An impeachable offense?

Did someone in the White House offer Rep. Joe Sestak a job in the administration if he would drop out of the Senate race against Arlen Specter?  That’s what Sestak claimed during his successful Democratic primary race against the White-House endorsed Specter.  If so, that would be a federal crime.  If the president did it, so people are claiming, that would be an impeachable offense.

The controversy revolves around an oft-repeated statement by Rep. Sestak, D-Pa., that he had been offered a job by the Obama administration in exchange for dropping out of the senatorial primary against Obama supporter Sen. Arlen Specter.

Sestak said he refused the offer. He continued in the Senate primary and defeated Specter for the Democratic nomination.

But Karl Rove, longtime White House adviser to President George W. Bush, said the charge is explosive because of federal law.

“This is a pretty extraordinary charge:  ‘They tried to bribe me out of the race by offering me a job,’” he said on Greta Van Susteran’s “On the Record” program on the Fox News Channel. “Look, that’s a violation of the federal code: 18 USC 600 says that a federal official cannot promise employment, a job in the federal government, in return for a political act.

“Somebody violated the law. If Sestak is telling the truth, somebody violated the law,” Rove said. “Section 18 USC 211 says you cannot accept anything of value in return for hiring somebody. Well, arguably, providing a clear path to the nomination for a fellow Democrat is something of value.

He continued, citing a third law passage: “18 USC 595, which prohibits a federal official from interfering with the nomination or election for office. … ‘If you’ll get out, we’ll appoint you to a federal office’ – that’s a violation of the law.”

via Sestak White House scandal called ‘impeachable offense’.

Is this just a tempest in a teapot brewed up by Fox News?  Or is it a tempest in a Teapot Dome-scale scandal?

About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • http://www.christlutheran.net Jeff Samelson

    It only rises to be large-scale scandal if Sestak comes forward with evidence of the “bribe”. Which isn’t too likely, given that he’s running as a Democrat to be a Democrat in the Senate — taking down the Democratic White House in the process would not be a wise career move.

    He’s probably wishing now that he’d kept his mouth shut, as you can be sure his fellow Democrats are none too happy with this.

  • http://www.christlutheran.net Jeff Samelson

    It only rises to be large-scale scandal if Sestak comes forward with evidence of the “bribe”. Which isn’t too likely, given that he’s running as a Democrat to be a Democrat in the Senate — taking down the Democratic White House in the process would not be a wise career move.

    He’s probably wishing now that he’d kept his mouth shut, as you can be sure his fellow Democrats are none too happy with this.

  • Winston Smith

    All the evidence will disappear, just like Obama’s birth certificate and all his school and adoption records. If that doesn’t work, someone will have a mysterious one-car accident or commit suicide by shooting themselves multiple times in the back of the head.

  • Winston Smith

    All the evidence will disappear, just like Obama’s birth certificate and all his school and adoption records. If that doesn’t work, someone will have a mysterious one-car accident or commit suicide by shooting themselves multiple times in the back of the head.

  • Steven Peterson

    If it wasn’t Karl Rove making the accusation, there might be more life to the story. A little too much of the pot calling the kettle black.

  • Steven Peterson

    If it wasn’t Karl Rove making the accusation, there might be more life to the story. A little too much of the pot calling the kettle black.

  • Joe

    I think it could be a big deal depending on what really happened. Did they really offer him a job? If so, what job? Was it a guaranty or was it a recommendation? Was it a gov’t job or in the private sector?

    But most importantly, who made the offer? The primary law at issue only prohibits a federal officer from promising employment. If the DNC made the offer then there is no crime unless you can prove that the DNC was acting on behalf of the President.

  • Joe

    I think it could be a big deal depending on what really happened. Did they really offer him a job? If so, what job? Was it a guaranty or was it a recommendation? Was it a gov’t job or in the private sector?

    But most importantly, who made the offer? The primary law at issue only prohibits a federal officer from promising employment. If the DNC made the offer then there is no crime unless you can prove that the DNC was acting on behalf of the President.

  • Tom Hering

    Someone in the administration may have committed felonies, or Sestak may have lied. But all Sestak has to do is say he misunderstood the administration. End of story.

  • Tom Hering

    Someone in the administration may have committed felonies, or Sestak may have lied. But all Sestak has to do is say he misunderstood the administration. End of story.

  • Cincinnatus

    Particularly when the Justice Department is currently refusing to launch an internal investigation of the matter.

  • Cincinnatus

    Particularly when the Justice Department is currently refusing to launch an internal investigation of the matter.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Folks, it doesn’t make a difference that Rove is pointing this out. There is a relevant question; if indeed Mr. Sestak was offered a job by the Obama administration in return for dropping out of the Senate primary, is that a crime?

    Rove is correct to point out that yes, it is, and should be, a crime to abuse the power of the executive branch to offer bribes. It is a felony, and it is impeachable.

    Moreover, Sestak, while I disagree with him politically, is about the best witness you can get–USNA grad who has had “We will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those among us who do” drummed into his head for decades.

    Although it’s likely that the Obama administration will not pursue this, the GOP seriously needs to point out the felony here, and put Sestak on the spot for either a lie or covering up a felony. Either one should doom his Senate bid.

    Or, even better, the Obama administration.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Folks, it doesn’t make a difference that Rove is pointing this out. There is a relevant question; if indeed Mr. Sestak was offered a job by the Obama administration in return for dropping out of the Senate primary, is that a crime?

    Rove is correct to point out that yes, it is, and should be, a crime to abuse the power of the executive branch to offer bribes. It is a felony, and it is impeachable.

    Moreover, Sestak, while I disagree with him politically, is about the best witness you can get–USNA grad who has had “We will not lie, cheat, or steal, nor tolerate those among us who do” drummed into his head for decades.

    Although it’s likely that the Obama administration will not pursue this, the GOP seriously needs to point out the felony here, and put Sestak on the spot for either a lie or covering up a felony. Either one should doom his Senate bid.

    Or, even better, the Obama administration.

  • Tom Hering

    And Republicans are currently refusing to file a complaint against Sestak, because that would launch an ethics probe, and no one is willing to go that far yet against a fellow representative. Though it could get to the bottom of the matter.

  • Tom Hering

    And Republicans are currently refusing to file a complaint against Sestak, because that would launch an ethics probe, and no one is willing to go that far yet against a fellow representative. Though it could get to the bottom of the matter.

  • Carl Vehse

    Yes, impeach Barry Soetero. But first we’ll have to look at his birth certificate to see if Barry is really qualified to be impeached.

  • Carl Vehse

    Yes, impeach Barry Soetero. But first we’ll have to look at his birth certificate to see if Barry is really qualified to be impeached.

  • kerner

    I oppose President Obama on a lot of things, but I wonder whether this law, especially if strictly interpreted, is an example of the over-regulation of our society.

    The president is usually thought of as the de facto leader of his party. Part of the function of a leader is to place his subordinates in the positions where he wants them. If the president wanted Spector as the senior Senator frm Pennsylvania, why shouldn’t he try to convince other Democrats to not oppose Spector? And why shouldn’t he placate other ambitious Democrats by finding them alternative ways to advance their careers? This just seems like Obama attempting (unsuccessfully, I might add) to lead his party to me, and I don’t see why that should be a crime.

  • kerner

    I oppose President Obama on a lot of things, but I wonder whether this law, especially if strictly interpreted, is an example of the over-regulation of our society.

    The president is usually thought of as the de facto leader of his party. Part of the function of a leader is to place his subordinates in the positions where he wants them. If the president wanted Spector as the senior Senator frm Pennsylvania, why shouldn’t he try to convince other Democrats to not oppose Spector? And why shouldn’t he placate other ambitious Democrats by finding them alternative ways to advance their careers? This just seems like Obama attempting (unsuccessfully, I might add) to lead his party to me, and I don’t see why that should be a crime.

  • Cincinnatus

    The Jacksonian system of patronage, kerner, was consciously and legally eliminated long ago. Check out the Pendleton Act sometime.

  • Cincinnatus

    The Jacksonian system of patronage, kerner, was consciously and legally eliminated long ago. Check out the Pendleton Act sometime.

  • DonS

    Kerner @ 10: The president has the right to appoint whomever he wants to certain administrative jobs (of course, many of these appointments are subject to Senate confirmation). But, Sestak was participating in a primary for a seat in the legislative branch. The voters, not the president, are supposed to determine which Democrat runs in the general election for that seat. What Sestak alleged was that the president or one of his underlings was attempting to interfere with the electoral process by offering a bribe in the form of an appointed administrative position, in an effort to induce a candidate to withdraw from the primary.

    The government exists to serve the people, not the other way around (yes, unfortunately, this is news to most politicians). The purpose of the appointed positions in the administration is to serve the people, not the party of the president. I cannot see why it is wrong to clarify through statute that using government employment to advance party interests over national interests is illegal.

  • DonS

    Kerner @ 10: The president has the right to appoint whomever he wants to certain administrative jobs (of course, many of these appointments are subject to Senate confirmation). But, Sestak was participating in a primary for a seat in the legislative branch. The voters, not the president, are supposed to determine which Democrat runs in the general election for that seat. What Sestak alleged was that the president or one of his underlings was attempting to interfere with the electoral process by offering a bribe in the form of an appointed administrative position, in an effort to induce a candidate to withdraw from the primary.

    The government exists to serve the people, not the other way around (yes, unfortunately, this is news to most politicians). The purpose of the appointed positions in the administration is to serve the people, not the party of the president. I cannot see why it is wrong to clarify through statute that using government employment to advance party interests over national interests is illegal.

  • Tom Hering

    President Obama said in his press conference, just moments ago, that his administration will release a response to the Sestak accusation shortly – in a matter of days. He assured the American people that nothing wrong happened, and sounded confident that was so.

  • Tom Hering

    President Obama said in his press conference, just moments ago, that his administration will release a response to the Sestak accusation shortly – in a matter of days. He assured the American people that nothing wrong happened, and sounded confident that was so.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom, not to sound like a birther or something, but what does that prove? Bill Clinton was “confident” that he didn’t have sex with “that woman.” Nixon was confident that he wasn’t a criminal. ad infinitum

    I personally have no idea what happened here, and it is of course uncharitable to assume guilt on the part of the administration. But now that Sestak has opened his big fat mouth, it’s too late to close it, and an internal investigation is now obligatory. If it happened, do you honestly think Sestak was the only person offered a favor? It’s a regular tactic in municipal (i.e., Chicago) politics after all.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom, not to sound like a birther or something, but what does that prove? Bill Clinton was “confident” that he didn’t have sex with “that woman.” Nixon was confident that he wasn’t a criminal. ad infinitum

    I personally have no idea what happened here, and it is of course uncharitable to assume guilt on the part of the administration. But now that Sestak has opened his big fat mouth, it’s too late to close it, and an internal investigation is now obligatory. If it happened, do you honestly think Sestak was the only person offered a favor? It’s a regular tactic in municipal (i.e., Chicago) politics after all.

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    In a matter of days? Why does it take so long to just say what happened if nothing happened?

  • http://facebook.com/mesamike Mike Westfall

    In a matter of days? Why does it take so long to just say what happened if nothing happened?

  • DonS

    If nothing truly happened, one would think the administration would lean hard on Sestak to come clean and tell everything he knows about the alleged offer.

    Cincinnatus mentioned Chicago politics, which brought to mind that one of the things former Gov. Blagojevich is in trouble for is allegedly conditioning his appointment to the senate seat vacated by Obama on quid pro quo.

  • DonS

    If nothing truly happened, one would think the administration would lean hard on Sestak to come clean and tell everything he knows about the alleged offer.

    Cincinnatus mentioned Chicago politics, which brought to mind that one of the things former Gov. Blagojevich is in trouble for is allegedly conditioning his appointment to the senate seat vacated by Obama on quid pro quo.

  • Tom Hering

    Mike Westfall, maybe they want to make sure, first, that no videos of those concerned – butt naked and having sex – are going to show up on the internet.

  • Tom Hering

    Mike Westfall, maybe they want to make sure, first, that no videos of those concerned – butt naked and having sex – are going to show up on the internet.

  • fws

    These kinds of things are hard to enforce. Let´s say that the Obama admin óffered the guy a job, and it just so happens that the offer was made around the time the guy was thinking of running for the senate. No law broken.

    I tend to worry more about laws broken that have actually done something we know is harmful It is not like there are not lots of those things around that would be far easier to gather hard evidence for.

  • fws

    These kinds of things are hard to enforce. Let´s say that the Obama admin óffered the guy a job, and it just so happens that the offer was made around the time the guy was thinking of running for the senate. No law broken.

    I tend to worry more about laws broken that have actually done something we know is harmful It is not like there are not lots of those things around that would be far easier to gather hard evidence for.

  • sg

    “If it wasn’t Karl Rove making the accusation, there might be more life to the story.”

    Right, because the most important part of any story or argument is who is offering it, not its actual merits or facts.

  • sg

    “If it wasn’t Karl Rove making the accusation, there might be more life to the story.”

    Right, because the most important part of any story or argument is who is offering it, not its actual merits or facts.

  • Cincinnatus

    Attempting to rig an election in a democratic nation isn’t harmful?

    Assuming it actually happened. Only an investigation can reveal whether “it just so happened that the offer was made around the time the guy was thinking of running for senate.” We could assume that no law was broken. But in what other circumstances is that acceptable, particularly in a government that is supposed to be transparent and democratic?

    Much lesser potential offenses have triggered much greater investigations.

    I grow weary of the partisan nature of such discussions. If it were Bush, the progressives would be demanding an accounting, and conservatives would no doubt insist that “it’s no big deal.” Now that a Democrat is in office, the situation is reversed. Let’s be consistent: the Bush administration was quite rightly investigated in the “Plame affair” and the Obama administration, based upon what I know, should be routinely investigated in this case. If there’s nothing to hide, there’s nothing to worry about.

  • Cincinnatus

    Attempting to rig an election in a democratic nation isn’t harmful?

    Assuming it actually happened. Only an investigation can reveal whether “it just so happened that the offer was made around the time the guy was thinking of running for senate.” We could assume that no law was broken. But in what other circumstances is that acceptable, particularly in a government that is supposed to be transparent and democratic?

    Much lesser potential offenses have triggered much greater investigations.

    I grow weary of the partisan nature of such discussions. If it were Bush, the progressives would be demanding an accounting, and conservatives would no doubt insist that “it’s no big deal.” Now that a Democrat is in office, the situation is reversed. Let’s be consistent: the Bush administration was quite rightly investigated in the “Plame affair” and the Obama administration, based upon what I know, should be routinely investigated in this case. If there’s nothing to hide, there’s nothing to worry about.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@20), are you getting a bit sloppy with your words? How is the alleged situation equivalent to “attempting to rig an election”? And how does this even compare to the level of blowing a covert operative’s cover?

    And Sg (@19), as to your sarcastic offering that “the most important part of any story or argument is who is offering it, not its actual merits or facts”, yes, that is what I routinely hear from “conservatives” whenever a “mainstream media” story is presented that challenges their preconceived notions.

    This is just the chiming of the conservative echosphere. WND reporting on what Karl Rove said on Fox News. Mm-hmm. That’s fascinating.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@20), are you getting a bit sloppy with your words? How is the alleged situation equivalent to “attempting to rig an election”? And how does this even compare to the level of blowing a covert operative’s cover?

    And Sg (@19), as to your sarcastic offering that “the most important part of any story or argument is who is offering it, not its actual merits or facts”, yes, that is what I routinely hear from “conservatives” whenever a “mainstream media” story is presented that challenges their preconceived notions.

    This is just the chiming of the conservative echosphere. WND reporting on what Karl Rove said on Fox News. Mm-hmm. That’s fascinating.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD: If it so happens (and I rather doubt it actually, though I wouldn’t be surprised either way) that someone in the Obama administration offered Sestak a political appointment in a conscious attempt to keep him from entering and thus influencing the results of an election, then yes, I would stand by my lexical choices.

    I don’t know if you can qualitatively measure the “seriousness” of (potential) federal interference in a state election against disrupting a CIA agent’s cover. Since no one, to my knowledge, died in the latter case, and since I couldn’t possibly care less about the CIA’s quasi-legal foreign adventures in service to the Empire, I’m not inclined to insist that “the level” of the Plame affair is far superior to intervening in an election.

    In any case, this isn’t merely the ravings of the Limbaugh echosphere any longer, so a response of some sort is necessary. There’s a thin line between offering someone a job for a purpose other than merit and actually breaking the law–which does, in fact, exist. I have a feeling nothing improper happened here, but pretending that it’s not a valid question will incite the Right and become a political distraction from more important matters.

  • Cincinnatus

    tODD: If it so happens (and I rather doubt it actually, though I wouldn’t be surprised either way) that someone in the Obama administration offered Sestak a political appointment in a conscious attempt to keep him from entering and thus influencing the results of an election, then yes, I would stand by my lexical choices.

    I don’t know if you can qualitatively measure the “seriousness” of (potential) federal interference in a state election against disrupting a CIA agent’s cover. Since no one, to my knowledge, died in the latter case, and since I couldn’t possibly care less about the CIA’s quasi-legal foreign adventures in service to the Empire, I’m not inclined to insist that “the level” of the Plame affair is far superior to intervening in an election.

    In any case, this isn’t merely the ravings of the Limbaugh echosphere any longer, so a response of some sort is necessary. There’s a thin line between offering someone a job for a purpose other than merit and actually breaking the law–which does, in fact, exist. I have a feeling nothing improper happened here, but pretending that it’s not a valid question will incite the Right and become a political distraction from more important matters.

  • Cincinnatus

    Here’s the law in question:

    Title 18, U.S.C. Section 211 says, “Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year or both.”

    Title 18, U.S.C. Section 595, which says, “Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States … uses his official authority for the purposes of interfering with, or affecting the nomination of, or the election of any candidate for office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representative…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

    Title 18 U.S.C. Section 600, which says, “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, in 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 … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

  • Cincinnatus

    Here’s the law in question:

    Title 18, U.S.C. Section 211 says, “Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year or both.”

    Title 18, U.S.C. Section 595, which says, “Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position by the United States … uses his official authority for the purposes of interfering with, or affecting the nomination of, or the election of any candidate for office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member of the Senate, Member of the House of Representative…shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

    Title 18 U.S.C. Section 600, which says, “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, in 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 … shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@22), oh no! Inciting the Right?! Political distractions?! Whatever would that look like? Can our country bear the strain of an incited Right?!‽‽?!

    There are not enough interrobangs to express my sarcastic fear.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Cincinnatus (@22), oh no! Inciting the Right?! Political distractions?! Whatever would that look like? Can our country bear the strain of an incited Right?!‽‽?!

    There are not enough interrobangs to express my sarcastic fear.

  • Cincinnatus

    Ok, sure, tODD. We can pretend that administration officials breaking the law is irrelevant.

    Seriously? So chances are nothing inappropriate happened and we can all go on with our business. But what if something did happen? Whether you like it or not, investigation is obligatory because there are very clear laws on the subject.

  • Cincinnatus

    Ok, sure, tODD. We can pretend that administration officials breaking the law is irrelevant.

    Seriously? So chances are nothing inappropriate happened and we can all go on with our business. But what if something did happen? Whether you like it or not, investigation is obligatory because there are very clear laws on the subject.

  • Peter Leavitt

    It’s best in this case without the relevant facts to reserve judgment. However, the Obama administration and Sestak both owe a public accounting of the facts.

  • Peter Leavitt

    It’s best in this case without the relevant facts to reserve judgment. However, the Obama administration and Sestak both owe a public accounting of the facts.

  • Cincinnatus

    Ah, Peter, you return just in time to say something with which I completely agree.

  • Cincinnatus

    Ah, Peter, you return just in time to say something with which I completely agree.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Actually, this is a lot bigger than the Plame affair, as in the Plame affair, it was quickly found that there was no crime committed in showing her to be employed by the CIA since she was not covert. When something despicable or criminal is actually done, conservatives do in fact tend to work to get rid of the offender–as in the case of Larry Craig and others.

    I don’t envy Sestak here; if he’s lying, or if he lies to say he was lying to protect President Obama, he loses the support of many friends (who also are affiliated with the Navy/USNA and hold that code as sacred) and the election. If he’s telling the truth, and I personally think he is, he ought to lose the election as a protest against Obama’s Chicago style politics.

    And Obama has all but said that Sestak has told the truth by admitting he needs time to get his story out. Get Sestak on the witness stand, and pop the popcorn.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Actually, this is a lot bigger than the Plame affair, as in the Plame affair, it was quickly found that there was no crime committed in showing her to be employed by the CIA since she was not covert. When something despicable or criminal is actually done, conservatives do in fact tend to work to get rid of the offender–as in the case of Larry Craig and others.

    I don’t envy Sestak here; if he’s lying, or if he lies to say he was lying to protect President Obama, he loses the support of many friends (who also are affiliated with the Navy/USNA and hold that code as sacred) and the election. If he’s telling the truth, and I personally think he is, he ought to lose the election as a protest against Obama’s Chicago style politics.

    And Obama has all but said that Sestak has told the truth by admitting he needs time to get his story out. Get Sestak on the witness stand, and pop the popcorn.

  • Tom Hering

    “And Obama has all but said that Sestak has told the truth by admitting he needs time to get his story out.”

    So if you say to someone here that you’ll respond to their comment tomorrow, it’s proof you’re cooking up something underhanded? Come on.

  • Tom Hering

    “And Obama has all but said that Sestak has told the truth by admitting he needs time to get his story out.”

    So if you say to someone here that you’ll respond to their comment tomorrow, it’s proof you’re cooking up something underhanded? Come on.

  • Cincinnatus

    On the one hand, Tom, your point is good and taken. But on the other hand, are you honestly implying that this isn’t something which should be investigated, etc.?

  • Cincinnatus

    On the one hand, Tom, your point is good and taken. But on the other hand, are you honestly implying that this isn’t something which should be investigated, etc.?

  • GW

    Pres. Obama has a secret weapon. He can turn loose a special prosecutor on Bush-era crimes. Torture aside, there are slam-dunk indictments and probable felony convictions all the way up to the Oval Office for FISA violations. All Pres. Obama has to do is say the word. Maybe the whole “look forward, not backward” thing was intended from the start as impeachment insurance. If the Republicans reneg, he can go nuclear—if he dares!

  • GW

    Pres. Obama has a secret weapon. He can turn loose a special prosecutor on Bush-era crimes. Torture aside, there are slam-dunk indictments and probable felony convictions all the way up to the Oval Office for FISA violations. All Pres. Obama has to do is say the word. Maybe the whole “look forward, not backward” thing was intended from the start as impeachment insurance. If the Republicans reneg, he can go nuclear—if he dares!

  • Tom Hering

    Cincinnatus, I support an investigation. A serious accusation has been made, and it ought to cleared up – one way or the other. I just don’t support the villagers carrying torches and pitchforks.

  • Tom Hering

    Cincinnatus, I support an investigation. A serious accusation has been made, and it ought to cleared up – one way or the other. I just don’t support the villagers carrying torches and pitchforks.

  • Cincinnatus

    Fair enough. I don’t keep up with the right-wing blogosphere (with the possible exception of this fine establishment?), but it’s entirely unsurprising that the villagers are out to destroy Frankenstein if they are. Isn’t that the point of the blogosphere on either end of the spectrum?

  • Cincinnatus

    Fair enough. I don’t keep up with the right-wing blogosphere (with the possible exception of this fine establishment?), but it’s entirely unsurprising that the villagers are out to destroy Frankenstein if they are. Isn’t that the point of the blogosphere on either end of the spectrum?

  • Carl Vehse

    However, the Obama administration and Sestak both owe a public accounting of the facts.

    … and what the public will likely get is a vaguely consistent set of plausible deniabilities.

  • Carl Vehse

    However, the Obama administration and Sestak both owe a public accounting of the facts.

    … and what the public will likely get is a vaguely consistent set of plausible deniabilities.

  • ptl

    GW….ok but watch out in the Fall if the Republicans take control back, you know they may want to launch their own schedule of investigations on all sorts of perceived crimes and scandals….would you like a list? Am sure everyone on the hill are aware that both sides can play that game when its their turn in power…that’s why you don’t see such foolish tactics taken seriously, beyond their suggestions, by anyone except hard core extremists on either side….peace and love!

  • ptl

    GW….ok but watch out in the Fall if the Republicans take control back, you know they may want to launch their own schedule of investigations on all sorts of perceived crimes and scandals….would you like a list? Am sure everyone on the hill are aware that both sides can play that game when its their turn in power…that’s why you don’t see such foolish tactics taken seriously, beyond their suggestions, by anyone except hard core extremists on either side….peace and love!

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    the followers of the Dark Side (Lucifer’s Kids) cannot lie because they do not recognize a lie as a lie– because they do not know the TRUTH!
    so-NO-THING will come of this!
    C-CS

  • http://carolmsblog.blogspot.com/ C-Christian Soldier

    the followers of the Dark Side (Lucifer’s Kids) cannot lie because they do not recognize a lie as a lie– because they do not know the TRUTH!
    so-NO-THING will come of this!
    C-CS

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Tom, if it were just “I’ll get back to you tomorrow,” I’d cut Obama some slack. What I’m seeing, though, is repeated vague statements and evasions that, if I hear it from a vendor (I’m a quality engineer by trade) mean I need to remind him of Deming’s dictum “In God we trust, all others must bring data.”

    Moreover, Sestak is complicating the situation by saying he’s going to wait until Obama releases his statement to talk about it. In other words, he’s going to tailor his statements around Obama’s.

    Meaning that for Sestak, the USNA honor code doesn’t mean anything after all. Whether or not he told the truth about Obama, he’s certainly tolerating the President’s efforts to hide and “shape” the truth, which is a clear violation of “nor tolerate those among us who do.” Sestak has just handed his opponent a series of wonderful campaign commercials.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Tom, if it were just “I’ll get back to you tomorrow,” I’d cut Obama some slack. What I’m seeing, though, is repeated vague statements and evasions that, if I hear it from a vendor (I’m a quality engineer by trade) mean I need to remind him of Deming’s dictum “In God we trust, all others must bring data.”

    Moreover, Sestak is complicating the situation by saying he’s going to wait until Obama releases his statement to talk about it. In other words, he’s going to tailor his statements around Obama’s.

    Meaning that for Sestak, the USNA honor code doesn’t mean anything after all. Whether or not he told the truth about Obama, he’s certainly tolerating the President’s efforts to hide and “shape” the truth, which is a clear violation of “nor tolerate those among us who do.” Sestak has just handed his opponent a series of wonderful campaign commercials.

  • Carl Vehse

    So now, according to the clymer press, the White House story is that Monica’s ex-boyfriend talked to Sestak, and Sestak’s story is that the White House talked to his brother.

    The plausible deniabilities are being set up. So move along, folks, there’s nothing to see here.

  • Carl Vehse

    So now, according to the clymer press, the White House story is that Monica’s ex-boyfriend talked to Sestak, and Sestak’s story is that the White House talked to his brother.

    The plausible deniabilities are being set up. So move along, folks, there’s nothing to see here.

  • ptl

    this sounds like a variation of the thing that got the ex-governor of illinois in trouble prior to the 08 elections? by the way, there hasn’t been a lot of news on the investigation and trial of that alleged violation, as interesting, enlightening and deliciously ironic as that would be….wonder why?

  • ptl

    this sounds like a variation of the thing that got the ex-governor of illinois in trouble prior to the 08 elections? by the way, there hasn’t been a lot of news on the investigation and trial of that alleged violation, as interesting, enlightening and deliciously ironic as that would be….wonder why?

  • Tom Hering

    According to Reuters,

    “President Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel enlisted former President Bill Clinton as a go-between with Sestak to discuss an unpaid job on a presidential advisory board so he could stay in the House of Representatives and avoid a divisive primary race for the Senate seat.”

    “‘We have concluded that allegations of improper conduct rest on factual errors and lack a basis in law,’ said White House counsel Robert Bauer in a memorandum issued Friday. ‘Such discussions are fully consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements.’”

  • Tom Hering

    According to Reuters,

    “President Barack Obama’s chief of staff Rahm Emanuel enlisted former President Bill Clinton as a go-between with Sestak to discuss an unpaid job on a presidential advisory board so he could stay in the House of Representatives and avoid a divisive primary race for the Senate seat.”

    “‘We have concluded that allegations of improper conduct rest on factual errors and lack a basis in law,’ said White House counsel Robert Bauer in a memorandum issued Friday. ‘Such discussions are fully consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements.’”

  • Carl Vehse

    Regarding his allegation of a tit-for-tat WH job offer in February, Joe Sestak is now claiming that on Wednesday administration officials “got ahold of my brother on his cellphone, and he spoke to the White House . . . about what’s going to occur.”

    The Washington Compost also reported that Sestak declined to elaborate on his discussions with his brother and that the White House has refused to explain its version of events, but that “legal aides have review the situation” and declared that nothing “inappropriate” occurred.

    As for the WH version of the elaboration on the discussions with the brother about the allegation about which nothing inappropriate occurred, Barry Soetoro declared, “You will get it from my administration… shortly.”

    That’s the ticket.

  • Carl Vehse

    Regarding his allegation of a tit-for-tat WH job offer in February, Joe Sestak is now claiming that on Wednesday administration officials “got ahold of my brother on his cellphone, and he spoke to the White House . . . about what’s going to occur.”

    The Washington Compost also reported that Sestak declined to elaborate on his discussions with his brother and that the White House has refused to explain its version of events, but that “legal aides have review the situation” and declared that nothing “inappropriate” occurred.

    As for the WH version of the elaboration on the discussions with the brother about the allegation about which nothing inappropriate occurred, Barry Soetoro declared, “You will get it from my administration… shortly.”

    That’s the ticket.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Oh my. Somebody woke the Vehsebot again.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Oh my. Somebody woke the Vehsebot again.

  • Carl Vehse

    … and, apparently, his red-billed oxpecker.

  • Carl Vehse

    … and, apparently, his red-billed oxpecker.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Keep in mind that the law forbids the offering of any employment, not just paid employment, and it doesn’t matter whether the offer is direct or indirect, according to the law.

    And to get Bill going, guess who had to be backing Rahm up. I would have figured that Harvard Law grad Obama and Yale Law grad Clinton would have read the law more carefully, or at least had someone read it for them.

    Moreover, the interactions between Bill Clinton’s office, Sestak’s office, and the White House recently set up the White House for the same allegations that got Clinton impeached; witness tampering and obstruction of justice.

    Even better; there is a clear allegation that the White House made a similar offer for a PAYING job to a Colorado politician, and this guy has named names. Time for a special prosecutor, since obviously the AG ain’t doing his job right now.

  • http://www.bikebubba.blogspot.com Bike Bubba

    Keep in mind that the law forbids the offering of any employment, not just paid employment, and it doesn’t matter whether the offer is direct or indirect, according to the law.

    And to get Bill going, guess who had to be backing Rahm up. I would have figured that Harvard Law grad Obama and Yale Law grad Clinton would have read the law more carefully, or at least had someone read it for them.

    Moreover, the interactions between Bill Clinton’s office, Sestak’s office, and the White House recently set up the White House for the same allegations that got Clinton impeached; witness tampering and obstruction of justice.

    Even better; there is a clear allegation that the White House made a similar offer for a PAYING job to a Colorado politician, and this guy has named names. Time for a special prosecutor, since obviously the AG ain’t doing his job right now.

  • Carl Vehse

    there is a clear allegation that the White House made a similar offer for a PAYING job to a Colorado politician

    That would be Democrat Senate candidate from Colorado, Andrew Romanoff to whom the White House promisted a job if he would quit the primary race last year. The Denver Post originally carried the story by Washington correspondent Michael Riley back in September, but then has been (or kept) silent about it since then, until Newsbusters commented on the press silence yesterday.

  • Carl Vehse

    there is a clear allegation that the White House made a similar offer for a PAYING job to a Colorado politician

    That would be Democrat Senate candidate from Colorado, Andrew Romanoff to whom the White House promisted a job if he would quit the primary race last year. The Denver Post originally carried the story by Washington correspondent Michael Riley back in September, but then has been (or kept) silent about it since then, until Newsbusters commented on the press silence yesterday.

  • sg

    “I just don’t support the villagers carrying torches and pitchforks.”

    Right. Any lowly citizens who dare question to appearance of impropriety of the exalted ones are promptly labeled a “villagers carrying torches and pitchforks” demanding that the accused be brutally tortured by raising the right hand and swearing to tell the truth and turn over some emails.

  • sg

    “I just don’t support the villagers carrying torches and pitchforks.”

    Right. Any lowly citizens who dare question to appearance of impropriety of the exalted ones are promptly labeled a “villagers carrying torches and pitchforks” demanding that the accused be brutally tortured by raising the right hand and swearing to tell the truth and turn over some emails.

  • Tom Hering

    Oh goody! I thought conversations would be non-existent this holiday weekend! ;-)

    As I said, I support an investigation.

    Inspector Kemp: “A riot isht an ugly zing, unt vonce you get von shtarted, there isht little shance of shtopping it, short of bloodshet. I zink, before we go around killing people, ve had better make DAMN sure – of our evidence. Unt, ve had better confyurme the fact that young Frankenstein isht indeed following in his grandgather’s footshtops!”

    Villagers: “WHAT?”

    Inspector Kemp: “Following in his grandfather’s footshtops. Footshtops footshtops!

    Villagers: “Ohhh – footsteps!”

  • Tom Hering

    Oh goody! I thought conversations would be non-existent this holiday weekend! ;-)

    As I said, I support an investigation.

    Inspector Kemp: “A riot isht an ugly zing, unt vonce you get von shtarted, there isht little shance of shtopping it, short of bloodshet. I zink, before we go around killing people, ve had better make DAMN sure – of our evidence. Unt, ve had better confyurme the fact that young Frankenstein isht indeed following in his grandgather’s footshtops!”

    Villagers: “WHAT?”

    Inspector Kemp: “Following in his grandfather’s footshtops. Footshtops footshtops!

    Villagers: “Ohhh – footsteps!”

  • Carl Vehse

    When a Chicago-machine politician calls up a serial adulterer/impeached perjurer to try and bribe another Demonrat politician, it shouldn’t be any surprise that there is a major pile of rotting garbage involved. Sestak gave the press a first whiff back in February when he admitted the White House had offered him a job last year to drop out of the Senate race. Since then both sides have been trying to spin-doctor that disclosure into a harmless chat about the weather.

    But the thin tarp that was to cover up the stench is failing as badly as BP’s latest attempt to plug their Gulf oil gush (after the 20 million gallons can it really be called a “leak”?).

    In his column, “r story starts to unravel,” Ed Lasky provides the links and points out the flaws and additional questions raised by the cover stories being put out.

    Last ditch explanation – “The TOTUS did it.”

  • Carl Vehse

    When a Chicago-machine politician calls up a serial adulterer/impeached perjurer to try and bribe another Demonrat politician, it shouldn’t be any surprise that there is a major pile of rotting garbage involved. Sestak gave the press a first whiff back in February when he admitted the White House had offered him a job last year to drop out of the Senate race. Since then both sides have been trying to spin-doctor that disclosure into a harmless chat about the weather.

    But the thin tarp that was to cover up the stench is failing as badly as BP’s latest attempt to plug their Gulf oil gush (after the 20 million gallons can it really be called a “leak”?).

    In his column, “r story starts to unravel,” Ed Lasky provides the links and points out the flaws and additional questions raised by the cover stories being put out.

    Last ditch explanation – “The TOTUS did it.”

  • Peter Leavitt

    One can believe that Bill Clinton, doing Rahm Emanuel’s and Obama’s bidding, offered Sestak an unpaid “high” administration position, for a Sestak withdrawal of a Senate bid, along with the Tooth Fairy. The “Vehsebot” is right once again.

  • Peter Leavitt

    One can believe that Bill Clinton, doing Rahm Emanuel’s and Obama’s bidding, offered Sestak an unpaid “high” administration position, for a Sestak withdrawal of a Senate bid, along with the Tooth Fairy. The “Vehsebot” is right once again.

  • Tom Hering

    Let’s see. Lasky says the “cover story” is not “consistent with hard facts.” Then he says Sestak was offered a position on the Intelligence Advisory Board, because the Washington Examiner says that’s the board that was “reportedly” offered to Sestak, and Sestak himself said on Friday, “At the time, I heard the words ‘presidential board,’ AND THAT’S ALL I HEARD … I heard ‘presidential board,’ AND I THINK IT WAS INTEL.” Wow, yeah – those are some really hard facts alright.

  • Tom Hering

    Let’s see. Lasky says the “cover story” is not “consistent with hard facts.” Then he says Sestak was offered a position on the Intelligence Advisory Board, because the Washington Examiner says that’s the board that was “reportedly” offered to Sestak, and Sestak himself said on Friday, “At the time, I heard the words ‘presidential board,’ AND THAT’S ALL I HEARD … I heard ‘presidential board,’ AND I THINK IT WAS INTEL.” Wow, yeah – those are some really hard facts alright.

  • Carl Vehse

    Ed Morrissey has some more information (and links) in his Hot Air column, “Gibbs: Sestak not offered spot on intel board,” which notes more inconsistencies between the stories from Sestak and from Zero-Zip-Zilch’s lackies.

    An updated link is to Gary Gross’s “Sestak Story Getting Less Believeable By the Minute.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Ed Morrissey has some more information (and links) in his Hot Air column, “Gibbs: Sestak not offered spot on intel board,” which notes more inconsistencies between the stories from Sestak and from Zero-Zip-Zilch’s lackies.

    An updated link is to Gary Gross’s “Sestak Story Getting Less Believeable By the Minute.”

  • Carl Vehse

    Now, American Spectator’s Peter Ferrara is predicting “The Coming Resignation of Barack Obama:”

    Months ago, I predicted in this column that President Obama would so discredit himself in office that he wouldn’t even be on the ballot in 2012, let alone have a prayer of being reelected. Like President Johnson in 1968, who had won a much bigger victory four years previously than Obama did in 2008, President Obama will be so politically defunct by 2012 that he won’t even try to run for reelection.

    I am now ready to predict that President Obama will not even make it that far. I predict that he will resign in discredited disgrace before the fall of 2012. Like my previous prediction, that is based not just on where we are now, but where we are going under his misleadership.

    Ferrara then recounts the FUBARs, if not criminal activites, of 0bamalamadingdong and his 0bamanistas.

  • Carl Vehse

    Now, American Spectator’s Peter Ferrara is predicting “The Coming Resignation of Barack Obama:”

    Months ago, I predicted in this column that President Obama would so discredit himself in office that he wouldn’t even be on the ballot in 2012, let alone have a prayer of being reelected. Like President Johnson in 1968, who had won a much bigger victory four years previously than Obama did in 2008, President Obama will be so politically defunct by 2012 that he won’t even try to run for reelection.

    I am now ready to predict that President Obama will not even make it that far. I predict that he will resign in discredited disgrace before the fall of 2012. Like my previous prediction, that is based not just on where we are now, but where we are going under his misleadership.

    Ferrara then recounts the FUBARs, if not criminal activites, of 0bamalamadingdong and his 0bamanistas.

  • Tom Hering

    “… 0bamalamadingdong …”

    I haven’t been engaged in arguments at this level since 4th grade ;-)

  • Tom Hering

    “… 0bamalamadingdong …”

    I haven’t been engaged in arguments at this level since 4th grade ;-)

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Of course, should Ferrara’s (@52) “prediction” fail to come true, one could argue from a Biblical stance that he should be stoned.

    But then, with him making predictions like that, one could further argue that he already is stoned.

  • http://www.toddstadler.com/ tODD

    Of course, should Ferrara’s (@52) “prediction” fail to come true, one could argue from a Biblical stance that he should be stoned.

    But then, with him making predictions like that, one could further argue that he already is stoned.

  • Carl Vehse

    Of course, should Ferrara’s (@52) “prediction” fail to come true, one could argue from a Biblical stance that he should be stoned.

    We’ll have to see if this prediction also comes true in 2012.

  • Carl Vehse

    Of course, should Ferrara’s (@52) “prediction” fail to come true, one could argue from a Biblical stance that he should be stoned.

    We’ll have to see if this prediction also comes true in 2012.

  • Tom Hering

    tODD’s observation was not a prediction.

  • Tom Hering

    tODD’s observation was not a prediction.

  • ptl

    looks like Tom has fallen into the 4th grade argument trap too :)

  • ptl

    looks like Tom has fallen into the 4th grade argument trap too :)


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X