Skip to comments.Is Senate Cand. Sestak (D-PA) Lying About Bribe or Did WH Break the Law?
Posted on 05/25/2010 6:01:22 AM PDT by Starman417
If Sestak is lying he should be disqualified for the Senate. If someone at the White House offered him a bribe to stay out of Senate race, they broke the law.
That's really the only two ways to look at this story. The White House made it clear they did not want Joe Sestak to run in the primary against Senator Arlen Specter. Sestak has repeatedly claimed that he was offered a high level job if he were to drop out of the race which he won in last week's Pennsylvania primary.
Sestak was asked about the controversy this past Sunday on Meet the Press and reaffirmed that an offer was made:
[VIDEO AT SITE]
Sestak refuses to say what the job was or who at the White House offered it to him. Earlier this year, Robert Gibbs, White House press spokesman, repeatedly tried to stonewall the matter hoping reporters would drop it. Finally this Monday David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist said that the matter had been looked into and that "nothing inappropriate happened." He refused to give any details and quickly changed the subject.
Read more at floppingaces.net...
Sestak has repeatedly said, he kept his honor in all this...tells me the White House committed an impeachable offense.
Oh nevermind, the first black president will never be prosecuted...
This CORRUPTION has got to end.
He may be pre-empting the Admin to cover his own ... vulnerability.
Even if they did, would it be illegal? They were not trying to influence Sestak's actions as a member of the House. They were trying to influence his actions as a private citizen who was deciding whether to run for the Senate. I know that is a very fine point, but most government corruption laws are about trying to influence someone in their position as a government official. I don't know if offering a non-civil service government position to someone would be illegal.
None of us here like Sestak’s politics, but there is zero, zip, nada in this guy’s background to suggest he is a liar.
Dick Morris said on Hannity last night that most likely Specter agreed to change parties last year, but as a condition said that he didn’t want to have a primary for the Senate race.
The WH was probably just trying to hold up their end of the bargain by attempting to lure Sestak away with a job offer.
Several days ago, Judge Napolitano laid out the cites, I'm sorry, I have not his brilliant legal mind or ability to retain, but in essence he said it violates the law because the president or those under his authority could make good on the offer, that was the bar, legal hurdle crossed. Different from typical political maneuvering, shenanigans. It is illegal to bribe someone in this manner. If I can find the specifics for you, I will post them.
He also gains nothing whatever by lying about it, rather the contrary in fact.
When someone says “Sestak is lying” -
the real question is “why would he lie?”
Really, what would he have to gain?
Laws and scandals only apply to Republicans
Pray for America
That seems clear to me also, but what I can't figure out is why the WH would want to submarine his candidacy. Specter has almost no chance of winning but Sestak, like him or not, has some kind of chance. By backing Specter, the WH improves the chances that their regime will be toppled over the next two years. They're all extremely smart (if also extremely power-hungry) so they HAVE to know this? What are they doing?? What can they be possibly thinking??!?
It’s time for some ambitious Federal Attorney to impanel a Grand Jury.
They've been so arrogant, the scheme Glenn Beck exposed of the Chicago Carbon Exchange, his latest with the Shoreline Bank in Chicago just two examples ... it strikes me that they think they can get away with anything simply because they can.
Specter has almost no chance of winning but Sestak, like him or not, has some kind of chance
When specifically was the offer made, do we know? What was the situation like at that time, was Specter still reasonably viable? Or did 0bama owe him something and so he had to try to get Sestak to leave off? There are all kinds of things that could be the reason, that's why an investigation/IC is necessary here.
In Colorado, we have a Democrat by the name of Romanoff (He was the Speaker of the Couse), who openly admits he was offered a job by the Obama administration not to run against sitting the sitting Senator Bennett (who Obama supports).
Yet not a word in the paper.
A few talk shows have confronted him, and he has admitted it more than once.
At the Dem. caucus last week, Romanoff took the most votes over Bennett. Obama has got to be angry over that.
Well, unless some actual journalist has dug up something or one of the lesser Obamatrons has flipped, I don't think we know anything specifically. I've been wondering who is the source for the rumors we HAVE been hearing.
it strikes me that they think they can get away with anything simply because they can.
Like I say, they're intelligent. They can read. They know that the Rasmussen poll has been dead-on accurate for months and is trending south again. They know that Specter is unreliable at best. All of this should have been factored in. Given all that, perhaps you're right: they thinktheycan theythinktheycan theythinktheycan...
Or did 0bama owe him something and so he had to try to get Sestak to leave off?
Upthread someone mentioned that having no opposition in the primary could have been part of the bargain Specter might have made when he switched parties. Could be...and would be logical, if not exactly ethical. Whether or not that is true, it remains speculative.
an investigation/IC is necessary here.
I agree 100%.
Probably both...because both are normal courses of action for politicians and this WH.
Just saw your post -- this is what I'm inquiring in the one I made above, and it lends credibility to the notion that the this whole thing did occur. As the Judge pointed out, the bar to be reached has to be the ability to make good on the offer, the WH is obviously quite capable of making sure Sestak got the nomination for SecNav, he knew that.
I'm curious now -- for several months, Chris Matthews said he was considering running for this Senate seat, I made a joke that when Specter changed parties, it deflated Matthews' balloon, aw, too bad. Now I'm wondering, did he not continue with his plans because someone *asked* him not to, was there any *offer* made to this TV pundit to keep him from being a primary challenger as well? Recognized face, celebrity-type, he would more than likely have beaten Specter also, hmm ...
All those who believe 0bama had nothing whatever to do with Blaggo and his former Senate seat raise your hands.
(Seeing none as yet)
Ah, so since Sestak has admitted it and the WH denies it, I say we've most definitely reached the IC point. I go back to the hue and cry made that an IC was necessary to investigate Newt Gingrich where no crime was charged nor found, just the pit yorkie Bonoir yapping. Surely we've passed that standard now.