Warren embraced the high-dollar fundraiser circuit for years -- until just before her presidential ca

[comradebillyboy]

Chase Williams grinned broadly as he stood for a photo next to Sen. Elizabeth Warren, chatting briefly with the senator from Massachusetts before moving on so someone else could have their turn.

It was the kind of moment that has become a ubiquitous part of Warren’s presidential campaign and its long “selfie lines,” where supporters wait for hours to pose with her at no charge.

But this shot, taken in October 2017, was at an entirely different kind of event: an exclusive “backstage” reception that took place in the vault of a former Cleveland bank. And that was the day’s low-rent affair — donors who agreed to pay more attended an even more exclusive shindig with Warren that day, according to two people familiar with her schedule.

The events were part of a high-dollar fundraising program that Warren had embraced her entire political career, from her first Senate run in 2011 through her reelection last year. Warren was so successful at it that she was able to transfer $10 million of her Senate cash to help launch her presidential bid.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/warren-embraced-the-high-dollar-fundraiser-circuit-for-years--until-just-before-her-presidential-campaign/2019/12/23/818fa02a-253b-11ea-ad73-2fd294520e97_story.html

[bluedye33139]

1. I'm still old-fashioned. I can't believe this has become a litmus test

[comradebillyboy]

2. Warren and Sanders made it a litmus test.

I don't have any problem with fundraising that is legal and open. But Warren is getting bitten by her own purity test.

I was leaning towards Warren up into October but have been losing confidence in her in the last couple of months. Her attacks on Mayor Pete's perfectly legal fundraising have been a huge turnoff.

Edit: Fundraising has always been a purity test for Bernie. Warren has only recently made it a big issue.

[still_one]

4. +++

[bluedye33139]

7. I still love her. But I think this is stupid.

A political campaign must use available resources. These resources include small donors and wealthy donors. I hate this election so far, but on the positive side, I hate it way less than 2016!

[LakeArenal]

11. Oh, I was told all rich people are Oligarchs.

Got a lot of pushback for supporting rich people who aren’t after political influence.

This from a supporter of a particular candidate.

And it wasn’t my candidate.

Go Pete. Collect all the money you can and roll it over to your next campaign. That way, next time, you can take some sort of superior high ground about donors.

[hedda_foil]

24. Link please.

[LakeArenal]

30. Don't care if you believe me or not.

But here on DU. It’s Christmas Eve. If it’s that important to you, I’ll look it up after the first.

[Cha]

48. I believe you, LakeArenal..

[LakeArenal]

56. Thanks. We don't need to fabricate anything.

Felize, sistah!!

[Cha]

57. We sure as hell don't need to fabricate one thing or

wouldn't want to!

Feliz, sistah!

[betsuni]

46. It's true. I joked that Pete's beholden to Big Wine and was told

that no, Pete is beholden to Big Oligarch. It's a thing.

For a certain ideology, it's vital to believe the U.S. is rigged by oligarchs, all rich people are oligarchs, and the reason government is dysfunctional is because of money in politics. When these oligarchs donate to Democrats the only reason is to make them do things Republicans do, like not tax millionaires and billionaires. Therefore both sides-both sides-both sides.

[Cha]

50. I call Balderdash on the "oligarch" Accusations..

Big Wine!

[betsuni]

79. It's like a Russia U.S. both sides thing.

[wellst0nev0ter]

92. Glad my quote struck a chord

Anyways, we saw in real time how money from the wealthy changed Mayor Pete's agenda into something anodyne that doesn't affect the well off. If that's not proof that money and influence from the few corrupts, what is?

[betsuni]

95. What quote?

It's anyway, not anyways. And how has money changed Mayor Pete's agenda? Why do you want to strike a cord? What's the point? Blah blah blah Democrats are corrupt.

[renate]

55. I don't get why the whole wine cave thing was such a big deal

He's raising money differently, but legally. And especially if she has big-donor fundraising in her own background, it seems like a weird thing to criticize him for.

She's still my preferred candidate because of all the things I love about her. But I think attacking Pete on fundraising was a bad move.

[The Mouth]

67. Well, now that she stopped doing it

Pete's fair game.

/sarc

[PhoenixDem]

73. +++++

[redstatebluegirl]

28. It is part of that damn purity test coming from many on the left of our party.

Nobody could pass their test, not even Bernie.

[The Mouth]

68. Which makes it somewhat ironic

when someone on the left can't pass it, either.

Supposedly "She only did that for Senate, not since running for POTUS' or some such rot.

We all know the candidates need to raise every dollar they can; it's just all but the most rabidly and blindly partisan doesn't care for hypocrisy from the left any more than from the right.

Criticizing someone for doing something you've done in the past is never a good look, tripe like 'That was for the Senate' just makes people laugh.

[delisen]

3. Not bothered by this or Biden's last minute call to Anita Hill

I think each candidate should just own the facts of their particular cases.

[Skya Rhen]

5. Most people aren't bothered by the Anita Hill red herring so you're in good company.

[delisen]

34. I know many people bothered by Biden's last minute "apology"

and I respect their position.

I also have enormous respect for Anita Hill and having watched the the entire hearing over which Sen Biden presided and read extensively about the behind-the-scenes maneuvers I believe Senator Biden did Anita Hill and women a tremendous disservice

I am glad Anita Hill has spoken out about the enormously delayed "apology."

I simply believe their is an element of opportunism in political primary races as well as general elections

My comment perhaps come from a position of lower expectations for totally ethical behavior among candidates-even Senator McGovern was not immune, as he publicly backed his vp choiceSenator Eagleton "1000 percent" only to reverse himself later.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

69. If you consider Joe's "apology" an apology, maybe you could also consider it delayed.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[LakeArenal]

15. These days it seems facts are in the eye of the beholder.

[PhoenixDem]

74. Classic whataboutism n/t

[delisen]

100. Huh? I llke to think and I encourage others to also think-its democracy in action. join us!

[PhoenixDem]

102. It is not democracy in action.

It is deflection in action.

[whathehell]

108. I'm bothered that Biden told Wall St "Nothing much will change"

Last edited Thu Dec 26, 2019, 07:01 AM - Edit history (1)

if he becomes president.

[betsuni]

111. Why?

Bernie doesn't know how to break up big banks

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/04/bernie-sanders-break-up-banks

[blm]

6. She chose to start running her 3rd campaign without big money fundraisers.

Are you not glad she made that decision? Prior to that she had accepted running the standard Dem party way.

It can be said that the purity police are those who judge harshly anyone who evolves on an issue.

[comradebillyboy]

10. She's the one attacking other candidates over fundraising. She's living

in a glass house and just started throwing stones.

Elections are very expensive. I have no problems with fundraising within the limits of the law. I don't have any issue with Warren's fundraisers either. If she wins the nomination she will have to court the big donors in order to be competitive. What do you think she will do then?

[blm]

18. She has already made that agreement with DNC. She chose to forego it

for the primary race because the policy she wants to implement as president includes the overturning of Citizens United.

She had to start somewhere and we should all be glad for it.

She has been upfront about all this.

Geez, Pete camp was happy when Warren didn’t hit him back for attacking her relentlessly on Med4All, even though he was for it not so long ago. Warren didn’t want to join the fray. After 3months of being attacked she is now hitting back and the outrage against her is manufactured and absurdly disproportionate.

[whathehell]

110. Thank you. n/t

[dansolo]

31. She rolled her Senate money into her campaign

That is not evolving, it's just hypocricy. Her campaign is using money gained from big money fundraisers. And she is planning to go back to big money fundraisers in the general election.

[blm]

32. And? You wanted her to go along with every standard YOU approve of

Based on your own purity tests for Warren?

Gee....again I realize how Pete camp sure would have preferred that Warren stayed above the fray for another month or two while they attacked her nonstop for Med4All even though Pete said he supported it not so long ago.

Pete camp wants it their way or the highway.

[BlueMTexpat]

97. This.

Thanks, blm!

[LongtimeAZDem]

38. Again, that would be fine if she was setting an example, instead of attacking others

By attacking, she chose to be the purity police, and the hypocrisy of it bit her in the ass.

[blm]

82. And that is only OK to do when it's everyone else attacking her for

3months straight. How dare she hit back.

[LongtimeAZDem]

83. You're not paying any attention to what anyone is saying; you're just repeating yourself

[blm]

86. Cuz I am kinda pissed at the hypocrisy from some camps.

THREE MONTHS STRAIGHT!!!!!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

101. So true... but, what were you expecting?! Look how Bernie is treated!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[emmaverybo]

89. Since she was attacked on policy, might she not have attacked Pete on the same grounds? I don't

think he ever implied that she is corrupt, unethical. That’s a character smear.

[BeyondGeography]

8. If we're talking about money in politics Warren is winning

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

As a reminder, someone in this race has real-world credibility in standing up to Big Money:

Link to tweet

Warren’s mistake here was focusing on just on fundraising methods rather than sources. Once the conversation gets back to the mutual attraction between Pete and Wall St. she’ll be fine.

And, btw, Pete’s continued identification with the wine cave sinks him even lower in the eyes of younger voters where he runs even with Biden and way behind Warren and Sanders:

The Democratic debate's Buttigieg 'wine cave' putdown explains his problems with millennials

... Beyond the damage that does his campaign, the exchange is indicative of a paradoxical challenge facing the 37-year-old South Bend, Indiana, mayor: The youngest major Democratic candidate, who has called for a generational change in leadership, isn’t resonating with the youngest voters. And one of the reasons is that his high-brow hobnobbing is a sign of a politics-as-usual approach that doesn’t appeal to his own millennial peers.

Buttigieg trails the oldest candidate, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, by 41 years and 11 percentage points, according to the RealClearPolitics polling average as of Thursday night. His gap is similar with 70-year-old Warren, a Massachusetts senator. But among the youngest voters, his numbers are far worse. While his RealClearPolitics average is at 8.3 percent of national support, a Quinnipiac University poll last week indicated that only 2 percent of voters ages 18 to 34 would support him, compared to 12 percent of voters ages 35 to 49 and 50 to 64, and 11 percent of voters over 65.

More at https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/think/amp/ncna1105691

[LakeArenal]

13. Thankfully, collecting a lot doesn't make you a winner.

If you aren’t the winner, you get to roll the money into your next campaign.

[Drunken Irishman]

21. If she's winning this narrative, I'd hate to see what losing is...

Warren's biggest issue has, and continues to be, her sincerity. A lot of people question it and this is yet another bad misstep from the Warren campaign that really is indicative of her slip in the polls. I like Warren personally, but I feel she's a mess of a candidate with how she handles these missteps.

On paper, Warren should be walking to the nomination. She's got the bonafides, or you'd think, of a liberal dream, without the actual divisiveness that Bernie had prior to the race. Among all the Democrats, only Bernie and Biden had better name recognition but she has continuously face-planted at major moments in the campaign that has cost her to lose a ton of traction each time.

First it was the whole DNA flub, which dominated the very early days of her campaign. Then, when she finally rebounded, and began making a surge in the polls, she backed herself into a corner with Medicare for All, only to have to pivot and watch her support dip because of it ... and now she's positioning herself for even more criticism by going after a Democrat on something she's done in the past.

On Oct. 8th, Warren essentially tied Biden nationally at 26.8% to his 27.

Since, she's dropped ten points and is now third behind Sanders.

On Oct. 28th, Warren was first in an average of Iowa polls at 22.7%. Today, she's fourth and has dropped nearly seven-points.

I don't consider that winning. She's once again opened herself up to the sincerity criticism and, as was the case with the DNA flap and them M4A, it's likely to ding her poll numbers even more. It wouldn't surprise me if Warren fell behind Klobuchar in Iowa. Okay, it'd surprise me somewhat but at this rate? She's faltering heading into the most important stretch of the campaign, which is not the message you'd want to send to wary Dems who are focused on beating Donald Trump.

[blm]

33. Liars questioned it for personal political gain. Warren is sincere and Clinton,

Obama, and Biden all know it. It’s why they went to her for her expertise.

Lying operatives attacked her credibility and since she was on top of the polls in Iowa all the professional liars took shots at her for 3 months straight.

She now hits back and it’s WhineCity.

[Drunken Irishman]

39. lol

She has come under fire about her sincerity with her heritage, her support for M4A, her background, including her brothers and now this. Warren is a good person but she seems to struggle with the image of someone who is 100% honest and transparent.

[BeyondGeography]

42. Lol...right. She just pays higher price than Joe for lesser offenses.

Why is that?

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[Drunken Irishman]

87. Because those are superficial digs.

Warren's biggest issue right out of the gate was the whole DNA flap - and you forget that Biden DID pay a price for it back in 1988 when he was accused of plagiarism despite the claim being relatively weak by today's standards. It was such a major issue for his campaign that he was forced from the race and publicly humiliated. It took years for him to rebuild his brand - about 20. So, yeah, I'm glad you brought up Biden because he paid the price too.

[wellst0nev0ter]

93. No, that quieted down

The only ones who do care use an ethnic slur.

[Drunken Irishman]

99. It's quieted down but it's still there...

And it certainly goes to the underlining issue with Warren. I think it's a legitimate concern to question her messaging and response to these situations because, come next year, if she's the nominee, those attacks are going to be flying full throttle. I have been 100% impressed with Warren's substance on policy. I've been less impressed with her response to criticism. I think that's a big reason her polling has dipped.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

107. The answer's obvious to the "wine cave" class who trample the working class like the grapes

under their own feet!! Thankfully, Bernie has had about enough of this malarkey!!


Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[Cha]

51. Yeah WhatABOUT Biden, DI?!!

to your TruthFUL analysis!

[loyalsister]

41. It's a lot to hope for but, I am keeping my fingers crossed that Obama is the last

Democratic president who made the campaign finance compromise that has everything to do with the corrupt nature of US politics.

[George II]

9. Looks like a situation where she was for them before she was against them.

[comradebillyboy]

12. Exaactly.

[Bradshaw3]

14. You mean like Biden on more isues than can be counted?

Like abortion, busing, and on and on.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/joe-biden-abortion-rule-hyde-amendment-backtrack-change-mind-trump-campaign-a8948101.html

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/06/23/biden_apologizes_for_the_wrong_thing_140624.html

https://www.city-journal.org/joe-biden-kamala-harris-busing

https://apnews.com/c142b9f08fa741c89bc26330d43e3abc

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/joe-biden-segregationist-civility-apology_n_5d20ec5ce4b0f312568512c8

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/biden-campaign-softens-its-position-accepting-super-pac-support-n1071466


I thought you didn't like sarcasm, such as in your post here. I guess you were against it before you were for it.

[Drunken Irishman]

22. Did Biden ever go after any Democrat on those issues?

The issue isn't that Warren took the money - the issue is that Warren now acts as if she's so pure and above it.

[blm]

36. Who is purity testing now? All of you who insist that Warren

should have continued to follow standard party procedure instead of choosing another path in running her primary campaign without holding the big money fundraisers. And she shoulda kept her mouth shut and stayed above the fray for another 3months while potshots were directed her way.

Wow....she is SO evil.

[LongtimeAZDem]

65. Why do you persist in deliberately misuderstanding? Peope are NOT chastising her for

her choice of fundraising.

We are condemning her for attacking others (specifically Buttigieg) for choosing to do it the way she has in the past, and has stated she will again.

[Drunken Irishman]

88. I'm not purity testing anyone...

I'm not the one attacking Mayor Pete for his fundraisers.

[PhoenixDem]

76. Whataboutism

This thread is not about Biden

[onetexan]

91. Lol the warren camp is using the classic look-over-there

Maneuver. Remember the RW's "but what about her emails?" Rebut? Sorry Warren camp, u dont get to call foul on others yet excuse your own actions.

[Cha]

52. And, that's great.. but don't be dragging on Mayor

Buttigieg or anyone else for doing the same thing now.

[Gothmog]

16. For this thread

Link to tweet

[blm]

20. She never said they were corrupt, just said big money shouldn't have

an outsized influence in who becomes the nominee and president.

The outrage is manufactured.

[PhoenixDem]

77. It is an asinine insinuation and character assassination by innuendo

[emmaverybo]

90. What it is. Let's call her attack what it is. Intentional or not. She could make the point without

making Pete Buttigieg the case in point.

[blm]

96. That's an exaggeration. But, still OK with you that Warren was getting

hit after hit for 3 months and as soon as she enters the fray the outrage is overthetop.

You all are exaggerating yourselves into your hatefests against one of the best Democratic policy minds in the country.

[ritapria]

17. A Government of the (Rich) people ,by the ( Rich ) people, for the (Rich) people

has lead us to NAFTA , Repeal of Glass-Stegall , The Military -Industrial Complex , 500,000 Medical Bankruptcies per year , Grotesque Income Inequality , 6 companies controlling our Media and countless other horrors …..

[PhoenixDem]

78. Again, trying too hard.

Last edited Tue Dec 24, 2019, 11:25 PM - Edit history (1)

One doesn't have to recite all the bellyaches all the time.

[snowybirdie]

19. Let's declare a moratorium

on Bernie/Warren/wine cave issues. It's dumb, divisive and gives comfort to the enemy. Vote blue, no matter who, Remember!

[The Mouth]

23. If a candidate attacks another candidate on a specific issue

then they'd better have their own house in order regarding same.

I like Warren, but she stepped in this one herself and in a premeditated fashion attacked another candidate for doing what she did just a year or two ago. That is unacceptable to me, to attack Pete for doing exactly what she did very recently.

[blm]

25. When was she supposed to start rejecting big money for her primary

Campaign for president?

Pete camp shouldn’t act so overthetop outraged considering that she didn’t attack him back after he and his team spent months hitting at her on Med4All when he was supportive of Med4All not so long ago himself.

Pete camp preferred Warren camp had stayed above the fray while they took their shots at her.

Now they whine loudly for being hit back. Outrageous.....they say.

[The Mouth]

27. Basic fact:

She attacked him for doing exactly what she had been doing.

[blm]

35. HAD been doing before she started running her OWN campaign

on her terms and not the standard operating procedures of the Dem party in pursuit of senate seats.

[squirecam]

44. This was

Romney care trying to argue Obama care isn’t the same thing. That failed. So will Warren.

She has done the same thing. No matter how you try to defend it, she was wrong.

She should let this go.

[blm]

80. She just may fail in this, but, not for being wrong.

Because the wrong spin on this from those targeting her is so much easier than the facts surrounding her decision to stop making big fundraisers part of her campaign.

And it is nothing like the Romneycare issue.

[wellst0nev0ter]

94. It's called "walking the walk"

It says a lot about certain people who denounce those who live up to their declared standards.

[squirecam]

106. Yes it does.

Which is why I support Amy. She refuses to lie to people. She tells them what is realistic.

And it’s easy to have principles after you’ve given 10 million to your campaign. Mayor Pete didn’t have that luxury.

[Cha]

66. A BS surrogate "whining" about EW..

Link to tweet

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

70. Fair point!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[NoMoreRepugs]

26. Republicans take money from Russians and

Billionaires seeking influence over the fate of our planet and children and people here at DU want to argue ad nauseam over wine cellars and big money donors.

Small wonder we lose elections.

Stop with the fucking purity tests once and for all. The Constitution is at stake people.

[matt819]

29. Well, so much for not trashing the Dem candidates

Look, none of the candidates is pure as the drive snow. They’re human. And every single one of them, even the billionaires, is more intelligent than trump and would make a decent president.

Maybe we should add a forum here for tracking democratic candidates. And then add an option to block an entire forum.

[LongtimeAZDem]

45. She's not being trashed; she's being called out because SHE trashed another candidate for

doing exactly what she has done in the past, and what she plans to do again in the future.

[David__77]

37. I'm thankful for her drawing attention to the issue of campaign finance and candidate access.

...

[Cha]

64. Yeah, a BS surrogate is callling her out on this..

Link to tweet

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

75. Moi aussi!!

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[whathehell]

112. Me too..

Unfortunately, many here seem abysmally apathetic about economic issues and the candidates positions on them.

[Autumn]

40. I applaud her for what she did. She knows that it's not a good look. nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

71. I as well..

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[UniteFightBack]

43. Yup she got busted and bested by Mayor Pete. nt

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

72. Hardly.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together & can't be bought!!
Jump on the Bernie Bandwagon & join the revolution!!

[blm]

98. No, she didn't. Pete lost some support from fair minded people

I know Klobuchar moved up and passed him on a number of top 3 lists from my Dem circle.

But, hey.....Merry Christmas to you.

[Amimnoch]

47. Holds no sway or issue for me what-so-evah.

If she decided again tomorrow to accept all sources of legal campaign financing, I would neither think lower or higher of her for doing so.

Same for Pete, Biden, BS, or anyone.

Now, if she started formulating her campaign and political positions based off of donations, that would be a different story.

I trust her character and integrity.

There is a huge difference between accepting donations from sources that believe in what you are proposing and representing vs accepting donations and changing your positions based on said contributions.

[myohmy2]

49. "Warren embraced the high-dollar fundraiser circuit for years"

...the pot calling the kettle black...

...shameful...

... ...

[ehrnst]

58. ...not the only pot in the kitchen...

...shameful, wouldn't you say?...

Mr. Sanders was cheered at a fancy campaign fund-raiser at the Hollywood home of Syd Leibovitch, a high-end real estate agent, and his wife, Linda, on Wednesday night.

Tickets for the event sold for a minimum of $250. Those who spent the maximum, $2,700, or who raised $10,000, were invited to a “pre-event reception,” according to the invitation.

The 14 co-hosts included Cindy Asner, the former wife of the actor Ed Asner, the actress Mimi Kennedy, and Benjamin W. Decker, whose website notes that he was once called the “legendary Hollywood P.R. maven” by Forbes magazine, and used to produce “celebrity-driven red-carpet movie premieres.

The fund-raiser at the Leibovitch home was the type of event that most politicians typically hold. According to a pool report, guests dressed in blazers, jeans and cocktail dresses were treated to valet parking, and aides estimated about $150,000 would be raised from roughly 300 people there. It was the ninth such event of his campaign, his aides said, according to the pool report.
.................................
“The truth is there are many people in this country who have money but also believe in social justice,” he said.

https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-has-fund-raiser-at-fancy-hollywood-home/

Syd Liebovitch's net worth was $400 million dollars in 2015.

The Sanders Institute, a think tank founded by Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ wife and son, is shutting down, at least for now, amid criticism that the nonprofit has blurred the lines between family, fundraising and campaigning.

https://apnews.com/9e4794da89ab448399f3ff1457464d1b

In recent years, Sanders has been billed as one of the hosts for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee's retreats for the "Majority Trust" -- an elite group of top donors who give more than $30,000 per year -- at Martha's Vineyard in the summer and Palm Beach, Florida, in the winter. CNN has obtained invitations that listed Sanders as a host for at least one Majority Trust event in each year since 2011.

The retreats are typically attended by 100 or more donors who have either contributed the annual legal maximum of $33,400 to the DSCC, raised more than $100,000 for the party or both.

https://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/index.html

“The truth is there are many people in this country who have money but also believe in social justice,” he said."

https://www.nytimes.com/politics/first-draft/2015/10/15/bernie-sanders-has-fund-raiser-at-fancy-hollywood-home/

Sanders formed his own “dark money” group at the same time he railed against 501(c)4s, which are not required to publicly disclose financial information, and have been effectively used by conservatives to influence elections and policymaking.

https://vtdigger.org/2018/06/22/second-year-sanders-earns-1m/

[myohmy2]

61. thanks ehrnst...

...I'll be heading over to the, "How Bernie Sanders Learned to Love Campaigning in California" post next...

...

[ehrnst]

62. ...you mean the one about him endorsing a CA candidate who was thrown out of Justice Democrats?...

...even after he was warned about that candidates' history of racism, anti-semitism and misogyny...

...then only after his supporters pushed back in shock and disappointment did he think it was a bad idea then reverse that endorsement...

...that post?...

LA Times: Bernie Sanders endorses a Californian who defends crude sex ratings of women

...It's getting old but could always use a kick...

...thanks, myohmy2!...

... ..

[Cha]

63. BS endorsed Lewd Misogynist Cenk Uygur in CA 25 after he was Urged Not to..

The National BS Campaign was Urged to Stay Out of Race..

Link to tweet

snip//

Sanders’ abrupt reversal represented a misstep for Vermont senator and presidential candidate. The California arm of his campaign was warned about Uygur's past comments and urged the national campaign to stay out of the race, sources told POLITICO.

But Sanders endorsed Uygur regardless. His intervention created turmoil on the ground in California’s 25th Congressional district, a seat that Democrats flipped in 2018 but is now vacant after Democrat Katie Hill resigned amid allegations of sexual impropriety.''

snip//

Similar denunciations poured forth again following Sanders’ endorsement on Thursday. Even supporters of the Vermont senator expressed dismay that the progressive standard-bearer would back a candidate, in Uygur, with a problematic history. Local activists also groused that, unlike Smith, Uygur does not live in the district.

Link to tweet

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=381802

[ehrnst]

85. The Sanders Institute raised more than $361,000 last year from a total of 13 large contributions.

...it's really interesting what comes up when one starts looking into "high dollar fundraisers" for candidates.

More than a dozen high-dollar contributions funded Bernie Sanders’ policy institute the year before he launched his second presidential bid, including one donation totaling $100,000, according to tax forms filed this month with the Internal Revenue Service.

The Sanders Institute, a progressive think tank founded in 2017 by the Vermont senator’s wife, Jane Sanders, raised more than $361,000 last year from a total of 13 large contributions ranging from $5,000 to $100,000, the tax filing shows.
............................................................

Driscoll declined to disclose further details, or identify the source of each contribution.

The group is in the process of suspending operations this month to avoid any possible financial conflicts of interest while Sanders competes for the Democratic nomination.

....talk about shameful...

... ...

...any thoughts?...

[Mike Nelson]

53. This doesn't change my...

... mind about either candidate. I knew Bernie was probably richer than he let on when he didn't release his taxes last time, and that Hillary said nice things the the Goldman-Saks audience that paid her to speak. There are bigger fish to fry...

[Eliot Rosewater]

54. I dont care if she gets money from Martians who in return want Manhattan, whatever it takes.

[ehrnst]

59. Agree.

[ehrnst]

60. Much like other candidates folded up their lucrative "Institute" when they started their campaign.

The Sanders Institute, a think tank founded by Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders’ wife and son, is shutting down, at least for now, amid criticism that the nonprofit has blurred the lines between family, fundraising and campaigning.

https://apnews.com/9e4794da89ab448399f3ff1457464d1b

High-Dollar Donations Funded Bernie Sanders' Policy Group A Year Before His 2020 Campaign

More than a dozen high-dollar contributions funded Bernie Sanders’ policy institute the year before he launched his second presidential bid, including one donation totaling $100,000, according to tax forms filed this month with the Internal Revenue Service.

The Sanders Institute, a progressive think tank founded in 2017 by the Vermont senator’s wife, Jane Sanders, raised more than $361,000 last year from a total of 13 large contributions ranging from $5,000 to $100,000, the tax filing shows.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/rubycramer/bernie-sanders-institute-donations

[betsuni]

81. +1

[EveHammond13]

84. DON'T. CARE.

[liberal N proud]

103. It wouldn't bother me except she attacked another candidate

It's called hypocrisy

[Kurt V.]

104. What's incredible to me is that big money donors obviously are sought after. a must if you will.

There is the problem. even sanders will eventually have to travel this path.

[Gothmog]

105. Just a couple years ago Warren held a high-dollar fundraiser in a bank vault.

Link to tweet

[whathehell]

109. To quote a respondent to that tweet..

"Is someone not a vegetarian because they once enjoyed Pete Lugar steaks"?

[LongtimeAZDem]

113. If a person used to eat steak, then stops for a while and insults others for eating steak, but

they have already said they are going to go back to eating steak later, then no, not really.

[Gothmog]

114. From the Hoarse Whisperer

Link to tweet