Clinton 'money-laundering' campaign funds

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

Just now, Lion Heart said:

But less than 1 percent of the $61 million raised by that effort has stayed in the state parties’ coffers

 

Well no ****? The General Election is in November. Why would the DNC distribute the money now? My guess is that once the General Election comes up, and once all donations have been collected, the DNC will use the formula mentioned in the article for the appropriate allocation of all funds raised. Then the state party coffers will see that money roll through, as they should.  

It's not a guess. It's what happens every time.

They're trying to paint Clinton as the offender when the DNC is just favoring her over him. Is anyone shocked?

What's interesting is that Jim Weaver keeps calling the race rigged, when Bernie is the wolf in sheep's clothing that's using them for his own gain.

[Lion Heart 15,041]

1 minute ago, LebaneseDude said:

Jim Weaver is calling it laundering when it is anything but. 

He's essentially accusing Obama of having stolen the presidency from McCain.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

1 minute ago, Lion Heart said:

****ing desperate right? I'm not shocked though. Bernie himself has said worse things about the president that turned the USA back from the brink of failure.

Hillary should sue them for defamation for accusing her of laundering so publicly. It should be the final nail in the coffin that is the failure of Sander's campaign.

[thedirtymonster 788]

When I read that story, it made me cringe at the way they twisted the truth so you can't say they're blatant lies. This is a terrible excuse for journalism. Thank goodness it's not a reputable source, or else somebody would be losing their job. I didn't see any factual basis anywhere in the immensely-long story that supported "money laundering". That's simply laughable that they're claiming that. It's just another sad story from another Bernie Bro in denial that their candidate is donezo. 

[Morphine Prince 109,683]

32 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

Bernie Sanders raised eyebrows Monday when he admitted his decision to join the Democratic Party to run for president was not an ideological choice or driven by loyalty, but a way to hack the nominating process.
“Here’s the truth. You’re right, I am the longest serving independent in the history of the United States Congress,” the Vermont senator, who identifies as a Democratic Socialist, told MSNBC’s Chuck Todd during a town hall Monday night in Ohio. 
“We did have to make that decision: Do you run as an independent? Do you run within the Democratic Party?” He said. “We concluded – and I think it was absolutely the right decision – that, A, in terms of media coverage, you have to run within the Democratic Party.”
He added that to run a campaign outside the major two-party process, “you need… to be a billionaire.”

Omg this makes me like him even more. Finally said I what I thought were his plans. 

[JusKeepBreathin 19,311]

Bernie Sandinista's are becoming desperate. 

[PopBitch 1,218]

Dream on, Bernie Supporters..  You're not taking Queen Hillary down.

[Emvee 8,836]

This really just proves to me why the DNC is so biased toward Clinton. The two parties are like high school cliques that ignore or ridicule outsiders until they've proved themselves. The criticism on Sanders is that he does nothing for the Democratic Party; but, honestly, why is this a bad thing? This election cycle has made me realize something really important. My goal isn't to elect a democrat per se... it is to elect someone whose ideals are most aligned with mine. I am not sorry that money in politics is a top priority for me. I am not sorry for criticizing Clinton or the DNC for doing nothing about it. "Well, Obama did it" is NOT a good argument. It's 2016, not 2008. A whole generation of people have grown into voting eligible age and it should not come as a surprise to anyone that this is suddenly a hot topic. You all should have seen this happening ever since occupy Wall Street happened. Public campaign funding is the way to go. I certainly don't trust Clinton or DNC to actually enact something like that at the moment. They like the big bucks too much. They love their own little bubble too much. 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

15 minutes ago, Rising said:

This really just proves to me why the DNC is so biased toward Clinton. The two parties are like high school cliques that ignore or ridicule outsiders until they've proved themselves. The criticism on Sanders is that he does nothing for the Democratic Party; but, honestly, why is this a bad thing? This election cycle has made me realize something really important. My goal isn't to elect a democrat per se... it is to elect someone whose ideals are most aligned with mine. I am not sorry that money in politics is a top priority for me. I am not sorry for criticizing Clinton or the DNC for doing nothing about it. "Well, Obama did it" is NOT a good argument. It's 2016, not 2008. A whole generation of people have grown into voting eligible age and it should not come as a surprise to anyone that this is suddenly a hot topic. You all should have seen this happening ever since occupy Wall Street happened. Public campaign funding is the way to go. I certainly don't trust Clinton or DNC to actually enact something like that at the moment. They like the big bucks too much. They love their own little bubble too much.

You're shocked that they're biased towards the candidate that has historically been with them? What's most irritating about this piece is that it completely dismisses the fact that Hillary has always supported down-ticket democrats. The difference is that it's now her turn to receive the bulk of the DNC's funding because electing the PRESIDENT is the major goal right now. The DNC is going to fund her no matter what. Donating to the DNC ensures that they have the funding available after the presidential race to fund the down-ticket democrats. 

How is that so hard to grasp? The money is for the down-ticket democrats by transitivity. It's about NOW vs LATER.

------

I can't even understand why you keep demonizing the democratic party as if it has not been the one responsible for almost every human rights AND socialist system victory (ironically) in the USA for the last century. Do you not align with those ideals?

No what you want is someone who is apparently "clean", failing to understand (or refusing to understand) that belonging to ANY form of group dynamic ultimately puts you in a tug of war within that system that only grows larger as the group does. That ultimately leads to different opinions within the same ideology. There is NO SUCH THING as a unified homogeneous party. There is NO SUCH THING as a continuous "revolutionary" movement. All Bernie supporters will eventually have conflict with one another on HOW to bring about that change. Of course it's only "special interests" and "corruption" when it's not you who's doing it.

Not to mention the fact that if Sanders is to cooperate to accomplish ANYTHING, he'll have to sacrifice those very ideals in order to compromise and reach common ground with those that disagree AND agree with him. There is no one-size-fits all approach to anything.

Money in politics may not be a big deal to you, but the reality is that at this point the two parties are locked in a struggle. One party CANNOT under any circumstances stop using a pawn piece that the other one does.

If you don't trust them to overturn those funding laws because they are currently using them to beat the very person who does, then one wonders how you can have any opinion on how conflict can be resolved. It's one thing to not resort to the same tactics. It's another to willfully put yourself at a MASSIVE disadvantage because of principles.

You are a liberal I assume? Do you support Bernie doing what it takes to win?

How can you not support the Democratic party doing what it takes to beat the Republicans, to protect all the progress that it has made so far as you sit and play revolution.

It smells of hypocrisy.

Oh and one wonders how someone who supposedly understands the necessity of electing Obama at all costs to fix all the crap that the Bush administration and Co. did to the country, won't understand the necessity of a democrat winning the election in order to continue fixing all that progress that was made, starting with the Senate representation and the Supreme Court justices.

Sorry if I came off harsh, but nothing tilts me more than seeing someone play the fiddle as the city burns around them. It's what I experienced in Lebanon for 18 years growing up. I don't want to see it in the USA. You have a responsibility not just to yourself, but for the common good of society. One must be pragmatic on what can be accomplished.

[FATCAT 60,888]

1 hour ago, YourSweet666 said:

@FATCAT where were you, I missed you. 

It's finals week dear

[mcoop 628]

They're doing everything they can to take down Hillary. Well it won't work lmao 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

18 minutes ago, mcoop said:

They're doing everything they can to take down Hillary. Well it won't work lmao 

Still unnecessary damage. The more I see this sort of thing, the less I'm open to Sanders staying in the race. He's crashing and taking everyone down with him.

[Whispering 18,865]

This arrangement was not invented for this primary campaign; the Joint Fundraising Committee model has been around since the early 2000s and was used by Obama in his general election campaigns. Supporting the Presidential campaign is the biggest expense for the DNC. In 2012, the DNC spent $290 million supporting his campaign. (Add in outside groups and the entire cost of the 2012 campaign for Democratic groups was $1.1 billion.) It was not laundering then and it isn't now. 

Sanders signed a carbon copy agreement in the fall. Suddenly, though, after 15 years of this type of fundraising, Sander's and his people are claiming it is all money laundering...just as it was obvious that Sanders was losing the nomination. 

 

[Aura Veil 2,395]

Leaving this here

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

7 hours ago, Aura Veil said:

Leaving this here

 

The echo chamber though. That's like the only source any Bernie supporter on here has provided. 

Funny that they are making a big deal out of this despite it being factually incorrect when Sanders has done nothing for Democrats for over 30 years  

I can't with overzealous Bernie supporters anymore