Posted on 12/07/2011 5:15:50 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Former Speaker of the House is facing questions over whether he broke the law by announcing on Wednesday that he would appoint former United Nations Ambassador John Bolton as his Secretary of State if elected.
Gingrich made his remarks at the Republican Jewish Coalition's Candidates Forum, saying he would first get Bolton to agree to change the State Department's culture of "appeasement."
But Taegan Goddard at Political Wire notes that Gingrich may have run afoul of federal law barring a candidate from promising a political appointment for the purposes of personal political gain.
Here's Title 18, Part I, Chapter 29, Section 599 of the U.S. Code:
"Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both."
(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...
They must be orgasmic over at Media Matters thinking that they’ve ‘got’ him. Too bad for them that it will turn out to be just another dry well.
Nice try, but it appears the statute is improperly worded for that. It says “to gain support”, not “to gain the support of the appointee”. So if I promised you that I would appoint Bolton, and in response you decide to support me, I have apparently broken this stupid law.
Jim DeMint is not going to be his VP. He said on the news that Mitt Romney would be his VP. I heard that from his mouth directly.
At least you remembered all 3!!!!
Countdown until the Socialists at the National Review use this liberal line of attack against the Gingrich campaign.
3 - 2 - 1: It’s inevitable!
In 2008, McCain kept going on about appointing Meg Whitman as Secretary of Treasury or Commerce or whatnot.
Oh come on!
Goddard wouldn’t have minded if Obama did that.
I have been a long time supporter of Mr. Gingrich.
His bad breath was not bad enough, his multiple wives (one at a time) I was not excessively jealous of, but this, this, this picking members of cabinet before he is even nominated? Too much.
No more support from me!
I am now firmly in Paul's camp!
Bwahahahaha
As pertaining to a promise to the public or to the appointee? As pertaining to the support of the public or of the appointee? Are we talking Blagojevich-style quid pro quo or a blanket public bribe? And with the public being so diverse and unguaranteeable for a certain outcome, how can this be considered any sort of a quid pro quo?
I’d better stop now before I muddle my questions further.
OK; before I look. . .’John Bolton’?
lol
completely laughable.
Am thrilled. . .;my pick is Newt’s pick!/lol. . .and so logical, of course, coming from Newt; (thought all along it would be Bolton. All to America’s ‘good’; given John Bolton’s talents/contributions by wisdom and experience! Andhis loathing of PC. . .
Am thrilled. . .;my pick is Newt’s pick!/lol. . .and so logical, of course, coming from Newt; (thought all along it would be Bolton. All to America’s ‘good’; given John Bolton’s talents/contributions by wisdom and experience! Andhis loathing of PC. . .
Richardson Promises Cabinet Preview
By PHILIP ELLIOTT
The Associated Press
Saturday, July 28, 2007; 2:59 PMHANOVER, N.H. -- Democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson told union members on Saturday he would give voters a preview of his Cabinet before voters pick the next president.
"I would announce my Cabinet before the election. If I'm the nominee, I would tell you who my team would be," the New Mexico governor told a Service Employees International Union conference at Dartmouth College.
"It would have independents, Republicans and Democrats. Don't worry, I won't overdo the Republicans," Richardson said, drawing laughter. "It would be taken from America, not from the Beltway."
Richardson's comments came as he courted union members during a three-day campaign trip to New Hampshire. Richardson, who is ranked third in state polls, repeated his pledges to SEIU members that he would give unions greater clout.
He said he'll choose a union member as his labor secretary, and a teacher for education secretary.
But first Richardson, a former energy secretary and U.N. ambassador during the Clinton administration, must win his party's nomination. He acknowledged it will be a tough fight against Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, but said that doesn't mean he can't win.
"Give me chance. I'm out there hustling. I'm out there working," he said. "I don't come in, swoop in, see a thousand people and leave."
After the speech, Richardson told The Associated Press his pre-election Cabinet picks wouldn't be final.
"The position would not be offered. There's a recognition that you eventually have to vet. But I would cite these are the people that I would name," he said in a brief interview on the way to a street fair. "We can't get bogged down by technicality. My vetting would be sooner."
He said he recognized the challenges with such public announcements, given the nation's history of Cabinet nominations later withdrawn in the face of embarrassing details or scandal.
(excerpted)
Key word here is "procuring", particularly in the context of the following sections 600 and 601, which deal with promising employment in exchange for political activity, and threat of firing unless political support is given.
It would only be an offense if he offered Bolton the appointment in exchange for Bolton doing something to support Newts candidacy. This was not the case.
I’m thinking the law was meant to apply to situations closer to Rod Blagojevich’s putting Barry’s old Senate seat up for bids, rather than to presidential candidates saying who they want to appoint in order to get voters to like them.
How about this: he has announced his preference for Mr. Bolton in order to help voters understand his own positions. It might well cost him as many or more votes than it would gain him. Case dismissed!
Romney said that someone like a Condi Rice would make a good VP; it depends on how you say it. Newt should have known better.
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.