Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: FBI investigating Jane Sanders for alleged bank fraud: report [View all]Ninsianna
(1,356 posts)since 2015. I think there is a post in this thread where someone has gathered them together.
The land deal was predicated on the financing, and she has been contacted, she just hasn't been interviewed yet, I believe. But it bothers me that the knee jerk reflex has been to make misleading statements about how this is a Republican witch hunt, when the investigation was happening before then and we all know how opportunistic the GOP is.
That doesn't mean that it's all because of the nasty GOPers.
It wasn't just VPR, there have been several other sources, and some are busy trying to paint this as some sort of political attack on Bernie via his wife. The initial reports on this were coming from local news sources, and they were also seen through the prism of some open wounds from the primary rather than on their own. When this started, it was about investigating a pretty big thing in Vermont, and the involvement of a wife of a sitting Senator wasn't the primary issue, but that seems to be the only thing that some people see.
So the timeline is being ignored and the spin is a bit too strong, with some thinking that her status alone makes her above reproach. I think that's a poor mindset. I don't think she was deliberately trying to commit a criminal act, but she might have done so and in a way that's ethically questionable, and that should be addressed without all the hysterics. People seem to be bringing in other grudges when anyone mentions a current story that's in the news for legitimate reasons.
P.s. Thank you for the reply, and no worries, most of us have things going on away from the computer, I find it weird that some people find that surprising and use as some sort of passive aggressive attack. This is a message board, there is no time limit, that I'm aware of on replies, and I prefer when people take the time, when they have it, to post things that are well thought out, as your reply was, there was no need for apology