting fundraising goals was a factor in her resignation. Greg Guma, who covered Sanders departure for VTDigger, reported that former trustee Jonathan Leopold was unhappy with her fundraising just days before her resignation was announced in September 2011.



Leopold never saw the actual signed pledge agreements, but he believes “the representations that were made at the time were made in good faith.”

“In hindsight a problem like this is an orphan, and there are lots of people who want to lay it at the feet of a specific person,” Leopold said.[/b[

Leopold emphasized that other members of the administration were also responsible for the capital campaign’s failure and a weak economy was also a factor.

He offered no concrete reason for Sanders being asked to resign, saying only that personally he “felt it was time for a change.”

http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/

It doesn't appear that the bank suffered a loss on the deal, if someone knows different, please post. Also if the church was damaged by it.
 

Cali_Democrat

(30,439 posts)
47. Overstating loan amounts still constitutes bank fraud
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:26 PM
Jan 2016
18 U.S. Code § 1344 - Bank fraud

Whoever knowingly executes, or attempts to execute, a scheme or artifice—
(1) to defraud a financial institution; or
(2) to obtain any of the moneys, funds, credits, assets, securities, or other property owned by, or under the custody or control of, a financial institution, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises;
shall be fined not more than $1,000,000 or imprisoned not more than 30 years, or both.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1344

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
53. I just love this game!
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:39 PM
Jan 2016
First, there must be a showing that the fraud was “knowingly and intentionally” committed, he said. Misstatements that result from ignorance or negligence don’t constitute criminal fraud, but could result in a civil action, Waples said.

In the case of Burlington College, it appears that Sanders overstated the pledges in the loan document, and misstated the nature of the $1 million bequest. Whether Sanders made misstatements intentionally or out of ignorance or negligence is unknown. VTDigger was unable to interview Sanders or Plunkett, and additional records were not available.

Secondly, prosecutors would need to show that the fraud was material, meaning that it could have impacted the plaintiff’s decision (in a case against Sanders or Burlington College, the plaintiff would be People’s United Bank). A showing of materiality doesn’t rely on whether the fraud did influence a plaintiff’s decision, only that it could have, Waples said.

The overstated pledges VTDigger has identified total less than $35,000, and would be unlikely to be considered material. However, close to $620,000 in confirmed pledges were never realized and are no longer being sought by the college, which means other pledges could have been overstated as well.

People’s United Bank is unlikely to pursue a civil action against Burlington College. That’s because, following the land deal with Farrell for $7.56 million, the school’s debt is greatly reduced and it’s in a better position to pay back the loan. A second deal to sell a former orphanage building on the North Avenue property to Farrell for $2 million will further improve the school’s financial position. That deal is expected to close in October.

If Burlington College were to have defaulted on the loan, the North Avenue property would have provided valuable collateral — the City of Burlington assessed it at $20 million.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
56. You're leaving out the $1 million "pledge" to be paid out over the subsequent 6 years,
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:45 PM
Jan 2016

that was actually a $1 million bequest, to be paid out only at the unknown date of the donor's future death.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
59. Oh you want particulars on who was supposed to raise what.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:53 PM
Jan 2016

here goes.

Michael Luck, whom Sanders hired as a vice president to assist with the college’s capital campaign, was the school official communicating with Leavitt at the time. He confirmed Leavitt’s version of events.

“He made it very clear he was juggling the estate business,” Luck said.

Luck was making regular reports to Sanders and other school officials about his progress on the fundraising campaign. Luck is a veteran of dozens of capital campaigns, he said. He’s also a principal at the fundraising consultancy Maple Leaf Management Group in Underhill. It’s typical to request of donors a signed letter for a formal pledge that includes the amount and over how many years it would be paid, he said.

Luck doesn’t recall ever soliciting such a letter for $60,000 from Leavitt, though he said he can’t be sure. Luck said he left files on the donors he worked with at the college. Current school officials said they had no such records.

Luck said he did not realize Leavitt was listed as a $60,000 confirmed contribution on the loan document. While he may have given Sanders a “hopeful” impression about the second $30,000, he does not recall telling her it was a “signed and sealed” pledge.


Former trustee Rob Michalak is a Burlington College alumni who now works at Ben & Jerry’s. Michalak is listed on the loan document as a $5,000 confirmed pledge. He recalls being asked to contribute to the school’s capital campaign along with other faculty and trustees.

However, he doesn’t recall pledging at the $5,000 level. After reviewing his own financial records, Michalak confirmed he did make a pledge and donation, but not for $5,000. He did not wish to share the actual amount of his contribution.


Seems to me the guy she hired to fund raise needs to be looked at.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
67. As the President of a tiny college, the buck stopped with Jane. Any million dollar
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:19 PM
Jan 2016

pledge should have been very carefully vetted. Her name went on the loan document.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
89. I read what you posted and it doesn't discuss the million dollar bequest.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:53 PM
Jan 2016

Nor does it discuss the fact that Jane, as the President of the college, was responsible for the accuracy of the documents she signed.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
49. the same group that is now saying fraud investigation being requested by Vermont GOP official
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:31 PM
Jan 2016

wrote a story about Sander's leaving the college in 2010. Here is part of that story.

Until recently, Sanders, wife of U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders, hoped to continue as president for another four years. But negotiations over a new contract stalled as doubts emerged about her plans and fundraising. In August, the board voted to negotiate an early exit package.

Last week, after a VTDigger.org story described the challenges facing the school, the agenda for a special Board of Trustees meeting, held at the Sheraton Hotel on Monday, was leaked. The agenda revealed that the trustees would be discussing the “removal of the president.” Lawyers for Sanders and the college have since reached a settlement that includes her resignation effective in three weeks, the title of President Emeritus and a year-long-paid sabbatical.

Purchase of the 200-student college’s new campus has created opportunities to “significantly grow the student body and fully realize the expansion of academic programs,” according to the announcement of Sanders’ departure. But her goal of doubling enrollment before the end of the decade could be tough to achieve, and millions of dollars more need to be raised to complete the new campus renovations.


http://vtdigger.org/2011/09/27/jane-sanders-resigns-presidency-of-burlington-college-reaches-settlement/

Note, nothing mentioned about fraud. Nothing mentioned about money issues with the purchase of the property. Only money issues regarding completion of the new campus renovations.

It does talk about personality issues between her and staff, and I don't doubt that may be true...but nothing touching the purchase of the property. So again...why now?

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
57. And in another VTDigger story
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:48 PM
Jan 2016
Sanders told People’s United Bank that the college had $2.6 million in pledged donations to support the purchase of the former Roman Catholic Diocese of Burlington property on North Avenue. The college, however, received only $676,000 in actual donations from 2010 through 2014, according to figures provided by Burlington College.


That is NOT fraud.

Pledges and actual donations are not always the same. Pledges are not always fullfilled.

They also say that two people who pledged say their pledge amounts were overstated (but offer no proof or even identification of said donors), and one was only supposed to happen after the donors death...so where is this fraud case? If these facts are true, the church should have sued the college.

But the only sources of this story are from conservative rags like Daily caller.

Sorry folks...there is no story here.
 

Uponthegears

(1,499 posts)
42. I love the smell of
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:12 PM
Jan 2016

Hillary supporters quoting RW hacks like Brady Toensing in the morning. It smells like victory.

Apologies to Francis Ford Coppola

 

Plucketeer

(12,882 posts)
81. One can just SMELL the panic
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:55 PM
Jan 2016

in Camp Coronation! It smells like rotting strategy and fuming frustration. Quick! Pass out the clothespins!

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
54. Yup. That was used against Hillary -- though it amounted to nothing -- and this
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:41 PM
Jan 2016

will be used against Bernie, if he becomes the nominee.

pnwmom

(108,925 posts)
64. So many people here think Whitewater, etc is a strike against Hillary, and a reason
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 09:16 PM
Jan 2016

not to vote for her; without accounting for the fact that Bernie and Jane will be subject to exactly the same sorts of attacks -- though they will be unfamiliar to a national audience, and therefore more interesting.

blackspade

(10,056 posts)
76. Whitewater was bullshit.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:27 PM
Jan 2016

Anyone with half a brain knows that.
My point was that DU shouldn't be funneling this RW bullshit....especially Clinton supporters given Whitewater, Benghazi, e-mails, etc....

 

Indepatriot

(1,253 posts)
61. What a coincidence that this breaks just when Bernie closes up in the National polls.
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 08:56 PM
Jan 2016

I'm sure Hilary's folks had NOTHING to do with it....

RandySF

(57,661 posts)
77. Jane Sanders was, at minimum grossly incompetant
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:34 PM
Jan 2016

And Bernie is a hypocrite for speaking out against golden parachutes after his wig took a $200k severance.

 

snoringvoter

(178 posts)
78. 200K? That's it?
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 10:52 PM
Jan 2016

That's just the fee for a Clinton speech, minus the airfare and the required deposits.

 

anigbrowl

(13,889 posts)
83. this college only had a $150k endowment when she became President
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:03 PM
Jan 2016

She expanded it considerably during her tenure but also ran up a large amount of debt in the process. The numbers are quite low but contemporary news reports (ie long before the Sanders presidential campaign) sound as if a lot of people thought she was feathering her next. Perhaps this is why she was so unpopular there by the time of her departure. That said, sometimes the best path to financial viability is through growth (in this case investment in land and buildings for a permanent campus) and that is not always appreciated by people who are ignorant of economics. I don't know enough from news reports to judge the quality of her job performance, but she was at loggerheads with others at the college the first time Hillary was running for President back in 2008 so I am not surprised that the GOP would try to make some political hay out of it.

passiveporcupine

(8,175 posts)
86. According to articles posted here, the college disagrees with you
Mon Jan 11, 2016, 11:20 PM
Jan 2016

Her income at the college was 150K, and they settled with her (for being forced out) for a year's pay and I guess 50k on top of that. Doesn't really sound that extreme to me. As a matter of fact, that's pretty low for what most CEO's get for a golden parachute when they leave a company, even if they cause the company to go bankrupt, or have major losses.

This is from a story on 5 CEO's getting golden parachutes...


Each of these CEOs get $150 million or more from these plans - often nicknamed "golden parachutes" - since they're not a bad way for a CEO to go. The data are based on estimates the companies provide to investors on what the CEOs would earn as part of a change of control event as of the end of their most recent fiscal years.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/markets/2015/12/07/ceo-severance-change-control/76910386/

Any some of you Hill supporters are bitching about 200K for a golden parachute for a college president?
 

DisgustipatedinCA

(12,530 posts)
95. Bring it. Bring everything you've got.
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 01:46 AM
Jan 2016

If we're doing open warfare, let's fucking do this thing. You bring everything you've got against Sanders and his wife. We'll bring Clinton scandal after Clinton scandal after Clinton scandal. No motherfucking prisoners. Bring it.

lexington filly

(239 posts)
93. Hmmm...., yes, but
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 12:17 AM
Jan 2016

So the vice chair of the Vermont Republican Party is the attorney for "Catholic parishioners....." Or are they just Republicans first and parishioners by the by. Hmmm....

Let's say, yes it's fraud, for discussion's sake.

But then we're left with two candidates whose spouses have been or are involved in fraudulent behavior. One while president of a college and one while The President. Where does that leave us---weighing the act's of each and the harm?

Yes, but we also have one of the candidates being investigated to see if her public State office was used to enrich her private Foundation.

Yes I'm a staunch Democrat and will vote for Hillary or Bernie but the choice doesn't become easier to make as the primary season goes on.

Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
103. If they are paying the bank mortgage on time for the property, the bank should shut the fuck up.
Tue Jan 12, 2016, 09:15 AM
Jan 2016

A "pledge" is not money in hand. I hope this group pays off the mortgage early to save some interest to the bank.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Group calls for fraud inv...