Report: Bernie Sanders’ Wife May Have Defrauded the State of Vermont


The wife of Bernie Sanders, Jane Sanders, could very well be brought up on criminal charges.  Upon her word only to the People’s Bank, she said that the school had the minimum commitment of $2.27 million in grants and donations prior to closing.  The bank agreed to purchase the bonds to finance the property purchase for the expansion of Burlington College in Vermont.  “The bank’s willingness to fund the loan is contingent upon … the minimum commitment of $2.27 million of grants and donations prior to closing.”

The college dutifully complied, producing a spreadsheet listing 31 confirmed donors who were scheduled to give the school over $2.6 million in donations between 2011 and 2016, including a $1 million commitment scheduled to pay out over five years.

And that was only the bottom limit, Sanders suggested, as there were millions more in verbal pledges or other donations that, while likely, were not set in stone. With those pledges, Burlington’s five-year fundraising projections reach just over $5 million.

The numbers needed were significantly deficient to meet the requirements and Sanders had nothing in stone, she only verbally claimed to have the contributions.

But in fact, even the smaller figure supplied by Sanders appears to have been anything but “confirmed.” According to audits obtained by TheDCNF, the school listed $1,303,785 in short- and long-term commitments for the year ending June 30, 2011, the same year that the college received the financing.

An accountant that spoke with TheDCNF explained that when non-profit organizations account for donations, future commitments are documented in the present as long as they are legally-binding, no matter when they are due to be collected.

Indeed, the school’s 2011 audit report confirms the use of this procedure, saying, “Contributions, including unconditional promises to give, are recognized as revenue in the period the contribution or promise is received.”

If Burlington College actually had confirmed commitments, then it would have been documented in the audit.

The accountant who spoke with TheDCNF said such a mistake was egregious, because bequests are far less legally binding (wills can be changed or invalidated). Such bequests shouldn’t be counted as confirmed contributions, he said.

Spilbor said that if Sanders or anybody else had knowingly garnished their confirmed donation figures, it would be “a pretty clear cut case” of fraud committed against the state.

This, ladies and gentlemen, could be America’s next First Lady.

 

 

 

 



Share

92 Comments

Leave a Reply

Pin It on Pinterest