Tornado Alley (PROG)

[fuagf]

The Sanders Campaign’s Sexist New Argument: Hillary Tries Too Hard

http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/04/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-tries-too-hard-ambitious.html

outed from about half-way down in yours, for easy viewing because as usual Rachel nails some of Bernie's campaign "bullpucky" again.

In your post we should also note that Bernie wracked up a number of Pinocchios, too.

Three here .. The Pinocchio Test
The Sanders campaign is exaggerating the contributions that Clinton has received from the oil and gas industry. In the context of her overall campaign, the contributions
are hardly significant. It’s especially misleading to count all of the funds raised by lobbyists with multiple clients as money “given” by the fossil-fuel industry.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/02/fact-checking-the-clinton-sanders-spat-over-big-oil-contributions/

Just below that one four more .. The Pinocchio Test
The Sanders campaign can certainly contrast the candidates’ votes on offshore drilling. But it cannot insinuate that Clinton’s vote in 2006 had anything to do with the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Indeed, as phrased, the Sanders campaign statement would make any reasonable person believe that if it weren’t for the bill that Clinton supported, BP would not have obtained a permit. But there is no cause-and-effect that can be found.
We wavered between Three and Four Pinocchios. Given this was made in a prepared statement — and because of the Sanders campaign’s unwillingness to admit error — we tipped toward Four Pinocchios.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/03/14/did-hillary-clinton-cast-a-vote-that-led-to-the-bp-tragedy-in-the-gulf-of-mexico/

Down a bit farther another four .. The Pinocchio Test
Plainly put, Sanders has not released his full federal tax return. The little he has released was the Form 1040 in 2014, which is a summary of his tax filing that gives a snapshot of his finances — not what is considered a full tax return. The Sanders campaign confirmed to The Washington Post that it has not released other tax returns prior to 2014, which is a sharp contrast to Clinton’s voluminous release of her complete tax returns.

Tapper correctly questioned Sanders, asking why “nobody has seen them [federal tax returns] at all.” Yet Sanders interrupted Tapper to reject the notion, insisting: “That is not true. Of course, we have released them in the past.” But this answer is nothing remotely close to the little federal tax records he has released to the public.

Sanders says there is nothing in his 2015 tax return that is different from what the public has “seen for the last many years.” This indicates he may have been referring to the information filed in his financial disclosures. But that’s not the same as a full federal tax return — and as a longtime member of Congress, Sanders should know that.
Sanders is not required to release his tax filings, and he clearly decided to keep them confidential. That’s his choice. But it doesn’t excuse him from misleading the public to believe otherwise with this false claim.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/05/bernie-sanderss-false-claim-that-he-has-released-his-full-federal-tax-returns/

Three more - The Pinocchio Test
Sanders is putting words in Clinton’s mouth. She never said “quote unquote” that he was not qualified to be president. In fact, she diplomatically went out of her way to avoid saying that, without at the same time saying he was qualified. The Washington Post article appropriately noted that she raised questions about his qualifications, but certainly never said or suggested she said Sanders was unqualified.
Sanders would have been on safer ground if he had said Clinton is raising questions about his qualifications and now he would like to raise questions about her qualifications. But he can’t slam her for words she did not say.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/07/sanderss-incorrect-claim-that-clinton-called-him-not-qualified-for-the-presidency/

While a Sanders supporter failed miserably to
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/06/is-hillary-clinton-really-ahead-of-bernie-sanders-by-2-5-million-votes/
sneak one into Hillary's corner.

Three more for Bernie .. The Pinocchio Test
Sanders has not demonstrated that the Panama free-trade agreement encouraged tax avoidance schemes in Panama. The trade deal did not cover tax issues and the section cited by his staff merely updated an existing investment agreement with Panama. The side agreements on taxes and bearer shares actually appear to have had an impact, even if Panama’s overall performance on stemming shady money continues to be poor.

We understand that Sanders is highly critical of free-trade agreements, but in this instance, his claims that provisions in the Panama deal fostered tax avoidance fall short. Perhaps he could make a case that the deal bolstered up an economy built in part on fraud, but that’s not the same thing as saying the deal itself promoted offshore accounts. In fact, U.S. officials tried to use the FTA as leverage to improve access to tax information about U.S. citizens using offshore accounts in Panama.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/04/09/sanderss-claim-that-panama-free-trade-deal-enabled-more-offshore-tax-scams/

See also:

One truthfullness measure: Hillary pips Bernie 8-2.
http://investorshub.advfn.com/boards/read_msg.aspx?message_id=121319983 .. see bottom, too.