Obama in serious trouble--Sestak confirms WH offer to drop out of Senate race

[Newby]

So much for the 'tough guy' persona, eh?

I was expecting some whips or chains at the very least from you.

Ok, we'll start in the "Hello Kitty Room:"

How appropriate.

 

[Samson]

So much for the 'tough guy' persona, eh?

I was expecting some whips or chains at the very least from you.

Ok, we'll start in the "Hello Kitty Room:"

How appropriate.

REALLY!!!!????

 

[saveliberty]

If your going to impeach the President of the US, the evidence is going to have to be more substantial than he said she said. Even if there are a bunch of them. Watergate took hundreds of actual tape recordings as well as witnesses. You need to link 0bama, by a paper trail, recordings, email or phone calls to show direct knowledge.

Impeaching a President is just too important to attempt without such evidence in my opinion. If it is there, fine, start proceedings. If not, we have an environmental crisis, two wars and a broken economy. Focus on the big picture here. Just trying to be objective here. Not apologizing for a poor President, even though he is one.

 

[Care4all]

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

OK.....

Was the position he was offered, created by an act of congress or was it delegated by the Constitution to the President with advice and consent of the senate?

I suppose we do not know this, because sestak will not say what position high up in the admin, he was offered?

My point is, is that the obama team would have been absolutely stupid to SAY OUT LOUD TO SESTAK, that they were ONLY OFFERING him this position because they wanted him to pull out of the senate race he had not even entered yet. THERE IS NO NEED to say such, when all they had to do is offer a job that he would accept.

It would have been understood that if sestak took the job offered, he would have to resign as a representative, and also not be able to enter the senator's race.....so nothing needed to be verbalized and if nothing was verbalized, then NO FOUL.

In addition to this, the law speaks of this being the law for positions that congress created....what exactly does that mean?

In addition to this, the way this law is worded, it seems that it is talking about others, outside of the circle of congressmen and senators, like key lobbyists or key campaign workers for you etc.... that you reward with a position created by congress???? like rewarding karl rove with a position within the white house for all of his dirty work of smearing his opponents??? or Andrew Card who also smeared others and helped Bush get elected, OR the appointment of any single individual in the Bush administration or the Obama administration or the administrations of all Presidents beforehand....

all of these appointments are "paybacks" for their help and support?

where is this line really drawn?

and I am not against drawing a line, but the line should be the same, for everyone.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

OK.....

Was the position he was offered, created by an act of congress or was it delegated by the Constitution to the President with advice and consent of the senate?

I suppose we do not know this, because sestak will not say what position high up in the admin, he was offered?

My point is, is that the obama team would have been absolutely stupid to SAY OUT LOUD TO SESTAK, that they were ONLY OFFERING him this position because they wanted him to pull out of the senate race he had not even entered yet. THERE IS NO NEED to say such, when all they had to do is offer a job that he would accept.

It would have been understood that if sestak took the job offered, he would have to resign as a representative, and also not be able to enter the senator's race.....so nothing needed to be verbalized and if nothing was verbalized, then NO FOUL.

In addition to this, the law speaks of this being the law for positions that congress created....what exactly does that mean?

In addition to this, the way this law is worded, it seems that it is talking about others, outside of the circle of congressmen and senators, like key lobbyists or key campaign workers for you etc.... that you reward with a position created by congress???? like rewarding karl rove with a position within the white house for all of his dirty work of smearing his opponents??? or Andrew Card who also smeared others and helped Bush get elected, OR the appointment of any single individual in the Bush administration or the Obama administration or the administrations of all Presidents beforehand....

all of these appointments are "paybacks" for their help and support?

where is this line really drawn?

and I am not against drawing a line, but the line should be the same, for everyone.

That's what we don't know at this point....if he offered him a job as the White House janitor...he's safe...but if he offered him a cabinet position or something equal to that in lieu of him DROPPING OUT of the Senate race...then there is a problem.

 

[Care4all]

NOW STOP, so I can read these laws that I finally found that were supposedly broken.

Care...we don't know if these laws were broken...what we do know is Sestak was offered a job in the Administration to DROP OUT of the Senate race...a quid pro quo...by HIS OWN WORDS in front of millions of witnesses. This is where the allegations are that the statute you are reading were alleged to have been broken. We need all partys involved to come forth and in a truthful manner, explain exacty what happened so a determination can be made by someone other than Robert Gibbs.

That's the bottom line.

...as an aside new Obama poll numbers....not good.

And I ask again, HOW could Sestak have been offeredd a job in the administration to DROP OUT of the Senate race against spector, when sestak himself SAID that he was offered a position within the administration "well before" he entered the senate primary race against spector?

And I have seen nothing, that show sestak repeatedly campaigned in the primary, and said repeatedly that "He was offered a job in the administration so that he would not run against spector".....

Do you know where this link to support that is....?

And if THIS IS TRUE....then why in the heck was this not investigated at the time, huh?????????????

Why wait till now to call foul by Issa?

this seems like nothing but political machinations to me, so to try to get the republican candidate toomey, the election win in november.

something is fishy about ALL that is being said, imo.

 

[Gatekeeper]

Apparently this IS,an impeachable offense, if proven, and some influence from 'somewhere' doesn't 'gag' those involved, No matter, there is nothing this president can do that will get him tossed out of office. The voice of the people in this country, it would appear, with this 'administration of change', has stifled the voices of opposition, whether the media, or the citizens. If anyone thinks the people have any real control of our government, think again, they will continue to do what they want, when they want and to who they want.

Sound familiar to anyone?

 

[Newby]

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

OK.....

Was the position he was offered, created by an act of congress or was it delegated by the Constitution to the President with advice and consent of the senate?

I suppose we do not know this, because sestak will not say what position high up in the admin, he was offered?

My point is, is that the obama team would have been absolutely stupid to SAY OUT LOUD TO SESTAK, that they were ONLY OFFERING him this position because they wanted him to pull out of the senate race he had not even entered yet. THERE IS NO NEED to say such, when all they had to do is offer a job that he would accept.

It would have been understood that if sestak took the job offered, he would have to resign as a representative, and also not be able to enter the senator's race.....so nothing needed to be verbalized and if nothing was verbalized, then NO FOUL.

In addition to this, the law speaks of this being the law for positions that congress created....what exactly does that mean?

In addition to this, the way this law is worded, it seems that it is talking about others, outside of the circle of congressmen and senators, like key lobbyists or key campaign workers for you etc.... that you reward with a position created by congress???? like rewarding karl rove with a position within the white house for all of his dirty work of smearing his opponents??? or Andrew Card who also smeared others and helped Bush get elected, OR the appointment of any single individual in the Bush administration or the Obama administration or the administrations of all Presidents beforehand....

all of these appointments are "paybacks" for their help and support?

where is this line really drawn?

and I am not against drawing a line, but the line should be the same, for everyone.

That's what we don't know at this point....if he offered him a job as the White House janitor...he's safe...but if he offered him a cabinet position or something equal to that in lieu of him DROPPING OUT of the Senate race...then there is a problem.

I thought he was offered Secretary of the Navy?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

It doesn't matter if it was offered BEFORE the Primary...he was offered the job to NOT ENTER THE PRIMARY...those were his words!!!!

 

[PatekPhilippe]

OK.....

Was the position he was offered, created by an act of congress or was it delegated by the Constitution to the President with advice and consent of the senate?

I suppose we do not know this, because sestak will not say what position high up in the admin, he was offered?

My point is, is that the obama team would have been absolutely stupid to SAY OUT LOUD TO SESTAK, that they were ONLY OFFERING him this position because they wanted him to pull out of the senate race he had not even entered yet. THERE IS NO NEED to say such, when all they had to do is offer a job that he would accept.

It would have been understood that if sestak took the job offered, he would have to resign as a representative, and also not be able to enter the senator's race.....so nothing needed to be verbalized and if nothing was verbalized, then NO FOUL.

In addition to this, the law speaks of this being the law for positions that congress created....what exactly does that mean?

In addition to this, the way this law is worded, it seems that it is talking about others, outside of the circle of congressmen and senators, like key lobbyists or key campaign workers for you etc.... that you reward with a position created by congress???? like rewarding karl rove with a position within the white house for all of his dirty work of smearing his opponents??? or Andrew Card who also smeared others and helped Bush get elected, OR the appointment of any single individual in the Bush administration or the Obama administration or the administrations of all Presidents beforehand....

all of these appointments are "paybacks" for their help and support?

where is this line really drawn?

and I am not against drawing a line, but the line should be the same, for everyone.

That's what we don't know at this point....if he offered him a job as the White House janitor...he's safe...but if he offered him a cabinet position or something equal to that in lieu of him DROPPING OUT of the Senate race...then there is a problem.

I thought he was offered Secretary of the Navy?

Unsubstantiated allegation as this point.

 

[Care4all]

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

OK.....

Was the position he was offered, created by an act of congress or was it delegated by the Constitution to the President with advice and consent of the senate?

I suppose we do not know this, because sestak will not say what position high up in the admin, he was offered?

My point is, is that the obama team would have been absolutely stupid to SAY OUT LOUD TO SESTAK, that they were ONLY OFFERING him this position because they wanted him to pull out of the senate race he had not even entered yet. THERE IS NO NEED to say such, when all they had to do is offer a job that he would accept.

It would have been understood that if sestak took the job offered, he would have to resign as a representative, and also not be able to enter the senator's race.....so nothing needed to be verbalized and if nothing was verbalized, then NO FOUL.

In addition to this, the law speaks of this being the law for positions that congress created....what exactly does that mean?

In addition to this, the way this law is worded, it seems that it is talking about others, outside of the circle of congressmen and senators, like key lobbyists or key campaign workers for you etc.... that you reward with a position created by congress???? like rewarding karl rove with a position within the white house for all of his dirty work of smearing his opponents??? or Andrew Card who also smeared others and helped Bush get elected, OR the appointment of any single individual in the Bush administration or the Obama administration or the administrations of all Presidents beforehand....

all of these appointments are "paybacks" for their help and support?

where is this line really drawn?

and I am not against drawing a line, but the line should be the same, for everyone.

That's what we don't know at this point....if he offered him a job as the White House janitor...he's safe...but if he offered him a cabinet position or something equal to that in lieu of him DROPPING OUT of the Senate race...then there is a problem.

There is a problem if it is a position "created by, in whole or in part, by Congress", which I believe it is the Constitution that gives power to the president to appoint and create administration positions....I am not certain that congress created them? but they might have? I don't know enough about how these admin positions are created?

 

[Care4all]

NO, Newby....be careful of what you read....

he was NOT offered Secretary of the Navy....the guy that got the position was offered it up and was vetted LONG BEFORE ARLIN SPECTOR, changed his party to being a Democratic....which was in the middle of May, I believe...and the Secretary of Navy was confirmed by the senate late may......so it could NOT have been the Secretary of Navy if you want to believe Sestak was offered a position within the administration in order to not run against arlin spector in the Democratic senator primary.

Arlin spector was not even a Democrat running in the democratic primary until may of '09.

he could have been offered secretary of navy, but that kills this RUMOR of the right wing, stating he was offered such, solely to drop out of the senate primary race against Spector, who obama supposedly supported.
care

 

[HUGGY]

The hysterics on this thread are very entertaining but the credibility is lacking.

Laws don't get written without some justification.

Does anyone know of a prosecution under the statute?

I've never heard of the law. Let's see what the circumstances where bringing any successful prosecution.

Anyone...a lawyer in the audience?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

It doesn't matter if it was offered BEFORE the Primary...he was offered the job to NOT ENTER THE PRIMARY...those were his words!!!!

It doesn't matter when the offer was made.

 

[Sinatra]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9BxRme-89Q]YouTube - Sestak Bribery Allegations Resurface[/ame]

 

[boedicca]

When media such as the LA Times keep the story alive, it's a big issue.

Top of the Ticket
Politics and commentary, coast to coast, from the Los Angeles Times

Well, it looks like we have an answer now to the question raised in that Monday Ticket item here: Obama White House probe of Obama White House finds no Obama White House impropriety on Sestak.

This Joe Sestak/Obama White House job mess does have legs. The public and the media are not buying the White House's self-cleansing, self-serving explanation that everything was appropriate, just move along.

The issue of what Democrat Sestak was offered by an Obama aide to drop out of his ultimately successful Pennsylvania Senate primary challenge of what's-his-name-the-old-former-Democrat-ex-Republican-now-Democrat Specter may well come up this morning at President Obama's first White House news conference in months. (As usual, we'll have the full transcript here this afternoon.)

It's a lesson that White House after White House fails to learn, incomplete answers only raise more questions. If it smells like a fish, good chance it's a fish.

Karl Rove: Joe Sestak's lying or he's protecting a felon in Barack Obama's White House | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times

 

[HUGGY]

So..If some administration offers someone a job in the administration and that someone runs for a spot in congress or the senate ...the presiding administration has commited a felony?

Do your people understand how crazy that is?

Welcome to the loony bin!

 

[Big Fitz]

Why is that?

The country is stronger for the coopersation that occassionally happens. Liberals have a place at the table just as conservatives and moderates do.

Pelosi: You had your chance, we are in charge now so sit down.
Unfortunately when you are locked out of meetings, have your ideas and amendments thrown in the trash it appears that the Democrats only embrace bi-partisanship when Republicans pay lip service to Democrat Bills and support them without changes.

Such bitterness. Yes, the current situation is less than ideal. You can't say the Republicans are trying to work with Democrats.

I'm speaking to what is ideal--bi-partisanship--both parties acting like statesman instead of school children. I urge the Democratic Party to work harder to find consensus with Republicans. I challenge Republicans to do the same. Grow up.

The Liberal definition of Bi-Partisan is like a blond joke.

What's "68" to a blond?
When she goes down on you and you owe her one.

The thing is, those remainders never ever ever ever ever get repaid. So let's try some bi-partisanship this way:

Libs, you start investigations on your lord and savior and ask the real hard questions not to be answered by slogans, for us... and we'll owe you one.

Sound good? mmkay?

The thing I want to know is this:

1. If this didn't happen, why is Sestak lying?
2. If this is a misunderstanding, why isn't the white house fixing this?
3. If this DID happen, what is Sestak hiding now and why?
4. If this DID happen, who made the offer and was P-BO involved?

 

[boedicca]

5. If the Obama White House found it to be a serious enough to warrant the Obama House investigating the Obama White House, why not share the information uncovered via the investigation?

 

[Sinatra]

Pa. Gov. Rendell: White House and Sestak Should Be as Transparent as Possible on 'Job Offer' Scandal

An increasing number of high ranking Democrats are now hammering the administration over its inablity to craft and open and honest anwer regarding the Sestak Job-Gate scandal...

____

RENDELL: Well, I agree with part of what Senator Graham said. I think, look, this is something where the White House should be as transparent as they can be, and so should Joe Sestak. I think that's part of our obligation as public officials.


...RENDELL: Others can't say unless they know what the tenor of the conversation was. Look, this ought to be done for the right reasons because we do deserve -- the people deserve a transparent government, and there's no question about that. It ought to be done for that reason. But it also ought to be done, as I said, for political reasons because this has become a problem that's going to only grow and grow.

_____

Pa. Gov. Rendell: White House and Sestak Should Be as Transparent as Possible on 'Job Offer' Scandal - Greta Van Susteren | On The Record With Greta - FOXNews.com