Posted on 05/27/2010 12:58:22 PM PDT by nickcarraway
In Washington, you can safely assume the air is beginning to stink when administration apologists play the “Politics isn’t a crime” card, as the Washington Monthly’s Steve Benen has here in reference to the brewing Joe Sestak job-offer scandal. [See who supports Sestak.]
Funny, I don’t remember Democrats being in such a forgiving mood when the Bush White House was accused of politicizing the Justice Department by firing a batch of U.S. Attorneys. Or when Rep. Tom DeLay launched his notorious K Street Project and helped to favorably redraw Texas’ congressional district boundaries. These efforts went beyond the pale of “exert[ing] influence in developments related to [the president’s] political party.” (Which indeed they did.)
One of my favorite liberal bloggers, Jonathan Chait, also seems to have succumbed to a sort of our-side-of-the-cafeteria partiality:
There's no such thing as offering somebody a job in return for them dropping out of a Senate race. The acceptance of a job means dropping out of a Senate race. The concept of offering somebody a job "in exchange" for them declining to seek another job is like offering to marry a woman in exchange for her not marrying some other guy. It's conceptually nonsensical.
Come again? Splitting hairs Michael Kinsley-style, Chait has outhunk himself here.
We’re talking (possibly) about a simple clear-cut case of quid pro quo: “Do this and I’ll do that.” Or if Chait prefers, “Don’t marry him; marry me.” What’s so “nonsensical” about that? In fact, I think I’ve seen the movie a couple of dozen times. Is Chait saying that a bribe is illegal only if it's accepted?
Former Attorney General Mike Mukasey spun a couple of scenarios—one indictable, the other not so much—to Washington Post blogger Dave Weigel:
“The least bad case," Mukasey said, "is that the guy's 20 points down, and everybody says you don't want to do this and bloody up a candidate to no end. You want to do something, we can find something for you. But to call somebody in and tell them, 'Look, you bow out and we'll offer you a job' is very serious. No rational prosecutor should indict unless it's that blatant.’"
Sorry, Democrats. This is more than Fox News Channel-generated hysteria.
It’s a big deal because it’s a felony and consistent with Rahm’s M.O.. “Pay to not Play” is just the flip side of Chicago style “Pay to Play”.
He ALSO BRIBED Andrew Romanoff in Colorado!! AND the BLAGO thingy!!
Sorry, Democrats. This is more than Fox News Channel-generated hysteria.
Horse trading is an age old tradition in politics and can be very unethical and still remain legal. For example:
“You know Joe, if you were to decide this is not the right time to run, something better might open up for you.”
is clearly unethical, but doesn’t cross the Rubicon of been illegal.
On the other hand:
“Joe, if you don’t run, we’ll make you Secretary of the Navy”
is clearly illegal.
But seeing the hamfisted behavior in world Diplomacy along with the clumsiness of dealing with the GOP on major issues, I have no doubt that the amatuers in the White House were stupid enough to break the law.
Barry may want to ask a favor of BP and get some advice about plugging holes.
I don't know that your hypothetical is the right one.
Offering someone who has not announced a candidacy a job if they choose not to enter the race is one thing.
Offering someone who has already entered a race a job if they dropped out of the race is tampering with an election. That person has formed committees, accepted donations, hired staff, and filed with the FEC and other state regulatory bodies.
-PJ
Even if they have not announced, a clear quid pro quo is bribery.
Where do you think the ‘independent’ investigators should come from? The KGB perhaps?
Certainly not from Washington D.C.
Why? There is no law against not running for office. Who's to say that one reason over another is legal or not legal?
But, once a candidate files and is running, different rules apply, don't they?
-PJ
The U.S. Code?
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.
Let me pull out the verbiage that puts the quid pro quo of an unannounced candidate into the legal hopper:
Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any... position... provided for... by any Act of Congress... to any person as... reward... in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office
Promising a reward to a person, in the form of a Federal job, for them not to run is a violation of this particular law.
Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any... position... provided for... by any Act of Congress... to any person as... reward for any political activity... in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office
The parsing you cited as "reward... in connection with any primary election" could refer to paying people for "get out the vote" activities. That "reward" is the quid, but what is the "quo?" The "quo" is not any activity relating to an election.
I'm saying that the "quo" is "any political activity," but not a "political inactivity." You cannot criminalize not running. You can criminalize running and then taking a "reward" to stop running.
-PJ
The “quo” is conditional. If the job is in exchange for non-action (i.e. the job will not be given if the bribee decides to run), then that is the condition for the “quid”.
Saying I will give you X in exchange for Y is the equation. If Y = “Not running”, the condition is still the same.
AHA! I think you are missing the point. The person to whom the bribe is offered is not the criminal.
You can't criminalize not running, but this law sure as heck criminalizes bribing someone not to run. The bribe is the active component, not the decision to run or not.
One last time:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1618849/posts
Joe Sestak’s campaign-finance report reads like a list of invitees to an Oval Office meeting with Bill Clinton.
The former three-star admiral, trying to oust Republican Curt Weldon from his U.S. House seat in the Philadelphia suburbs, has received financial support from a dozen top insiders from Clinton’s two terms in the White House.
So many onetime Clintonites are among Sestak donors that the Weldon campaign yesterday cited it as proof of its claim that Sestak, with no previous electoral experience, is little more than the tool of a Democratic Party effort to oust GOP incumbents in swing districts throughout the country.
Sestak’s campaign said, however, that the former Clinton officials are people Sestak knew personally when he was something of a White House insider - director for defense policy on the National Security Council staff.
Sestak’s contributors include U.S. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D., N.Y.), whose political action committee gave $2,500.
Also on the list are:
Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, who donated $500.
Former White House chief of staff John Podesta, who gave $300.
Former CIA director John Deutch, who gave $500.
Former Navy secretary John Dalton, who gave $500.
Former national security adviser Samuel R. “Sandy” Berger, who gave $1,000.
Former national security adviser Anthony Lake, who gave $500.
Among the administration’s once-powerful but lesser known figures on the donor list is Richard A. Clarke. He later became famous for his 2003 book, Against All Enemies, that accused President Bush of ignoring terrorist threats before 9/11. Clarke, who was a top counterterrorism adviser to several presidents, gave $2,100 to Sestak.
“Joe Sestak was picked - handpicked - by the Clinton national Democratic organization to... run for this seat, and now they’re bankrolling him,” said Michael Puppio, a Weldon campaign spokesman.
Sestak is running in the Seventh District, concentrated in Delaware County, where he grew up but where he had not lived for decades before mounting his campaign. As a Navy officer, he lived all over.
The Weldon campaign earlier criticized Sestak for taking support from Berger, whom it said is a convicted criminal. Berger pleaded guilty last year to a misdemeanor charge of removing unauthorized material from an archive and retaining classified documents.
Puppio, in a telephone interview yesterday, said the inclusion of Deutch’s name on Sestak’s list made for two “convicted criminals” who had contributed to the Democrat.
Deutch won a pardon
Clinton, on leaving office in 2001, pardoned Deutch for a misdemeanor conviction of having retained classified information on his home computer.
Allison Price, Sestak’s spokeswoman, said yesterday that Sestak was “very proud” of gaining support from the Clinton insiders, including both Berger and Deutch.
Sestak earned the support of the administration officials by having won their respect and confidence when he worked with them, according to Price. His campaign Web site contains a photo of him in white Navy uniform in the Oval Office with Clinton.
A number of former National Security Council staffers, and at least four former admirals, are also among the 3,864 people the Sestak campaign said have contributed $427,264 from Jan. 1 to March 31.
In the same period, Weldon, who has been in Congress for two decades, raised more than $460,000, including substantial contributions from the defense industry. He is vice chairman of both the House Armed Services and Homeland Security committees, and is the head of an Armed Services subcommittee that authorizes defense programs.
Officials at defense firms
Sestak’s financial report, filed last week with the Federal Election Commission, shows a few contributions from officials at General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin and Northrop Grumman, all defense companies. Price said these are from former Navy leaders or National Security Council officials who worked with Sestak.
“Many of the people in armed forces... go to work for the defense industry,” Price said.
Also donating to Sestak’s campaign were members of his large immediate family, including his father, Joe Sestak Sr., and his mother, Kathleen, both of Delaware County, who each gave the legal maximum of $4,200.
Several of his brothers and sisters gave up to $4,200, also.
Among the political well-knowns on Sestak’s report is an entertainer. Jimmy Buffett, the singer who made “Margaritaville” famous, donated $2,100 from his base of operations in Los Angeles.
Former President Clinton is a big no-show on the Sestak list.
But there is a Bill Clinton - in fact, a William J. Clinton - on the list.
Clinton, a former health-care manager who now works as a consultant from Upper Providence, Delaware County, gave $250. He recently became a township councilman.
“I am a Democrat, and a progressive,” he said, “and I support Joe Sestak.”
[ Report Abuse | Bookmark ]
For those who have been following Able Danger, here’s further proof that the Clintonites do not want Congressman Curt Weldon to get to the bottom of this scandal. For those unfamiliar with it, Able Danger was a DOD program that identified Atta before the 9/11 attacks. But when datamining efforts used by the group turned up shady links between the Clinton Administration and China, it was shutdown and prevented from sharing info with the FBI.
This group could have prevented 9/11, but the Clinton’s knocked it out of Commission. When Weldon started digging into this issue, the Clinton’s recruited one of their own — Admiral Joe Sestak, a former member of Clinton’s NationalSecurity Council — to run against Weldon.
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.