Actor James Woods is the sheriff of the internet these days and when it comes to taking down liberals, he is second to none.
After nearly forcing Nancy Pelosi to retire on Saturday, Woods is back with another merciless quip of former Democrat presidential nominee Bernie Sanders.
Sanders took to Twitter to note that it was more expensive to jail someone in California over covering their tuition at the University of California.
“$30,000: The cost to send a California student to UCLA. $75,000: The cost to send someone to prison in California. Maybe, just maybe, we should be investing in education rather than locking kids up,” Sanders tweeted.
$30,000: The cost to send a California student to UCLA
$75,000: The cost to send someone to prison in California
Maybe, just maybe, we should be investing in education rather than locking kids up.
— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) June 3, 2018
Several people called out the odd comparison:
Well then they shouldn’t do illegal things. I’ll pay taxes to incarcerate bad people.
— C-Mac (@CoreyMcLaughl20) June 3, 2018
Maybe just maybe we should be teaching kids to value getting an education over engaging in the kids of anti-social criminal behaviors that get them sent to prison. Parents and family will have more influence over that than the government.
— Libertas (@SemperLibertas1) June 3, 2018
How many years in college should you get for murder?
— Jason Schmidt (@telenetworxx) June 3, 2018
You’re right, free college and no prison time for criminals is a winning strategy…
— Hank Barr (@barr_hank) June 4, 2018
Lol everyone always defending people that make wrong choices. God this country is screwed.
— Will (@Willsephx) June 4, 2018
But Woods took things to a whole other level.
Speaking of a controversy affecting the Sanders family, which surfaced last year, Woods said he would personally cover the cost to have Sanders put in prison.
“Aren’t you in prison yet for that bank fraud thingy…? I’ll pay the 75,000 a year for that myself,” Woods tweeted.
Aren’t you in prison yet for that bank fraud thingy…? I’ll pay the 75,000 a year for that myself. https://t.co/QGmogAcTms
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) June 4, 2018
Here’s more on the “bank fraud thingy,” per Fox News:
A key witness in the possible bank fraud case against Sen. Bernie Sanders’ wife, Jane Sanders, was questioned by FBI agents just over a week ago, Fox News has learned.
The revelation—the first such confirmed development since January—likely indicates that the federal investigation into a soured $10-million real estate deal remains open.
Jane Sanders, the former president of the now-defunct Burlington College, was at the helm when the college decided to expand and obtain a tract of land from a Roman Catholic parish. She secured a $6.7 million loan from a bank and a $3.6 million loan from the parish from which she planned to purchase the property.
She resigned in 2011 amid accusations that she inflated the amount of money donors have pledged to the school and provided incorrect information to a bank to get the loan. Multiple individuals, who were listed as college donors, have since come forward denying the commitments.
During an interview with CNN’s Chris Cillizza, VTDigger’s Morgan True said the investigation by Vermont into Sanders may amount to “nothing.”
“It’s entirely possible that the US Attorney for Vermont is building a loan fraud case against Jane Sanders to present to a grand jury — or is presenting one currently — and if they do, it’s equally possible the jurors will vote to indict,” True said.
“Handicapping the odds that prosecutors will get to an indictment is difficult,” he added. “In my opinion, those odds are lower than the odds that the US attorneys in Vermont working on this thing decide they don’t have a case or fail to convince a grand jury of its merit.”
As the journalist explains, the legal team representing the state of Vermont would have to prove Jane Sanders intentionally misled the bank:
That’s partly because when I first interviewed an assistant US attorney about what constitutes loan fraud, he made it clear that the government would have to prove any misrepresentations were intentional.
Proving intent — or what was going on in someone’s head when they did a thing — is really difficult unless that person told people or documented their thinking some other way. If investigators have a smoking gun, it’s hard for me to understand why there hasn’t been an indictment already; remember this started 18 months ago.
However the case will end, several people who replied to the Woods’ tweet were well onboard with chipping in:
I’ll chip in
— Curt Schilling (@gehrig38) June 4, 2018
I’ll pitch in a couple of bucks @RealJamesWoods .
— Allen S. Boyd (@AllenSBoyd1) June 4, 2018
I’ll donate a $100 bucks to that $75k to see Bernie in prison! And another $100 to see Hillary thrown in to!
— Henry G. Nerida (@kuh_nuhn_druhm) June 4, 2018
We could crowd-fund it!!
— peg c (@pegva) June 4, 2018
I’m good for $10,000.00/yr myself…….😎
— MAKE’N BACON (Doc) (@Steven31015146) June 4, 2018
Where do I contribute towards this righteous cause?
— Steve Course (@stevecourse) June 4, 2018
Note: The author of this article has included commentary that expresses an opinion and analysis of the facts.
Hey I can throw in a few $$ myself.
— SC_Deplorable (@JohnAHole1) June 4, 2018