jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Imagine if it was Hillary's campaign instead of Bernie's.
Since it's Bernie's, this is all just a simple mistake.
Had it been Hillary's, the media would have 24/7 coverage featuring pundits questioning her ethics and judgment.
If Hillary's campaign finance problem was that some contributors gave $3,000 when the limit is $2,700, you are right that it would warrant media coverage. Those amounts are normally Hillary's cab fare on the way to give a speech on Wall Street.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Imagine if it was Hillary's campaign instead of Bernie's.
Since it's Bernie's, this is all just a simple mistake.
Had it been Hillary's, the media would have 24/7 coverage featuring pundits questioning her ethics and judgment.
If Hillary's campaign finance problem was that some contributors gave $3,000 when the limit is $2,700, you are right that it would warrant media coverage. Those amounts are normally Hillary's cab fare on the way to give a speech on Wall Street.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Imagine if it was Hillary's campaign instead of Bernie's.
Since it's Bernie's, this is all just a simple mistake.
Had it been Hillary's, the media would have 24/7 coverage featuring pundits questioning her ethics and judgment.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Imagine if it was Hillary's campaign instead of Bernie's.
Since it's Bernie's, this is all just a simple mistake.
Had it been Hillary's, the media would have 24/7 coverage featuring pundits questioning her ethics and judgment.
Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Anonymous wrote:You only need to itemize contributions that aggregate more than $200 from a single source, or any single contribution over $50. If he's collecting money online, he should have systems in place that require collecting the legally required information (name, address, occupation) and also systems that track contributions from individuals so you will know if you meet the itemization threshold for that person. It also looks like he accepted contributions from foreign nationals, which is illegal.
None of this is a huge deal per se, but it makes you wonder who's minding the store. This is the big leagues and you need to get this stuff right. Also, as someone who is constantly criticizing our rigged political system, you'd think he would be filing accurate campaign finance disclosures.
Anonymous wrote:jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Paragraph 2 refers to $23 million of unitemized contributions.
Yeah, I guess they reported the total amount contributed by an individual, but need to itemize it. The list of excessive contributions is all itemized, so the campaign must have itemized some and not others. It's just a reporting issue that should be easy to fix.
A bit of an understatement.
jsteele wrote:Anonymous wrote:Paragraph 2 refers to $23 million of unitemized contributions.
Yeah, I guess they reported the total amount contributed by an individual, but need to itemize it. The list of excessive contributions is all itemized, so the campaign must have itemized some and not others. It's just a reporting issue that should be easy to fix.
Anonymous wrote:Paragraph 2 refers to $23 million of unitemized contributions.
Anonymous wrote:Yes, there's some interesting stuff in there. Not much press coverage of it.