this is an excellent comment from Mark Lippmann that provides further context. i put this diary out just to show information and link to the article and then let discussion follow…
“The presumption of innocence
Brady Toensing, Vice-Chair Vermont Republican Party, sent the original request for an investigation to the US Attorney for Vermont on January 10, 2016. The request accused Jane Sanders of bank fraud and implicated Bernie Sanders, too. There was a named plaintiff and numerous exhibits.
The case looked authentic but since it came from Toensing few news outlets covered it. Vermont Public Radio and VTDigger come to mind. A month later, some reporters asked Sanders to release full copies of his tax records including schedules and attachments. They would have cleared up some questions about the allegations.
In April, at the debate before the New York primary, Wolf Blitzer was still asking and Sanders promised, “You’ll get them.” I won’t bother with the video clip. He never delivered.
The timing seemed like a curious coincidence. On January 5, 2016, Sanders rolled into New York City to deliver an important speech about Wall Street. The crowd was enthusiastic. Sanders said that the business model on Wall Street is fraud but the bankers weren’t prosecuted.
I affiliate with the Left of the Left in France. Blanket condemnation of an entire class of people, no matter how unpopular they are, isn’t an ideal that we promote. It reminds people of the 1930s. The presumption of innocence is a foundation of the legal/judicial system and something that citizens shouldn’t discard so carelessly.
Sanders didn’t observe the presumption of innocence relative to his opponent’s speeches. And his campaign’s lawyer accused her of money laundering in a letter to the FEC. The claims he made were repeated as if they were true facts.
Of course, people like him don’t appreciate the presumption of innocence until it’s their turn to be accused.”