The document says the school had to provide proof of having the 2 millions, yet she signed it and they considered that proof?
Sounds fishy on the bank's end.
Plus if the bank did give the loan as a result of influence from Sanders, it means the bank is doubly fishy in this; they want proof of the school (not Jane) having 2m, they never got it, and made the loan anyway after being "influenced" yet still never getting the proof?
And there is no board st the college to approve the request for a 2m loan? Just Jane deciding so and signing a paper? Again, fishy.
I'm going to guess the bank accepted as a result of negotiations due to the lack of 2m, not that the school or Jane faked it.
Now that could be as a result of influence from Sanders, tbd.
The real questionable part we know of is the 200,000$ golden parachute.
Also, wouldn't surprise me that this firm is hoping for Hillary's camp to use this story only to bring something similar up on the Clintons, to force both to acquiesce. If Sanders give in, and Clinton attacked him on this, and then the law firm brought something similar on the Clintons they would pretty much have to settle quickly.
More likely this is a case where the lawyers see a small window of time in which they can still squeeze money from Sanders's campaign, because Sanders will be out of the race soon. The reason it's been sat on for so long is probably because the lawyers in this case considering the possibility of getting more money if this issue blew up during a hypothetical general election with Sanders as the nominee.Also, wouldn't surprise me that this firm is hoping for Hillary's camp to use this story only to bring something similar up on the Clintons, to force both to acquiesce. If Sanders give in, and Clinton attacked him on this, and then the law firm brought something similar on the Clintons they would pretty much have to settle quickly.
Not convinced of what? It is a legitimate story but I don't think any of the majors will pick it up. Trump does not need to pick up the thread as he sees Bernie as an also ran , and Clinton does not play that way. I personally don't care but it is interesting to see the dynamics of how things like this play out in a news cycle. This has been out in the wild for about two weeks so it may just pass Bernie by.Smells political due to the timing. Not convinced honestly.
'There's no way a mistake could have been made'There is no way a mistake could have been made as the documents she signed for the closing of the loan were clear. Unfortunately the loan had already gone through when this was discovered.
Holm and Moore declined to criticize Sanders, who served as president from 2004 to 2011.
But in a statement Monday morning, the college blamed debt from the land deal as a primary reason for the school's closure.
Holm suggested the college’s plan to pay for the waterfront campus was unachievable.
“I believe the vision was enrollment would grow, which it did, but not at the level that would have allowed us to manage the financial debt we had incurred,” Holm said. “So here we are.”
I'm curious how much shit would be dug up about Sanders is he actually did when the primaries.
Oh the humanity!The Sanders campaign is like seeing a zeppelin on fire crashing down.
I'm curious how much shit would be dug up about Sanders is he actually did when the primaries.
Yes, the bank planned on losing all of its money. Fraud!The document says the school had to provide proof of having the 2 millions, yet she signed it and they considered that proof?
This is called victim blaming.Sounds fishy on the bank's end.
No, it means Sanders might have greased the bank a little. You really have no idea how powerful US Senators are, do you? They are 100 of the most powerful men on the planet and in our government.Plus if the bank did give the loan as a result of influence from Sanders, it means the bank is doubly fishy in this; they want proof of the school (not Jane) having 2m, they never got it, and made the loan anyway after being "influenced" yet still never getting the proof?
You didn't even read my post. She SIGNED saying that her school had an amount of money. She did not have that money. That is fraud.I'm going to guess the bank accepted as a result of negotiations due to the lack of 2m, not that the school or Jane faked it.
I don't even care about that. I thought it was really small tbh.The real questionable part we know of is the 200,000$ golden parachute.
putting this in OP now, thank you.Here is a contemporary, local article with a lot of details on the problem: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...al-questions-dog-burlington-college/14117505/
and the 2013 audit they refer to: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2648823/Burlington-College-Inc-2013-Single-Audit-2.pdf
also, it was not clear in the OP, but the college just shut down this week: http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/...rlington-college-shut-down-programs/84439890/
Eh
I'm pissed at Bernie
But I want a bit more evidence before jumping on this
Lol @ people saying this is a political attack from the right. The right WANTS Bernie as the nominee so they can slam him with all this stuff in the general. This is the first week that some of Bernie's dirty laundry has been exposed and it came out without the other politicians even trying. He's been handled with kid gloves. If he was the nominee this is what every week would look like.
It's insane how gaf eats this shit up.
One letter from a lawyer representing someone who took a bad deal? That's all people need. A political one at that that's referring to how Sanders is running his presidential campaign which is 100% irrelevant to what the lawyers interest SHOULD be in sending this letter. It's transparently designed to make people think more negatively of sanders (a hit piece if you will).
Hillary is directly part of a federal investigation and if you want to tie her to her husbands stuff like this ties Sanders to his wife's dealings, Clinton has also been accused of helping cover up and silence women who accused Bill Clinton of rape. But one letter from a lawyer and Sanders is the devil or something.
Idk for the record I don't buy the stuff mentioned about hillary either, just that's the dichotomy here.
Well, he is a senator.But there's no way Bernie would ever use his establishment connections for his own gain is there? I mean, that would mean he's full of shit.
It's insane how gaf eats this shit up.
This is probably the worst week of Sanders' life. Literally every day for four days something else has happened.
I get where you're coming from, but it's more about the narrative than directly comparing the gross amount of severity of scandals about both candidates.
People know what they're getting with Hillary - a very skilled politician, with all the pros and cons of that experience and culture. Bernie is cut from the same mold, yet he ran on a platform of being an outsider and of actual righteousness in politics. It's no surprise people are extremely frustrated now that the skeletons are collapsing from the closet. It's Bernie vs. Hillary to some degree obviously, but it's also a fallen hero story which the human condition enjoys regardless of affiliation.
Smells political due to the timing. Not convinced honestly.
Same... The fact that the letter specifically calls out the campaign only arouses more suspicion. Two sides to every story.
Yeah I guess I get that, but the problem is when people are LOOKING for it so hard. At this point it could almost be a letter written in crayon and people would react the same way.
There's plenty of doubt here for this specific accusation. GAF has such a tendency to ignore stuff like that in favor of boosting the signal of stories that create narratives that they either like or fuel their desire to see someone torn down.
It's like these people have never seen the internet before. People keep falling into the same pattern it's insane.
She SIGNED saying that her school had an amount of money. She did not have that money. That is fraud.
Clinton hasn't attacked Sanders when they were actually competing, she won't touch this with a 10 foot pole because besides the fact that there is no reason to smear someone after he lost, it's a bullshit fishing expedition by the law firm done to drum up attention to their law suit.
I don't expect anyone but possibly fox news to even cover this
A bank giving out a loan isn't going to be a "victim". Unless you think banks were really the victims during the 2009 housing market crash?This is called victim blaming.
These are GOP troll lawyers who love fucking with Dems, completely unaffiliated with any Democrat campaign...they were going at Hillary before for Benghazi as well in much the same way.
Clearly just a shitty play to get themselves a STFU settlement check or something.
This is the GOP smear machine and these are the tactics Bernie's campaign hasn't had to deal with yet (or for 25 years), btw. I'm sure he'll handle it okay though.
If Hillary were behind this it wouldn't have been released on a Friday/Saturday, especially not a holiday.
The whole thing sounds pretty speculative.
The Reddit post I linked had a lot of links embedded that I did not have the time to restore. This includes an image of the signature. There is tons more information in this document:Screenshot of the signed statement?
There's no way the college only had less than 500k in the coffers.
I think this accusation has a breakdown between Total Liabilities and Net Assets. It's likely that the college DID have enough money in the bank but also had other debts.
Again, two sides to every story.
This letter isn't evidence. It's an accusation. Where's the evidence?
Do you think she had a secret plan to bankrupt her own college?The Reddit post I linked had a lot of links embedded that I did not have the time to restore. This includes an image of the signature. There is tons more information in this document:
http://blackpearl.wcax.com/documents/TOENSING.pdf
The number you're talking about was a capital requirement that Jane Sanders said the school would satisfy through donations. However, the donations only ended up totaling something like 200k, when she had promised 2 million. That's where the discrepancy is.
Why would she estimate so many donations?
She SIGNED saying that her school had an amount of money. She did not have that money. That is fraud.
The Reddit post I linked had a lot of links embedded that I did not have the time to restore. This includes an image of the signature. There is tons more information in this document:
http://blackpearl.wcax.com/documents/TOENSING.pdf
The number you're talking about was a capital requirement that Jane Sanders said the school would satisfy through donations. However, the donations only ended up totaling something like 200k, when she had promised 2 million. That's where the discrepancy is.
Why would she estimate so many donations?
it is from the right. everybody knows sanders isn't going to win and his usefulness will run out after june 7th. they are gonna try and weaken him as a messenger when he campaigns against trump during the general election. if they can kick up a big enough stink then many people running for office will try and stay clear of him. you are crazy if you think the gop doesn't want to take down a guy who has a ton of democratic and independent support and who will use that support to tell people to vote against trump.Lol @ people saying this is a political attack from the right. The right WANTS Bernie as the nominee so they can slam him with all this stuff in the general. This is the first week that some of Bernie's dirty laundry has been exposed and it came out without the other politicians even trying. He's been handled with kid gloves. If he was the nominee this is what every week would look like.
Citation?
Also why would the GOP want bernie to drop out when he's doing their dirty work on Clinton?
Victoria Toensing and her husband and legal partner Joseph diGenova are pushing claims that anonymous State Department and CIA "whistleblowers" have been blocked and threatened by the Obama administration to prevent their testifying on the September 2012 attack on the U.S. diplomatic facility in Benghazi, Libya. Toensing and diGenova are longtime Republican activists, and Toensing has a history of pushing dubious claims and falsehoods into the media.
They Have Been Criticized For "Non-Stop Mugging" And For Lacking "Impartiality, Non-Partisanship, And Professionalism." In 1998, Toensing, who was working as outside counsel for the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, was criticized for her actions in connection with the Monica Lewinsky scandal. A February 5, 1998, Roll Call article (via Nexis) reported: "Rep. Bill Clay (D-Mo) launched a stinging attack on the two lead attorneys investigating the Teamsters campaign finance scandal yesterday, alleging that the attorneys have lost their objectivity because of their frequent television appearances and 'participation' in the scandal involving ex-White House intern Monica Lewinsky."
Clay said in his letter that a LEXIS/NEXIS search found 166 citations of diGenova and Toensing commenting on the Lewinsky affair between Jan. 21 and Feb. 4. The letter came even as Republicans approved an additional $750,000 for the diGenova-Toensing investigation.
Toensing Attempted To Link The Resignation Of David Petraeus To The Benghazi Attack. In November 2012, Toensing wrote an op-ed for Fox News attempting to draw a link between the Benghazi attack and the abrupt resignation of former CIA director David Petraeus.
Toensing And diGenova Involved In Discredited And Retracted Article About President Clinton. In a February 27, 1998, article on Toensing and diGenova's involvement in a retracted Dallas Morning News article claiming that a Secret Service agent had witnessed President Clinton and Lewinsky in a "compromising situation,"
Stinkles said:Some real Lance Armstrong fans in here.
I think she had a very public plan to Make Burlington Great Again. I think she and her husband have a very sincere respect for the education system and wanted the students to have the best college they could. I think Jane looked very hard for a new location for the college, found the church, and thought, "This it. This is must be the place." I think Jane Sanders then did everyhting in her power to make it happen because this was her dream project.Do you think she had a secret plan to bankrupt her own college?
That's some great fan fiction.I think she had a very public plan to Make Burlington Great Again. I think she and her husband have a very sincere respect for the education system and wanted the students to have the best college they could. I think Jane looked very hard for a new location for the college, found the church, and thought, "This it. This is must be the place." I think Jane Sanders then did everyhting in her power to make it happen because this was her dream project.
I think she went to the bank and they told her she would need a very serious capital requirement before they could afford the loan with her. I think she then convinced the church to help pony up some of the money or offer her a loan because it would be a good choice in the long run and it was the Christian thing to do. I think when even that wasn't enough, she closed her eyes and pictured a massive fundraiser all across the small city of Burlington. A real grassroots movement to make Burlington College the pride and joy of the ciy.
So she goes back to the bank and tells them she expects $2 million in future donations. They're skeptical. She's not. They tell her they need to think about it. Jane goes home nervous and tells her husband what happened because as a supportive husband, he's been tuned into the process from the very beginning. Her wife is sad. They are so close to really making a difference.
So I think Sanders makes a call to the bank. I think he assures them, with his full credibility as a United States Senator, that he knows the college, he knows his wife, he knows they will make it work. Because that's how it's always been for the Sanders. It will work out in the end. The difference between people who make it work and people who don't is that the people who make it work really gave it a vigorous effort. It will work out in the end because if other people can do it, so can they.
And so Bernie Sanders closes his eyes, too.
![]()
And when they open them again, the college is gone. The bank has taken a massive loss. The church lost $2 million. They only raised 200k in their grassroots movement. Jane is fired by the board. Everything went wrong.
I have never heard Bernie or Jane publicly talk about this. Talk about their mistakes. Own up to it. I have never heard Bernie own up to anything before, to be honest. So that's why this story is important. It's because wishful thinking is irresponsible. It's not because the Sanders are "corrupt", it's because they're incompetent. It's because you can't trust them to get it done. This is about judgment, and they have none.
I think she had a very public plan to Make Burlington Great Again. I think she and her husband have a very sincere respect for the education system and wanted the students to have the best college they could. I think Jane looked very hard for a new location for the college, found the church, and thought, "This it. This is must be the place." I think Jane Sanders then did everyhting in her power to make it happen because this was her dream project.
I think she went to the bank and they told her she would need a very serious capital requirement before they could afford the loan with her. I think she then convinced the church to help pony up some of the money or offer her a loan because it would be a good choice in the long run and it was the Christian thing to do. I think when even that wasn't enough, she closed her eyes and pictured a massive fundraiser all across the small city of Burlington. A real grassroots movement to make Burlington College the pride and joy of the ciy.
So she goes back to the bank and tells them she expects $2 million in future donations. They're skeptical. She's not. They tell her they need to think about it. Jane goes home nervous and tells her husband what happened because as a supportive husband, he's been tuned into the process from the very beginning. Her wife is sad. They are so close to really making a difference.
So I think Sanders makes a call to the bank. I think he assures them, with his full credibility as a United States Senator, that he knows the college, he knows his wife, he knows they will make it work. Because that's how it's always been for the Sanders. It will work out in the end. The difference between people who make it work and people who don't is that the people who make it work really gave it a vigorous effort. It will work out in the end because if other people can do it, so can they.
And so Bernie Sanders closes his eyes, too.
And when they open them again, the college is gone. The bank has taken a massive loss. The church lost $2 million. They only raised 200k in their grassroots movement. Jane is fired by the board. Everything went wrong.
I have never heard Bernie or Jane publicly talk about this. Talk about their mistakes. Own up to it. I have never heard Bernie own up to anything before, to be honest. So that's why this story is important. It's because wishful thinking is irresponsible. It's not because the Sanders are "corrupt", it's because they're incompetent. It's because you can't trust them to get it done. This is about judgment, and they have none.