Are Jane and Bernie Sanders going to jail?

Joe Fan

Joe Fan

10,000+ Posts
Federal investigation of Jane Sanders' land deal heats up by Jack O'Brien | Jul 10, 2017, 2:28 PM

The federal investigation into potential bank fraud by Jane Sanders, wife of Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-VT, while she was president of Burlington College has expanded in recent weeks.

According to the Washington Post, federal prosecutors confirmed last week they began presenting evidence against Sanders before a grand jury. In April, a federal probe initiated last year was publicly confirmed after federal prosecutors sought preservation of the college's records, according to VTdigger.com.

The probe revolves around the securement of a $6.7 million bank loan in 2010 to finance a land deal to expand the college's campus.

Jane Sanders was president of the college from 2004 to 2011 and sought to expand enrollment numbers for the school. Sanders worked to purchase waterfront property owned by the local Roman Catholic diocese, a move that would cost around $10 million.

Sanders allegedly overstated "firm" donation amounts in order to secure the loan from the bank.

In the 2010 loan application, Sanders said the college had $2.6 million in "confirmed" donations and anticipated an additional $2.27 million in donations.

However, according to a former trustee, the college only raised $125,000 by the summer of 2011. In one instance, the college listed a $1 million donation as secured from a prominent Burlington resident even though she only agreed to donate the money upon her death.

Sanders resigned in October 2011 under mounting pressure from the board of trustees and allegations that she provided inaccurate information. The college, which enrolled 160 students, struggled with the financial repercussions of the deal and closed in May 2016....."​

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/f...ne-sanders-land-deal-heats-up/article/2628176
 
Hopefully they'll get the jail cell next to Hill & Bill. But I'm not gonna hold my breath. They've got the money to fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.
 
I don't think Bernie is headed for any jail time, not so sure about his wife.
The summary seems to show culpability. Trial may show something different.
White collar criminals usually get off pretty easy. Nobody much was prosecuted, much less faced jail time, for all the lies/fraud/negligence that caused the mortgage meltdown that sent billions into the abyss.

A guy burglarizes a home and steals $5K worth of stuff likely get a decade in the slammer. Steal a few million by lying from the bank ... not so much.
 
Last edited:
Funny thing is ... white collar criminals are deterred by prospect of spending time in jail. Studies show that deterrence doesn't work as well for the poor impulse control folks who really do spend time in jail.
 
Crockett said:
Funny thing is ... white collar criminals are deterred by prospect of spending time in jail. Studies show that deterrence doesn't work as well for the poor impulse control folks who really do spend time in jail.
Click to expand...
Which is why you only need to send a white collar criminal to jail every blue moon or so (cause it works so well). When it doesn't work well (for others), you need to maximize the dosage to have an effect.
 
Crockett said:
Funny thing is ... white collar criminals are deterred by prospect of spending time in jail. Studies show that deterrence doesn't work as well for the poor impulse control folks who really do spend time in jail.
Click to expand...

Many of those who routinely go to jail on drugs and theft will admit that it is simply a cost of doing business...they won't quit until they get tired of losing all their crap each time they go to jail.
 
If Bernie or Jane Sanders committed fraud they should be prosecuted. I'll let the investigation play out before convicting them. By all measurements, Bernie is still one of the poorest Senators in D.C. despite how some are painting him on this thread.
 
Made me laugh

"FBI probe of Bernie Sanders' wife closely tracks Hillary's secret campaign plan"

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ claims that an ongoing FBI probe of his wife is based on partisan politics don’t square with the fact that it began under President Obama and appears to closely track Democratic opposition research revealed in the hacked emails of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

* * *

According to a series of 2015 emails to and from Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta, leaked to and published on Wikileaks, the Clinton team wrote an extensive political opposition memo entitled “Sanders Top Hits-Thematics.” The memo details Mrs. Sanders’ role in the college’s financial failure, and parallels the ongoing FBI investigation, now before a grand jury, into the scandal. Other email correspondence shows the Clinton team believed scandals surrounding the college and Jane Sanders provided an opportunity to knock the Vermont senator’s reputation and chances to win the Democratic primary election.

“I think our first question is how are we going to defeat Sanders. … he's not who he says he is -- gun votes, DSCC money, Jane. There may be other options too but these seem to be the strongest attacks to consider. How we undermine Sanders candidacy is our threshold question,” a Clinton campaign official wrote in the fall 2015......"​

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/14/hillary-clintons-plan-to-attack-bernie-sanders-wife.html
 
Joe Fan said:
Made me laugh

"FBI probe of Bernie Sanders' wife closely tracks Hillary's secret campaign plan"

Sen. Bernie Sanders’ claims that an ongoing FBI probe of his wife is based on partisan politics don’t square with the fact that it began under President Obama and appears to closely track Democratic opposition research revealed in the hacked emails of the Hillary Clinton campaign.

* * *

According to a series of 2015 emails to and from Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta, leaked to and published on Wikileaks, the Clinton team wrote an extensive political opposition memo entitled “Sanders Top Hits-Thematics.” The memo details Mrs. Sanders’ role in the college’s financial failure, and parallels the ongoing FBI investigation, now before a grand jury, into the scandal. Other email correspondence shows the Clinton team believed scandals surrounding the college and Jane Sanders provided an opportunity to knock the Vermont senator’s reputation and chances to win the Democratic primary election.

“I think our first question is how are we going to defeat Sanders. … he's not who he says he is -- gun votes, DSCC money, Jane. There may be other options too but these seem to be the strongest attacks to consider. How we undermine Sanders candidacy is our threshold question,” a Clinton campaign official wrote in the fall 2015......"​

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/14/hillary-clintons-plan-to-attack-bernie-sarnders-wife.html
Click to expand...

This purported investigation began under Obama...at the request of the Vermont chair of the Republican Party. Until an inditment comes down this is a nothing story. Nothing more than FoxNews and conservative media attempting to distract from verified Russian collusion with the Trump campaign.
 
I35 said:
It's sad because the Collusion is a fake story and there's actually something to the Sanders case.
Click to expand...

Donald Trump Jr. literally said "I love it" when offered up a meeting with a "Russian government lawyer" and you are claiming fake news. We have the email to prove it!
 
Seattle Husker said:
Donald Trump Jr. literally said "I love it" when offered up a meeting with a "Russian government lawyer" and you are claiming fake news. We have the email to prove it!
Click to expand...
Emails proved Clinton did a no-no and we all know what happened there. Plus, she broke a law that in anybody else's case would have been locked up for a long time and if the "intent" defense would have been used, the prosecution would have laughed so hard that they would have probably died.

Just because he loved the idea of what they were offering doesn't mean he colluded with the Russians. ****, I love the idea of certain people getting the crap beaten out of them but you don't see me doing it. For example, if you sent me a message asking to beat the piss out of Texas Taps, I couldn't like it fast enough. Does that mean I am guilty of beating him?
 
militaryhorn said:
For example, if you sent me a message asking to beat the piss out of Texas Taps, I couldn't like it fast enough. Does that mean I am guilty of beating him?
Click to expand...

If you met someone to plan the attack, yes, you could be breaking the law without actually attacking him. Donald Jr. did more than hit "like" but met what he though was a Russian lawyer ready to pass on information from the Russian government.

Why does every defense of Donald Jr. somehow involve HRC or Obama?

BTW- I do think that HRC violated some statutes in her handling of confidential data. It's also apparent there is a double standard for those in leadership (e.g. HRC, Patreus and others) than the grunts sitting in the Langley Ops center and others. That's not unique to HRC nor will it be to DJT when he inevitably runs his mouth after he leaves office.
 
Seattle Husker said:
If you met someone to plan the attack, yes, you could be breaking the law without actually attacking him. Donald Jr. did more than hit "like" but met what he though was a Russian lawyer ready to pass on information from the Russian government.

Why does every defense of Donald Jr. somehow involve HRC or Obama?

BTW- I do think that HRC violated some statutes in her handling of confidential data. It's also apparent there is a double standard for those in leadership (e.g. HRC, Patreus and others) than the grunts sitting in the Langley Ops center and others. That's not unique to HRC nor will it be to DJT when he inevitably runs his mouth after he leaves office.
Click to expand...
Not trying to split hairs here, but meeting someone and an email are two separate things. Not saying he isn't guilty either but the politicians need to be consistent if you are going to start accusing and prosecuting people.
 
militaryhorn said:
Not trying to split hairs here, but meeting someone and an email are two separate things. Not saying he isn't guilty either but the politicians need to be consistent if you are going to start accusing and prosecuting people.
Click to expand...
Folks, there is no law addressing this. Show me the law or STFU - this what my lawyer would say.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top