Joe Biden had an End of Irony moment last night

[BeyondGeography]

Link to tweet

Some background on the hosts:

Jack B. Piatt and Nardelli, both co-chairs, are well-known Pittsburgh-area commercial real estate executives. Nardelli is a founder, manager, and partner at Castlebrook Development. Castlebrook is the developer for Shell’s ethane “cracker” plant in the Beaver Valley, which President Donald Trump visited in August.

...Several of the hosts have a history of giving to Republican candidates for president and Congress, and to the Republican campaign arms of both the Senate and House, and to the Republican National Committee. Many of them also gave to Democratic candidates and campaign committees.

Piatt, who has not yet given to Biden this cycle, is the founder and chair of Millcraft Investments, a real estate company based in Pittsburgh. He’s the former director of the Pittsburgh’s Federal Home Loan Bank, and the Pittsburgh branch of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. He also sits on the board of the St. Clair Hospital Foundation. Piatt also has a history of donating to Republicans in presidential races. He gave $2,700 to Kasich’s 2015 campaign, $1,000 to the committee supporting George W. Bush and Dick Cheney’s 2004 ticket, and $2,300 to Rudy Giuliani’s presidential committee in 2007. Piatt and the other co-hosts did not respond to requests for comment.

Tom VanKirk, one of six co-hosts, including his wife Bonnie, is the executive vice president of Highmark Health, a Pittsburgh-based health care company affiliated with BlueCross BlueShield. It’s one of the largest insurers in the country. Highmark runs as an integrated delivery and finance system, meaning it’s a holding company for health care providers and health care insurers, including nonprofit and for-profit entities. VanKirk oversees the company’s legal affairs. VanKirk is also the former chair and CEO of the firm Buchanan Ingersoll and Rooney PC, where he was a practicing litigator and “corporate adviser to many Fortune 1,000 companies.”

VanKirk is a frequent Democratic donor and has also contributed to numerous Republicans in recent years, including Rep. Kevin McCarthy and Sen. Pat Toomey in 2015.

Doug Campbell is a financial litigation attorney and founding member of Campbell and Levine, LLC, a firm that handles asset protection, bankruptcy and insolvency cases, debt and creditors’ rights, and settlements...

More at https://theintercept.com/2019/10/28/joe-biden-real-estate-fundraiser/

[TidalWave46]

3. She is a proven Democrat.

Neither of them should be questioning each other on that one. We shouldn't be questioning them on that one.

[TidalWave46]

8. What do you see in her Senate career do you see that makes you think...

She isn't a proven democrat. Seems pretty foolish to think otherwise.

[George II]

22. True. Then I wonder why she questioned him on that one last week (i.e., "in the wrong primary")?

[TidalWave46]

39. Not sure why either of them have insinuated such foolishness.

My guess with Warren is that she is going after the Sanders vote. Biden was simply reactionary. Neither were necessary.

[BlueMTexpat]

11. She is now and has

been since she became an activist. Hillary Clinton has also not always been a lifelong Dem. But both she and Elizabeth have been Democratic activists when and where it has counted.

Joe may have a lifelong Dem record. But there are parts of that record that render him quite vulnerable.

You can bet that GOPers will revive every one to smear him ... and create new ones.

Of course, they will do that with ANY Dem candidate. But having a long record is not always an asset.

[spooky3]

13. Agree. And I see nothing in Warren's recent history

(Eg >10 years) that suggests that she is insincere—just the opposite.

I think she understands that the President does not control legislation and that whatever plan comes out of Congress will be substantially different from her plan. I think she will work with it.

[betsuni]

14. Hillary Clinton was never a registered Republican or ever voted for one.

[BeyondGeography]

15. She also "seriously weighed" putting Warren on the ticket in 2016

https://www.politico.com/story/2019/07/25/warren-hillary-clinton-vice-president-1435422

[betsuni]

16. So?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

56. So Warren is Democratic enough for Hillary, but not enough for you it appears.

Do you feel she is a Republican mole? In the pocket of Wall Street? Proposing policies the Republicans have adopted?

Presumably she will become Democratic enough for you if Warren is nominated by the Democratic Party. Presumably you would vote for her then.

[betsuni]

62. What are you talking about? All I said was that Hillary did not vote for a Republican.

[vsrazdem]

30. That's not what she says. I don't think you get elected president of Wellesley Young Repulicans

without being a registered Republican.


In high school, Hillary Rodham — who grew up in Illinois and was influenced by her die-hard Republican father and high school history teacher — considered herself a Republican and even became a Goldwater Girl. She wrote about it in her book Living History:


Hillary Clinton in a photo of student council leaders from her high school yearbook.
Maine Township High School
"I was also an active Young Republican and, later a Goldwater girl right down to my cowgirl outfit and straw cowboy hat emblazoned with the slogan 'AuH2O.'

"My ninth-grade history teacher, Paul Carlson, was, and still is, a dedicated educator and a very conservative Republican. Mr. Carlson encouraged me to read Senator Barry Goldwater's recently published book, The Conscience of a Conservative. That inspired me to write my term paper on the American conservative movement, which I dedicated 'To my parents, who have always taught me to be an individual.' I liked Senator Goldwater because he was a rugged individualist who swam against the political tide."

She also writes about volunteering to check voter registration lists against addresses to find voter fraud. And during her first year of college, she was even elected president of the Wellesley Young Republicans Club. According to Carl Bernstein's book A Woman In Charge, by the fall of 1966, she identified herself as a Rockefeller Republican. By the spring of 1968, though, she was volunteering for Democrat Eugene McCarthy's presidential campaign.

[StevieM]

33. So she first voted at the age of 21 in 1968 and she was a Democrat by then.

When she started working for McCarthy she was 20 years old.

Being a Republican when you were a teenager is hardly the same thing as voting twice for Ronald Reagan at the ages of 31 and 35.

That being said, I like Elizabeth and I am not going to dismiss her candidacy simply because she was more conservative in the past.

[vsrazdem]

36. I agree. In this day and age, I just think it is important to have the facts.

[BlueMTexpat]

41. Wrong!

I was a devoted Hillary Clinton supporter - in the 2008 primaries until she conceded - and "all in" for her in 2016, both at the primary level and for the GE!

She was not only a registered Republican. She was an activist Republican.

See also, Post #30. She became disillusioned with the Republican Party in 1968 because her preferred candidate was Nelson Rockefeller. After that, she saw the light, never looked back, and became the wonderful Democrat we know today.

Unlike some, I never held her political origins against her because she ended up in the right place. Just as I do not hold Elizabeth's political origins against her. She has definitely ended up in the right place!

[OldRed2450]

44. Hillary was only republican in her teen years. Lol

[BlueMTexpat]

58. Read Hillary's own account of when and what.

It can easily be found on-line.

The point is that she changed. So did Elizabeth Warren, although later on. Earlier, Elizabeth Warren was basically a Republican by default. She was not an activist and really had nothing to do with politics until she researched how the middle class was getting totally screwed by GOPers with help - witting or unwitting - from some Dems. Especially in the 90s.

THEN she became a Democrat and an activist Democrat at that. Her comparatively short career as a Dem has been a very productive one for those of us who are not in the One Percent.

[Baitball Blogger]

20. Based on Biden's past voting history, she is more Democratic on some issues than

Biden ever was. And, in this culture, if controlling Wall Street and Banker abuses is a main issue for Democrats, Elizabeth Warren is the only one talking that language.

That said, should we be talking about this so close to the primary? And if you are going to get on that strategy, maybe you should come up with criticism that has more substance?

[JoeOtterbein]

29. +1

[TidalWave46]

40. How many votes did he take in his long career where he sided with a majority of Republicans...

and minority of democrats?

What you put forward says nothing about who is a "real democrat."

[notKeith]

21. Re: life-long democratic party member..

That is part of the problem, IMHO. He still appears to think like it's the 70's where there was comity between the GOP and the Dems. One would think his experience as VP under Obama would have opened his eyes to the 21st century reality - the GOP, before Trump became front/center was all about scorched earth. It was pre-Trump when Rush Limbaugh broadcast "Barach the Magic Negro", i.e., GOP racism didn't need Trump's help; it was pre-Trump when McConnell prevented Obama's SCOTUS nomination from moving forward. It wasn't Trump who kept the Benghazi carnival going ad infinitum.
It's not Biden's gaffs that scare me most, although they are hair-raising at times, it's his POV on Republican behavior and what he thinks he can accomplish with them via "compromise" and whatnot.

[Bradshaw3]

23. This line of attack is getting wearisome and is just plain dishonest

Warren has voted for every Democratic candidate for President since the 1970s. She also has been fighting for the middle class for three decades while Biden was known as a senator who supported the banking industry over consumers.

From the NYT:
"MBNA executives and employees contributed roughly $200,000 to Mr. Biden’s campaigns from 1989 to 2010, making the company his largest corporate donor during that time, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

The bankruptcy debate went on for many years in Congress, with Mr. Biden on several occasions supporting the bill and ultimately, with 73 others, voting for the version that passed the Senate in 2005. That legislation, which Mr. Obama voted against, drew the ire of advocacy groups who saw it as anticonsumer."

If people keep wanting to go there, I'll put Warren's Democratic values of supporting working people over Biden's any day.

[BlueMTexpat]

42. Exactly.

[Act_of_Reparation]

57. Who cares?

How is it relevant? You think Elizabeth Warren is a Republican Manchurian candidate or something? She's gonna get sworn in an surprise, we're a theocracy now?

Seriously, what are you going on about?


Just as a side note, here's some perspective: Warren switched over in 1996. That's 23 years ago. There are "lifelong Democrats" who have been Democrats for less time than Elizabeth Warren.

[TidalWave46]

2. Hope someone was handing out Unite the Country cards so they can donate even more there.

I simply don't have a problem with this. I do have a problem with the ultra shady Intercept.

[BeyondGeography]

4. Feel free to correct any factual information about the hosts

I know you can do better than defaulting to “It’s The Intercept.”

[TidalWave46]

5. There is no need to spend time doing such a thing.

With limited resources one must pick and choose their battles. The Intercept is without question a deceptive and shady outlet. I have spent my time understanding the organization. No need to go further. They employee Fox News tactics geared toward the lowest common denominator.

[BeyondGeography]

7. Still nothing on the facts

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

9. And there won't be.

Bernie/Elizabeth or Elizabeth/Bernie 2020!!
Either way, they're stronger together!!
Welcome to the revolution!!!

[highplainsdem]

10. I hope Biden raised a lot of money. Trump is already waging a GE campaign against him, since he

knows Biden is far and away the greatest threat to his re-election.

As even Fox News' politics editor admitted:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/1287336910

[Bradshaw3]

25. Wh ocares how he raises the money, right?

From the very people who have created the economic inequality that is strangling average Americans. That's ok? Foreign dictators? I prefer candidates who are for working people over the elites who are ruining our country.

And this meme of Biden is the best candidate because rump thinks so is just laughable. I'll pick my candidate based on Democratic values, not what that idiot or Fox News thinks.

[Andy823]

28. So now Fox News

is the go to place to get "honest" reporting, or only if that reporting supporters your candidate? Kind of like all this polls from fox that were being used here. I would trust anything coming from that cesspool.

[DCofVA]

12. Apparently, the press wasn't allowed to cover his speech.

This raises all kinds of warning flags.

[brooklynite]

17. The press doesn't attend most fundraisers...

...including the high dollar fundraisers I attended for Elizabeth Warren's Senate campaigns.

What do you imagine happens that requires reporting?

(nb - I've been to small lunch and dinner events with VP Biden, which the press also didn't cover).

[awesomerwb1]

24. dear lord

This is not a rally. Fundraisers don't have to include the press.

[George II]

18. Did anyone at the fundraiser give more than the maximum allowable contribution?

[Bradshaw3]

26. It's not how much it's who is giving

And what they expect in return. I thought Democrats were supposed to care about the influence of money in politics. I guess some don't if their candidate benefits.

[George II]

27. So you're implying that Biden can be bought?

[Bradshaw3]

49. I figured you would try this BS

Try to get an alert by putting it in those words. Try debating on the facts, OK? Here's a fact from the NYT on the bankruptcy bill:

"MBNA executives and employees contributed roughly $200,000 to Mr. Biden’s campaigns from 1989 to 2010, making the company his largest corporate donor during that time, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics.

The bankruptcy debate went on for many years in Congress, with Mr. Biden on several occasions supporting the bill and ultimately, with 73 others, voting for the version that passed the Senate in 2005. That legislation, which Mr. Obama voted against, drew the ire of advocacy groups who saw it as anticonsumer."

He got the most money from them during that time period and supported their interests. Fact.

So in the vein of your question, do you think supporting big banks over consumers shows true Democratic principles? Are you going to attack Obama for opposing the bill?

[George II]

53. Pssst, as YOU stated above:

MBNA executives and employees contributed roughly $200,000.

Where do you think MBNA was headquartered at the time? WILMINGTON DELAWARE. No doubt those employees included file clerks, tellers, bookkeepers, workers in their lunchrooms, maintenance employees, secretaries, telephone operators, etc. OOOOH, but they worked for MBNA so they must not give to any political campaigns!!

Also, from your excerpt:

Mr. Biden on several occasions supporting the bill and ultimately, with 73 others, voting for the version that passed the Senate in 2005.

He didn't do it on his own, and he did it along with an overwhelming MAJORITY.

Finallly:

"He got the most money from them during that time period.."

MBNA was acquired by Bank of America in 2006 and the thrust of their business changed, along with a reduction of their operations Delaware.

Funny how these things get ignored in an attempt to bash the politician-o-the-day.

As for your statement in the post to which I responded, yes, you DID imply that there were ulterior motives for those contributions, i.e., Biden can be bought, and in this post you all but said it outright.

[Bradshaw3]

60. Lot of dodges and false charges there, as expected

I didn't write those words - they came from a NYT ARTICLE, which I referenced and used QUOTE MARKS for, so putting YOU (referring to me in YOUR headline) is an outright falsehood.

Then you use the old "employees contributed too" dodge. Yes I'm sure the janitors there are who Joe was having fundraisers with. Followed by the "majority voted for it" as if that makes anything ok. As does the cpmpany being in his state.

I didn't IMPLY anything, another outright lie by you, nor did I all byt say it. If I want to say something I will. Unlike you, who uses words like imply whne it isn't true an tries ot bai a poster into an alert. I asked you to use fact and all you can do is smear.

Some Biden supporters on here think its ok to take money no matter the source. I and anyone else who cares about what these big money donors have done to our economy and political system want our government to represent the people, not the very corporations that have caused these ills.

[George II]

61. Of course the details of where the money came from is always ignored to make it look worse...

Most of that industry, employer data comes from opensecrets.org.

You should look at how they determine where money comes from and their caveats. I'll help you out, it's posted below. Of course you can choose to interpret this any way you want or ignore what you don't like. The reason we don't know as much about Sanders' source of money is that more than 70% of his contributions (tens of millions of dollars) are "un-itemized"! We don't know the occupation or employer of the source of almost three quarters of his revenue, so no one can scrutinize it as deeply as some like to do with Biden and other candidates.

Why (and How) We Use Donors' Employer/Occupation Information

The organizations listed as "Top Contributors" reached this list for one of two reasons: either they gave through a political action committee sponsored by the organization, or individuals connected with the organization contributed directly to the candidate.

Under federal law, all contributions over $200 must be itemized and the donor's occupation and employer must be requested and disclosed, if provided. The Center uses that employer/occupation information to identify the donor's economic interest. We do this in two ways:

First, we apply a code to the contribution, identifying the industry. Totals for industries (and larger economic sectors) can be seen in each candidate and race profile, and in the Industry Profile section of the OpenSecrets website.

Second, we standardize the name of the donor's employer. If enough contributions came in from people connected with that same employer, the organization's name winds up on the Top Contributor list.

Of course, it is impossible to know either the economic interest that made each individual contribution possible or the motivation for each individual giver. However, the patterns of contributions provide critical information for voters, researchers and others. That is why Congress mandated that candidates and political parties request employer information from contributors and publicly report it when the contributor provides it.

In some cases, a cluster of contributions from the same organization may indicate a concerted effort by that organization to "bundle" contributions to the candidate. In other cases—both with private companies and with government agencies, non-profits and educational institutions—the reason for the contributions may be completely unrelated to the organization.

Showing these clusters of contributions from people associated with particular organizations provides a valuable—and unique—way of understanding where a candidate is getting his or her financial support. Knowing those groups is also useful after the election, as issues come before Congress and the administration that may affect those organizations and their industries.

https://www.opensecrets.org/2020-presidential-race/contributors?id=N00001669

The bottom line is that as much as you imply (there's that word again!) that the source of Biden's or any other candidates you don't favor is nefarious, every single penny collected is legal and within FEC permissible limits.

Now about those millions of "un-itemized" dollars, hmmmm....

[BeyondGeography]

34. Joe said Friday at the Liberty & Justice Dinner that all we have to do is get rid of Trump

and the way forward is clear.

I see a lot of roadblocks on that list.

[LanternWaste]

35. Literalism. I guess it ain't just for fundies, anymore.

[BeyondGeography]

37. Neither is naivete

Or is that an elitist thing to say?

[beastie boy]

31. I am assuming that Ryan Grim, whose tweet you linked to, is referring to this Biden quote:

"But at another level these kinds of attacks are a serious problem. They reflect an angry unyielding viewpoint that has crept into our politics. If someone doesn’t agree with you — it’s not just that you disagree — that person must be a coward or corrupt or a small thinker.

Some call it the “my way or the highway” approach to politics. But it’s worse than that. It’s condescending to the millions of Democrats who have a different view.

It’s representative of an elitism that working and middle class people do not share: “We know best; you know nothing”. “If you were only as smart as I am you would agree with me.”

This is no way to get anything done. This is no way to bring the country together. This is no way for this party to beat Donald Trump.

There are a lot of ways — a lot of progressive ways — to fix our health care system and to make our tax system fair and to address the challenge of climate change. I believe I have proposed the most progressive, transformational ideas in this campaign — and I can get them done."

So how does talk of elitism kill irony? Let me guess the alleged connection: it is because Biden is talking to supporters with money, who, in Ryan Grim's view, are the financial elites, I presume. And, because his message is addressed to them, Biden's reference to (presumably) Warren's elitism is ironic.

This is so lame! Accepting all of the assumptions in Grim's tweet, since when has talking to elites about elitism become ironic? It's not like Biden is an elitist criticizing Warren's elitism! THAT would have been ironic indeed. And when did warning donors against a losing strategy in favor of of a winning one, which had been spectacularly validated just yesterday, kill irony?

There is one thing that is telling in Grim's tweet. It is the shift of the TYT pro-Bernie/anti-Hillary narrative in 2016 to exclusively anti-Biden/pro-no one in particular narrative in 2019

[PhoenixDem]

32. Meh - weak sauce

We need all the help we can get.

Go Joe !!

[LonePirate]

38. I understand the need to raise money but weren't any left leaning people/industries available?

[BannonsLiver]

43. Wow, you're really worked up about his fundraiser

[OldRed2450]

45. As long as Biden doesn't have a history of being corrupt...

I don't care where he raises his money from. Biden is and has always been honest and decent.

Warren defended corporations, and pocketed massive amounts of money for the asbestos industry, the breast implant industry, and for Big Retail who looted $6 billion/year out of consumer pockets via interchange fee transfer.

[BeyondGeography]

46. Gimme an M, gimme a B...

Yeah, sure.

[OldRed2450]

47. You don't think it's true?

It is true. https://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2012/09/24/warren-represented-coal-mining-company-bankruptcy-caseb/HTgZwpjNJBy8aL6geQ8jXI/story.html

[BeyondGeography]

48. You don't think this is true?

Link to tweet

[OldRed2450]

50. No I don't think it's true

Trade issues are much more nuanced than that. Warren is worth 10 million dollars. She made her money defending big corporations against the little guy. Biden did not get rich off his work.

[BannonsLiver]

59. +10000

It’s a fallacy that only dumbed down Trump humpers and conservatives have trouble processing nuance.

[OldRed2450]

51. What was Biden doing while warren was doing this?

Sybil Goldrich, a breast-implant victim and trustee for claimants in the 1995 bankruptcy case, has said Ms. Warren was “on the wrong side” of the litigation as the company worked to contain corporate damage related to the claims.

Other summaries released by the campaign omitted key details.

Describing Ms. Warren’s work in a 1989 Internal Revenue Service case, the summary says she worked to “help the tax court.” The summary does not specify that she was retained by one of Texas’s wealthiest families, the Hunts, in a tax dispute about how much various members owed to the I.R.S. after they tried to corner the silver market.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/us/politics/elizabeth-warren-corporations.html#click=https://t.co/IgppFP2ufC

[JustAnotherGen]

54. I listened to him on the Joe Madison show this morning

He put it where even the goats can get it. One thing I think we as a party (all of US) get wrong is speaking down to people who don't agree with us.

[brutus smith]

55. Joe needs to quit alienating other Dems.