Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012, is a bipartisan bill passed by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in December 2012, intending to punish Russian officials responsible for the death of Russian tax accountant Sergei Magnitsky in a Moscow prison in 2009.

Since 2016 the bill, which applies globally, authorizes the US government to sanction those who it sees as human rights offenders, freeze their assets, and ban them from entering the U.S.'>>>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnitsky_Act

For information, IMPORTANT to note FACTS:

*Sanders was joined in voting nay by Carl Levin (D-MI), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Jack Reed (D-RI). . .

the Obama administration opposed the Magnitsky Act. The administration flip-flopped only after the sanctions were attached to a bill normalizing trade relations with Russia, hence the bill’s official name: The Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 6156). . .

Sanders voted for a second, more robust version of the Magnitsky Act in 2015. . .

Sanders supports imposing punitive sanctions targeting Putin and his oligarch cronies.'>>>

https://pplswar.wordpress.com/2018/07/19/why-did-bernie-sanders-vote-against-the-magnitsky-act/

https://pplswar.wordpress.com/2018/07/19/why-did-bernie-sanders-vote-against-the-magnitsky-act/

The fact that Bernie Sanders (I-VT) voted against the so-called Magnitsky Act of 2012 imposing targeted sanctions on Russian oligarchs to punish the Putin regime for human rights abuses is often cited as “proof” by liberal conspiracy theorists that Sanders was somehow culpable in the Kremlin’s targeted effort to damage the candidacy of Hillary Clinton as part of their broader attack on the 2016 U.S. election.

What liberal conspiracy theorists won’t tell you is that Sanders was joined in voting nay by Carl Levin (D-MI), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Jack Reed (D-RI) none of whom stand accused by anyone of being Russian stooges.

What liberal conspiracy theorists won’t tell you is that the Obama administration opposed the Magnitsky Act. The administration flip-flopped only after the sanctions were attached to a bill normalizing trade relations with Russia, hence the bill’s official name: The Russia and Moldova Jackson-Vanik Repeal and Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act of 2012 (H.R. 6156).

What liberal conspiracy theorists won’t tell you is that Sanders voted for a second, more robust version of the Magnitsky Act in 2015.

What liberal conspiracy theorists won’t tell you is that Sanders supports imposing punitive sanctions targeting Putin and his oligarch cronies, supports the sprawling Russia counter-intelligence investigation of the 2016 election led by Special Counsel Robert Mueller, denounces Russian aggression and Putin on a fairly regular basis, and during the 2016 presidential campaign supported sending more U.S. troops to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s (NATO) Eastern European members to deter Russia from attacking them the way it attacked Ukraine in 2014.

We CAN'T let misleading 'memes' go un-answered.

The Magnisky Act was passed in the Senate by a vote of 92-4, with 4 not voting. It passed in the House 365-43, with 25 not voting. Vote combined was 457 for, 47 against.

The Russia Sanctions bill passed in the Senate by a vote of 98-2. It passed in the House 419-3, with 11 not voting. Vote combined was 517 for, 3 against.

Only one Senator voted against both of these, Senator Sanders.

In January 2019 the Senate held a vote to reverse a decision by the Treasury Department to lift sanctions against Oleg Deripaska's companies. 99 Senators participated in the vote, only one did not - Senator Sanders.

Three separate votes on bills to sanction Russia - two Sanders "nay", one "not voting".

Sanders missed the 2019 vote because he was in a meeting with people who had worked in his campaign & faced harassment. The logistics were already arranged. If he missed that meeting after arranging the meeting, the headline would be "Sanders doesn't care about Sexual Harassment". If he attended the meeting, the headline would be "Sanders missed Russia vote". He can't win either way.

1. The reason for that meeting was that there was rampant sexual abuse and harassment in his campaign, as well as income inequality - men were getting paid MUCH more than women who were doing the same job.
2. The meeting took place over the course of 24+ hours. The vote on the floor of the Senate was a 30-minute vote.
3. The meeting took place only minutes from the Capitol.
4. Coincidentally, he left the Senate chamber as the vote was beginning and didn't return until after the vote closed. He was gone less than an hour.

Ninety-nine other Senators were able to participate in the vote for sanctions against Oleg Deripaska. Only one didn't.

As to your headline, he very easily could have addressed that meeting an hour before or an hour after the vote.

Finally, if there was more control over his campaign staffers the meeting never would have had to be held in the first place.

regarding sexual harrassment, don't remember which one, but I do know it was not nearly as covered as Bernie. Wonder why. These types of posts are not constructive and will do nothing but divide potential voters for the democratic ticket. I will vote for whoever the nominee is, but I fear the same will not be said if Bernie were to win the nomination, and save your breath telling me it won't happen. Nobody can predict who will win.

....(not three years later) and that person was dismissed.

later), and so yes, he definitely needed to address it and did so.

...to be a micro manager, with his hand in everything. Or was he?

would be difficult to know it's going on. Even people who are micromanagers, which I have never heard that Bernie was, are not mind readers. Unless they listen to a lot of gossip at a campaign headquarters, if it was even discussed prior to this, you would'nt know. But do go ahead and blame the candidate for someone else's inapprorpiate behavior. That seems par for the course.

....in his 2018 Senate campaign.

https://theintercept.com/2019/01/10/bernie-sanders-campaign-sexual-harassment-sexism/

Maybe you should read you own links.

I told my story to bring attention to the sexist environment that is unfortunately endemic to most workspaces, including political campaigns. However, I was disheartened to discover that the takeaway by many pundits was not that sexism and harassment is pervasive, but that Sanders was somehow uniquely culpable. I was also struck by some of the messages and tweets calling into question the character of the women who spoke out.

As was the case throughout the 2016 campaign season, my personal experiences as a woman of color were sublimated to serve an establishment media narrative that pretends the progressive movement is all white, all male, and runs counter to the interests of women and people of color.

But my story should not be taken to confirm the “Bernie bro” mythology. It should be taken to confirm the pervasiveness of sexism in professional life and distill the hard truths that all campaigns should learn from.

It’s not as if the Sanders campaign alone is nursing the last vestiges of sexism and sexual harassment in the political sphere. Both were reportedly features of Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign. During her first run at the White House, Clinton’s campaign chose to retain a senior adviser who reportedly harassed a young woman repeatedly rather than fire him. And just last month, an aide for Sen. Kamala Harris, D-Calif., resigned after it was reported that he settled a sexual harassment lawsuit for $400,000.

....was so he could address the issues in his 2016 campaign. That isn't a very good excuse since the meeting was conducted over a 24-hour period and the vote he skipped, which was to reimpose sanctions on Russian Oleg Deripaska, was only a 30-minute vote.

That's the subject of this discussion, his failure a number of times to vote against Russia or Russians.

The meeting, which you brought up not me, was just a distraction.

response to allegations of widespread sexual harassment and gender-based pay discrimination?

I understand this desire to try to justify or portray Bernie's vote as a one off. Of course, like Trump, Bernie has also long been a critic of NATO and had even proposed including Russian in NATO even though NATO was formed as a bulkwark against Russian aggression.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/11/19/sanders-wants-new-nato-with-russia

Thank you. The question is why even after he learned about such interference, Bernie did not vote for Russian election sanctions. If there was some element of that bill that he did not like, then as a senior senator, he should have worked it out so that he could stand with the American people.

....any North Atlantic Treaty Organization when the country doesn't border on the North Atlantic Ocean or, for that matter, ANY ocean.

What good does this crap do anybody?

This is Bernie's voting record. He can pontificate, but when it came down to it, Bernie voting with Putin and Russian Oligarchs. Likewise, when it came to protecting out election system from Russian interference, Bernie sided with Putin and against the integrity of U.S. elections, which is made even worse because Russian interference helped him.

You can say Fake News all you want, but his votes are a matter of public record.

Democrats are better than this.

Who have actively pushed Trump/Russian talking points. For example, Briahna Joy Gray is Bernie's current and former campaign secretary:

Link to tweet

?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E780590640438603777&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2F%3Fcom%3Dview_post%26forum%3D1287%26pid%3D386015

Just stop

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. I submit that the reason why cites to Bernie's votes and the statements of Bernie's campaign are divisive would because Bernie himself tries to create division. I am simply saying that we need to acknowledge that Bernie himself is often the source of the division. Bernie has long elevated himself by trashing the Democratic party:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/11/bernie-sanders-lambasts-absolute-failure-of-democratic-partys-strategy

There.

Fixed the thread title.

Distraction type threads like this are not needed. Go away!

No need to thank me.

The Obama administration opposed the original 2012 Magnitsky act until it was modified to include trade normalization with Russia. Sanders opposed the normalization and voted against the bill.

He voted for the 2015 version. That one was stronger than the 2012 version and was not loaded with other issues.

Sanders voted against the 2017 version as it included Trumps new sanctions against Iran, in violation of the nuclear accord.

We have an actual foreign asset in the White House. None of our candidates are supporting fascists.

'Ironically, When Russia Assassinates People, Bernie Votes to Support Russia,' and expect it to pass, unexamined.

It's disgraceful.

It is amazing how Bernie always seems to have a handy excuse to avoid voting against Russian oligarchs.

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/16/senate-democrats-vote-to-block-trump-from-lifting-russia-sanctions-fails.html

Carl Levin (D-MI), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), and Jack Reed (D-RI)

But it's funny because "Bernie's not a Democrat" is a constant refrain, and I'm sure the OP wouldn't have meant to say that he is.

But they did.

never have, won't start now.

....only one name would be inside both intersecting circles.

I can give you an explanation of Euler diagrams too if you want.

Here's an example. Substitute "Multiples of 3" with "Magnisky" and "Multiples of 5" with "Russia Sanctions" and you've got it:

I wouldn't. I prefer FACTS.

...against the Magnitsky Act and Russian Election sanctions. Thank you.

Bernie's Stated Reason Does Not Hold Water when considered with his vote against Russian election sanctions coupled with his long standing hostility towards U.S. involvement with NATO. Of course, there is the fact that Bernie directly benefitted from Russian interference. So, just because Bernie gave some alibi justifying his latest pro-Russian vote, does not mean the issue is resolved.

https://www.vpr.org/post/how-russian-social-media-effort-boosted-bernie#stream/0

SHOULD have been 'removed,' imo.

This is pretty incredible that among 100 Senators, Bernie happens to side with Putin.

He has a striking record of votes, skipping votes, and stated positions that benefit Russia while deviating 180 degrees from his Democratic colleagues every time and even with Republican senators a number of times. Voting record more pro-Russia than Putin's Republican Party, at least on those bills. And even McConnell is not calling for dismantling NATO while Europe is forced to arm against the threat of Russian invasions. Sanders is.

And I can tell you that not one of his reasons really held together to me (I've read them looking to understand) or people in general. The press should bring up the spotlight, pour some water in all of them and report on what they find.

And in the meantime, you probably should look into this yourself and learn what those who have know.

Does anyone call Bernie on his excuses and explanations? Okay, you give him a pass on the 2012 Magnistky Act. You give him a pass on his comments about making Russia part of NATO. You give him a pass on his vote against the 2017 Russian election sanctions. Then, what about him missing a vote to stop Trump administration from lifting sanctions on firms linked to Putin?

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/16/senate-democrats-vote-to-block-trump-from-lifting-russia-sanctions-fails.html

Implying an asset. That's opinion. where is your proof?

I am saying that Bernie consistently takes pro-Russian positions and that he has conspicuously voted against Russian sanctions or missed key votes sanctioning Russia. I just listing bills and votes, which are a matter of public record.

I also think that the explanations given for Bernie's votes are way too pat. For example, Russian election sanctions. Bernie is a senior Senator. He was directly involved in the 2016 elections. Bernie should have used his influence to modify the bill so that he could vote and protect the American people on a key issue, protecting the integrity of elections.

So, Bernie's excuse for voting against the sanction bill just does not hold water. How he managed to get on the wrong side of such a bill is just crazy. I linked the other story of Bernie missing the vote limiting Trump's ability to lift sanctions on certain Russian oligarchs.

What is up with that? There is nothing to imply. Bernie's actions and votes just need to be reviewed and discussed.

You scratch my back ...