Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) attacked South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg, her competition for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination, during the Democrats’ debate last week, over claims that Buttigieg attended a high-dollar fundraiser thrown in his honor in a “wine cave” in Napa Valley.
“Billionaires in wine caves should not pick the next president of the United States,” Warren said during the debate.
There were already issues with her attack: Craig and Kathry Hall, who own the Hall Rutherford winery where the event took place, told the Associated Press that the fundraiser wasn’t nearly as glamorous as Warren made it out to be, and while they do sell a bottle of wine for $900 — a price point Warren said demonstrated how out of touch Buttigieg’s backers were — that bottle is actually a “extra large” and holds four times what a standard wine bottle holds.
Their most expensive bottle of wine is around $400, according to their website, but the Hall Rutherford Winery sells bottles across all price points, starting at around $20. And one of the attendees, Bill Werhle, wrote his own op-ed in The Washington Post defending the fundraiser, noting that “plenty [of the attendees] were people of means,” but that he’s “neither a billionaire nor a millionaire,” and the bottle of wine he drank retails for around $150.
But there’s a bigger problem with Warren’s line of attack: she’s isn’t so immune from “influence” as she claims. According to NBC News — not exactly an anti-Warren outlet — Warren, herself comfortably a millionaire (her net worth is somewhere north of $10 million), held her own winery fundraiser, complete with a $1,000-per-plate dinner, an appearance by noted millionaire entertainer Melissa Etheridge, and a souvenir wine bottle.
“On a Saturday evening in June 2018, with temperatures in the 70s and the Red Sox playing at Fenway Park, supporters of Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren gathered at the City Winery Boston for a fundraiser,” the outlet reported. “They were treated to songs by the Grammy-winning artist Melissa Etheridge and heard remarks from Warren, who was months away from announcing her campaign for the 2020 Democratic presidential nomination. For the top donors, those who could contribute or raise $5,400 per couple or $2,700 a person, there was a VIP photo reception and premium seating … For them and others who gave at least $1,000, there was also a gift: a souvenir wine bottle.”
Warren says she’s since “learned” from her mistakes and doesn’t sell access, but that’s also not entirely true.
“She used more than $10 million from her Senate campaign account, some of it raised at large donor events, to help seed her presidential bid, a fact Buttigieg eagerly pointed out,” the New York Post reports, adding that Warren embraced the sort of fundraiser and donor she now eschews as recently as 2018. “Past Warren donors say she was an engaging presence at those events, asking questions of her wealthy patrons and listening intently to what they had to say.”
She also handed out awards to millionaire donors, co-hosted events in tony locations, and courted celebrities like Matt Damon and Ben Affleck.
As for her newfound commitment to bypassing mega-donors and mega-fundraisers, it seems fairly limited, too. Instead of just personally courting those millionaire and billionaire fans, she’s just shuttling off that responsibility to bundlers, according to Politico, who act “as conduits” to her campaign and raise the cash on her behalf.
“[Paul] Egerman, her campaign treasurer, is a prolific political donor himself. And the wealthy supporters Egerman and [Shanti] Fry are organizing today may have another act to play in Warren’s campaign: If she became the nominee, those donors may help finance the national Democratic Party, which can collect six-figure sums and which Warren has said she would raise money for if chosen as the nominee, or help super PACs that would support Warren against President Donald Trump,” the DC-based outlet reports.
Jacobin — another not-very-right-leaning publication — also took Warren to task recently for narrowly defining what “PAC” money she’ll accept, leaving the door open for plenty of fundraiser influence — just not through very specific channels.