Let’s truly hope she sets a high standard.

Why does he not blame Obama or the Democratic Party for attempts to out her potential failures?

“His Impressive Independency” campaigned to become the head of the Democratic Party by becoming it’s 2016 Presidential candidate and thrashing Trump on his way to the White House.

Trump occasionally praised him solely to encourage his undermining of Hilary. Obama and the Democratic Party in fact succeeded in overthrowing the Bern Assault. Not Trump.

Jane Sanders, the wife of the Vermont senator and 2016 presidential candidate, has been in the news of late — and not for good reasons. In late April, VTDigger, a non-profit reporting site in Vermont, broke the news that the FBI was potentially conducting an investigation related to her stewardship of Burlington College in the 2000s. No allegations of wrongdoing have been made by authorities against the Sanders.

Source: How much trouble is Jane Sanders actually in? – CNNPolitics.com

Are they conducting an investigation? Regardless, if they find nothing or think not actionable for whatever reason, the public is not supposed to know, ask tall Mr Comey. He is consistently clear about that. Was there a quiet exit negotiated between lawyers? So many questions, so little time or conclusive unarguable evidence.

Had they not fired her (it they did), maybe they might not be 3 years behind filing mandatory annual IRS Reporting required to keep their non profit status. Possible this web site is simply not current. Anybody know?

How frequently are penalties paid after the final extension, seemingly within 9 to 11 months after a year end. What is the motivation to overlook them or allow them to file until almost 4 years overdue. Or for that matter to violate the requirements of timely filing. Sounds like a racket with nebulous beneficiaries who are not WTP.

Penalty is loss of tax exempt status loss if not filed for 3 years.  A brief review of a handful of 501c(3) non profits including Harvard University are only filed as of 2014. How is that practice whenever practiced, not bad faith compliance with WTP?

Any American citizen with a high school diploma should be able to read and understand most laws and regulations and trust that our legislators or regulation writers knew of no contradictory laws or regulations on the book for any new law or regulation. Obviously to much for WTP to ask, because, well you know.

Let the vast Big Law conspiracy scare high school graduates into highering them only to discover too often that the bill will result in a costly discussion of researched laws and regs and court cases on your behalf of the usual conflicting laws and regs and even conflicting court cases. You might get a nonbinding opinion on how the court would rule if ever brought to trial. Can WTP afford that? No.

And for that matter, why can those Non Profits engaging in overt political purposes avoid paying taxes as most (not all) For a For Profit Business do. After all Public Service Politics is a Profitable Endeavor for most participants.

That is and will remain one unchangeable foundation of Bipartisan Hypocrisy enabling politicians (and other to profit) to get in to office with tax free money and make a profit during and after their Public Service. Really?

And isn’t it obvious that actors on all sides of he aisle work first to get elected first and foremost, by making emotional and un-achievable promises whose failures will be blamed on the other party?

The second and third vehemently denied purpose is to get their party into the power of the majority or better super majority and then to get reelected. In elections 55/45 is considered to be a landslide. What would 85% be?

But only most of the time. Many may honestly feel they have to do this other wise the other guy will take the country down the drain. Sure, they sometimes do feel they have the truly best answer.

But despite denials, it is hard not to feel that WTP come(s) in fourth.

And WTP are an amorphous bunch unless you count the Non Profit Organizations we belong to or donate to, rile against or simply tolerate or ignore.