2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJane Sanders Withheld Information From Burlington College Donors While Overstating Their Pledges.
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 Peoples 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.
Thats 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 Peoples 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.
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 donors death.
http://vtdigger.org/2015/09/13/jane-sanders-overstated-donation-amounts-in-loan-application-for-burlington-college/
JonLeibowitz
(6,282 posts)I am shocked.
Obviously, Bernie is unfit to serve.
I am not sure what to make of the "Neither were aware that the pledges were used to secure the loan" -- doesn't seem to matter whether they were aware of it or not. Is there a law against doing so?
As for:
Two people whose pledges are listed as confirmed in the loan agreement told VTDigger that their personal financial records show their pledges were overstated.
We have no idea if their personal financial records match what they promised the college.
SunSeeker
(51,740 posts)For example, she claimed a pledge would be available to pay back the loan over the next 4 years when in fact it would not materialize by the terms of the donation until the donor died. As a result the college took on way more debt than it could afford to pay back.
Considering what a central role Jane Sanders plays in Bernie's campaign, this problematic financial management history does not reflect well on Bernie.
tecelote
(5,122 posts)Looks like Bernie stands tall and righteous when compared to every other politician on both sides of the aisle.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)That small college almost bankrupted over it.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)Proud sponsor of rehashed smears. If the ssmear doesn't stick the first time, try and try again.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Burlington College nearly went bankrupt over this. But I guess as long as it is Jane Sanders, it okay to lie and cheat.
Betty Karlson
(7,231 posts)it didn't prolong racial inequality (sponsorship from the prison industry),
it didn't almost bankrupt the country or eradicate the middle class (Wall Street pals),
it didn't amount to massive loss of life (OK-ing the Iraq War),
so no: it isn't at all like Hillary's checkered past.
And don't even get me started on her husband: DADT, DOMA, repeal of Glass-Steagall, introduction of extraordinary rendition, ...
safeinOhio
(32,733 posts)to go after spouses?
elleng
(131,176 posts)leftofcool
(19,460 posts)The woman ripped off donors and investors by lying. She then got a golden parachute to leave.
bvf
(6,604 posts)about Bill Clinton right here on DU?
Can you be more specific?
Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)There have been many threads that have gone on about it the last few weeks, particularly as he began to really join the campaign trial.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Be specific.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)That's an instant classic if ever there was one.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)about Bill Clinton on DU that isn't true.
I still haven't seen any.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)have been unable to answer the simple question:
What "shit" about Bill Clinton has been said on DU that isnt true?
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)It is what it is. The truth is given about Jane Sanders. What is the problem?
bvf
(6,604 posts)2pooped2pop
(5,420 posts)Want but it's really the same post over and over. I know it's all you got so like I said before, I'll just buy some udder cream for the rash as you keep trying to get milk from this non story.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)The facts speak for themselves. She lied, people lost money. It's simple really.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)MADem
(135,425 posts)Martin A. Hoak, finance officer for the diocese, did not return phone calls from a reporter.
$500,000 in the form of a "bridge loan" from real estate magnate and philanthropist Tony Pomerleau. This was money for basic work on the diocese building to allow the college to move in and begin using it.
Pomerleau said last week that he made the loan in support of both the college and its then-president, Jane Sanders, who orchestrated the purchase.
"It wouldn't have happened without Jane," Pomerleau said. "In my mind, she did a tremendous job."
Pomerleau is also an old friend of Sanders' husband. He supported Bernie Sanders after he was elected mayor of Burlington. When Bernie Sanders won election, Pomerleau recalled proudly, "I was the first one to congratulate him."
Sanders forms unlikely alliance with wealthy developer
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/local/2015/12/23/sanders-unlikely-alliance-wealthy-developer/77425498/
http://www.sevendaysvt.com/vermont/jane-says-sanders-secret-weapon-or-a-political-liability/Content?oid=2670992
That worries some Burlingtonians who have crossed paths with O'Meara Sanders in her other professional roles particularly the seven years she spent as president of Burlington College.
"As much as I want Bernie to win, the idea of her in the White House or of having any power at all is deeply disturbing," says former faculty member Genese Grill, who was fired by O'Meara Sanders and who calls her style "extremely dictatorial."
Other critics question whether she was responsible for the school's near-demise last year, when the cash-strapped college found itself struggling to meet payroll. They say she over-leveraged the institution by borrowing $10 million to finance a risky campus expansion, assuming she could make payments by increasing enrollment and donations during an economic downturn.....So why was she ousted in the fall of 2011?
At the time, she and board members publicly maintained that her departure was entirely voluntary, though they privately admitted relations had soured in the preceding months. Things came to a head in late September, when the board added "Removal of the President" to a meeting agenda......
MrChuck
(279 posts)have great things to say about Bernie and Jane.
The one person who was fired says she has concerns.
Big surprise.
Remember, the Catholic Diocese was eager to make this deal in order to hide some cash that would have had to have been paid out in settlements to sex abuse victims.
Let's get real here and stop trying to disqualify someone because their spouse has some lingering questions about their past.
I think you catch my drift.
MADem
(135,425 posts)And if he makes it to the general, her problems are going to--like it or not--become Front and Center issues.
This isn't about Catholics, either--and if it were, why is it a "good thing" that Jane was helping those Catholics hide their sex money? That whole arc of justification makes no sense.
Jane Sanders created a major at that school, before she was fired, in woodworking....and then put her daughter --who runs a woodworking school--in charge of it. She's a nepotist in a big way, and that's where her problems begin. It's not about the AMOUNTS, either--it's about taking money that isn't hers--be it from a college, or a political campaign--and funneling it to her kids. It's icky stuff. Sex is one thing, misappropriating money for pure selfishness and greed is another thing entirely
And it's not "asked and answered" stuff, either--if you catch MY drift.
The closer one gets to the head of the pack, the more people scrutinize. Get used to it. It has only just begun.
bvf
(6,604 posts)None of which are vtdigger.
You're funny.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)WHITE CROWD!!!
YACHTS IN THE BACKGROUND!!!
PEOPLE OWN GUNS THERE!!!
ZOMGWTFBBQ???
And I'm supposed to believe they know anything about my home state?
Some people never get tired of embarrassing themselves.
bvf
(6,604 posts)I would have missed "ZOMGWTFBBQ???"
Yes indeed, and they're just getting started. Should be an interesting next few weeks.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Supporters of a 1%er who rents a mansion in the Hamptons for $50,000/week implying Vermonters are elitists because ... boats.
bvf
(6,604 posts)After "Attack your opponent on your weaknesses," Rove should have added, "but try not to look like a fucking idiot."
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)I saw yachts in the background and I was like go Bernie go he is taking the fight right to the playgrounds of the 1%.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Clinton supporters are accusing Bernie of cronyism because he hired his family to work on his campaign, accusing his wife of corruption, questioning the source of his "wealth" (see the 'funded by Israel' conspiracy) and most hilarious of all: accusing him of being a neocon war monger who's in the pocket of the MIC and is also responsible for Iraq.
Seriously?
snoringvoter
(178 posts)Ken Burch
(50,254 posts)Even if everything you say about Jane were true, it would not discredit Bernie.
Only the rich benefit from what you are doing here. It can't be progressive to be on this kind of vendetta against the only progressive candidate.
hill2016
(1,772 posts)that we should not be attacking Bernie while we are fine to attack Hillary in this Primary forum?
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Bill Clinton start on the campaign trail even Sanders has made statements about Bill Clinton, Bill is not running, why the double standard?
PADemD
(4,482 posts)Jane Sanders is just a supportive spouse who has not, to my knowledge, held public office.
This attack on Jane Sanders reminds me of the Jane Muskie attack during the 1972 presidential campaign.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)And not much has been said about the golden parachute his wife received. Again a double standard. Bill Clinton is also a supportive spouse, why does he lose the privilege of being a supportive spouse because he has been elected to an office. This isn't the first time a couple has held offices, supporting the spouse is what spouses do. This is nit the first time a spouse has had their conduct brought to light.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Or maybe look into the Clinton Foundation donations and their curious relationship in some cases with the timing of permits for the purchase of weaponry?
Then there is always Benghazi, Benghazi.
Always the same "scandal" about the valuation of donations and of property and all right in 2008 when the economy fell apart.
This is just silly.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Mail Message
On Mon Jan 11, 2016, 05:32 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Shall we talk about Bill Clinton's propensity for bimbos?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=993602
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
"Bimbo Eruptions" r/w attack
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Mon Jan 11, 2016, 05:42 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing to do but alert stalk? For cryin' out loud.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I believe that the poster is making a point about the ridiculousness of scouring the past for any trivial issue and blowing it up into a major, manufactured scandal. The poster is riffing on the "r/w attack" to show how silly it is.
Leave it.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is hardly over the top for GD-P. When Democrats attack Democrats it gets ugly. That is what GD-P is for.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: First of all, the alerted on post referred to "bimbos", not "bimbo eruptions"; secondly, the term "bimbo eruptions" was coined by then Governor Bill Clinton's chief of staff:Betsey Ross Wright is an American lobbyist, activist, and political consultant who worked more than a decade for Bill Clinton in Arkansas. She served as chief of staff to Governor Clinton for seven years. As deputy chair of the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign, Wright established the rapid response system that was responsible for defending Clinton's record in Arkansas and promptly answering all personal attacks on the candidate. During the 1992 campaign, Wright coined the term "bimbo eruptions" to describe rumors alleging extramarital affairs by Clinton. Hey, alerter! Wikipedia is your friend.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Jd priestly was clearly trying to make a point about ridiculous attacks, and l suspect the alerter knows that. Please stop wasting everyone's time with these strident alerts.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Not helpful.
Orrex
(63,228 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)I guess the theory over at camp weathervane is that the best they can do is to try to suppress any mention of Bill's sordid history via word policing. Sort of sad. Juries ain't buying it.
Kalidurga
(14,177 posts)So hey try another thread maybe it will get some traction. If not at least you have the high fives of your buddies to keep ya warm. I just hope they know how little you care about victims of sexual abuse if you can get some digs on a candidate you don't like.
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Answer: nothing - because corporate "donors" don't give a shit about child victims. The only children corporate "donors" are interested in are the ones who need de minimis health care and education programs so they can handle working in 3rd world sweatshops for the aforementioned corporate "donors".
What's the Clinton Family Foundation doing for post-war victims of cluster bombs?
Same answer as above, with the added factor that there are MIC profits to be made from cluster bombs.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Warren Stupidity
(48,181 posts)beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)They're trying to silence Bernie supporters but it just makes us more determined to stand up to the smears.
Watch your back my friend.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)... head and shoulders more ethical than Hillary and Bill.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)This is potato nodules.
beam me up scottie
(57,349 posts)Note to jury: no DUers were harmed by this post. Thank you for serving.
restorefreedom
(12,655 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)bvf
(6,604 posts)Monica Lewinsky acceptable to you?
NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Why she possibly felt the need to do so. I have asked them for links, but nothing yet.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251993614
bowens43
(16,064 posts)the attacks on the only candidate who can save our party become more and more ridiculous......
Vinca
(50,314 posts)In Jane's defense, college presidents wouldn't be the ones filling out financial statements. They might sign something without reading it line by line - not a good thing - but they wouldn't be filling in the boxes on loan applications. Now . . . shall we talk about Bill?
Sancho
(9,070 posts)rjsquirrel
(4,762 posts)I say this is pure bullshit. And reaching.
Colleges do this all the time. It's normal business practice. It's a tiny school. And she's his wife not the candidate, same as Bill is Hillary's husband,!not the candidate.
Shit like this is stupid and doesn't change anyone's mind one way or the other.
Mike Nelson
(9,971 posts)...many people pledge and exaggerate.