Posted on 05/29/2010 6:45:46 PM PDT by Laissez-faire capitalist
Charles Krauthammer brought up how TWO contacts were made with Sestak by the White House. One in June and one in July of 2009.
Clinton only talked one time with Sestak about taking an unpaid advisory position.
In his interview with Larry Kane, Sestak said yes to being offered a "high ranking" and a "federal job" by someone in the White House. When asked if it was for Secretary of the Navy he responded with "no comment."
An unpaid advisory position would not be a high ranking federal job.
What was that high ranking federal job and who would be the one who would have the power to offer it? Was Sestak ever offered a paid job in exchange for dropping out of the PA race? Krauthammer said that the official White House response does not deny offering Sestak a paid job.
Ping.
Did I miss anything?
BTW, does anyone here have definitive proof that one of those two contacts was Bill Clinton’s contact with Sestak to take an unpaid advisory position - acting as a go between for the WH?
If so, what was the other contact from the White House about? Secretary of the Navy?
Whoops. We will have a revised statement from Clinton on Tuesday. It will have something to do with the word is.
mmm mmm mmm
Clinton is not the Whitehouse ...
Two times?? No. According to Larry Kane, it was “many times”....
How Long Does It Take The White House To Get A Story Right?
3:48 pm in Barack Obama, Politics, The Clintons | 350 views
On February 18, Larry Kane, a television news anchor in Philadelphia, asked Congressman and former Admiral Joe Sestak:
“Were you ever offered a job to get out of this race?” Kane was referring to the Democratic Senate primary against Arlen Specter.
“Yes,” Sestak answered.
“Was it Navy Secretary?”
“No comment,” said Sestak.
According to Kane, Sestak talked about staying in the race but added that he “was called many times” to pull out. Later, Kane asked:
“So you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”
“Yes.”
At the end of the taping, Sestak looked surprised and said, “You are the first person who ever asked me that question.”
His response to Kane appeared spontaneous and unscripted.
Kane called the White House Press Office that afternoon and played the interview for a staffer, who promised that someone would call Kane back.
A few minutes later, at 3:45 PM, another staffer called and said the White House would call back with a reaction “shortly.”
Kane’s station played the report aired all night.
At 6:45 the next morning, 15 hours later, a Deputy Press Secretary called and said, “You can say the White House says it’s not true.
“On the Friday before Memorial Day, 100 days later, a classic news dump day, the White House Counsel Robert Bauer issued his report. He claimed that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel enlisted the support of Bill Clinton, “who agreed to raise with Congressman Sestak options of service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board.”
Remember, when Kane asked a second time, “So you were offered a job by someone in the White House,” Sestak did not equivocate.
He said nothing about an “uncompensated” advisory position or an offer by a White House liaison, he simply said, “Yes.”
Someone’s lying, and Scooter Libby went to jail for less.
Now that there has been sufficient time to construct a story that would imply the least amount of collateral damage: Bill Clinton and Joe Sestak, both decide to come clean about the story at almost the same instant on the late Friday afternoon before Memorial Day, right after the President has lunch with Bill Clinton.
The Obama White House typically uses this technique to drop the more dubious and ambiguous news stories to avoid the most intense media scrutiny.
This is Joe Sestak’s version:
“Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background. He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives.
I said no. I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer. The former President said he knew I’d say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects.”
Bringing in President Clinton to conduct questionable election negotiations as stated while his wife is Secretary of State raises interesting questions of ethics, if Clinton has been chosen because of his apparent immunity to past charges of perjury, his teflon-like coating may be wearing thin and the unlikely premise that the ‘position’ offered was with zero pay is inconsequential as far as using illegal methods to influence election results.
The question is whether the offer by the White House violated federal bribery and extortion laws. Last month, Congressman Darrel Issa R CA, asked Attorney General Holder to conduct an independent investigation into the matter, not surprisingly the Justice Department has been slow to initiate the investigation.
“It’s not the kind of thing anybody likes to talk about, but it does go on,” said former Reagan Justice Department official Michael Carvin. “But it does fall within the literal language of the statute.”
This situation is a possible violation of the law, it has been compounded by the tendency of the White House to assume that the regional Machine politics of Chicago will work in DC, that lies and obfuscation will make problems disappear.
This Chicago attitude of Obama and Rahm will probably be their undoing.
Has WJC ever really made a statement or is everyone relying on the White Hut for information?
Good catch! Wish the media would notice things like that.
They needed a real pro here, so they brought in Bubba.
Obama should cut his losses and resign.
Failure In Chief.
I personally think Clinton is a deliberate distraction.
Of course he is,but my point being Sestak would have said Pres Clinton contacted me not the Whitehouse contacted me...
Evert time the Obama admin comments they dig a deeper hole..
Best quote today!
Show me the money! Phone receipts, records? Airline trip records? Where did they meet. Who else was present? Any recording? Video? Witnesses? Prove it ever happened. They made this up. But you can bet one thing! CLINTON GOT SOMETHING FOR IT OR THE OLD BAG DID!
chicago attitude! yep, you nailed it. good post, you are all over this. now lets watch how the media will (course not), cover this like they attacked from 6/’72 thru 8/’74. what a crock that entire episode was.
good.
Indeed, and the defense of “everybody does it” that Democrats are using was dismissed by Obama when he said that “Nothing improper took place.”
Dems cannot use that defense anymore. Obama torched that defense. LOL.
And it is true that Sestak would have said that it was Clinton who contacted him, not the White House.
So, what were those two contacts about that the White House says that they made with Sestak?
An unpaid advisory position is NOT high ranking.
The whole point of the OP was to show that what Sestak has said does not line up with what the White House is saying. That has to hurt...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.