PDA

View Full Version : General Politics LOL, this oughta be good, WH preparing formal explanation on Sestak job offer


mlyonsd
05-28-2010, 08:20 AM
Obama Says 'Official' Explanation Coming 'Shortly' on Alleged Sestak Job Offer
Published May 27, 2010
| FOXNews.com

President Obama said Thursday that the White House is preparing to issue a formal explanation regarding the allegation that it offered Rep. Joe Sestak a job to drop out of the Democratic primary race against Sen. Arlen Specter.

The president, addressing the matter in public for the first time since the Pennsylvania congressman leveled the claim in February, said the statement should answer questions about the claim and insisted "nothing improper" happened.

"There will be an official response shortly on the Sestak matter," Obama said, when asked about the issue by Fox News at the president's press conference. "I mean shortly -- I don't mean weeks or months. ... I can assure the public that nothing improper took place."

White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has also said nothing improper happened, but refused to elaborate when asked repeatedly about the charge at Thursday's briefing.

Sestak, who did not drop out and won the race against Specter last week, repeated his allegation in an interview on Sunday, but also declined to elaborate.

Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who has been leading the charge for more details on the allegation, said he hopes Obama's pending response "will detail what conversations were had with Congressman Sestak."

"If what the president said is true and nothing 'improper' took place, Adm. Sestak's credibility will be called into significant question," Issa said in a statement. "If the president'sresponse is insufficient or contradicted, the situation will only escalate."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/27/obama-improper-alleged-sestak-job-offer-official-explanation-come/?test=latestnews

What will the explanation be?

1) The dog ate our homework.
2) Sestak misunderstood the word 'job' didn't really mean 'employment'.
3) Sestak is seriously deranged which is why we backed Specter.
4) Bush originally offered Sestak the job and we were just extending the offer again.
5) Yes we actually might have broken the law but we're the Obama administration so who cares?

petegz28
05-28-2010, 08:36 AM
If they did nothing wrong there would be no need for time to get an explanation together.

blaise
05-28-2010, 09:03 AM
OMG I can't believe you wingtards are melting down over this!!!! LOOK at all you wingtards just melting down! Where were you wingtards when Bush did this other thing? I mean, Bush did ___ and ____, and Bush and Bush, Bush to the Bush the Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush you wingatards are all melting down over something so petty when Bush did Bush Bush Bush! Let me go find a Huffington Post article about Bush doing something similar!

Chief Henry
05-28-2010, 09:04 AM
The white house is coming out on the Friday before Memorial day with this... Watch the MSM trip all over themselfs with this..........NOT

blaise
05-28-2010, 09:06 AM
Seriously though, Obama is going to announce he meant to offer the job to a Sleestack from Land of the Lost.

petegz28
05-28-2010, 09:25 AM
EXCLUSIVE: White House asked Clinton to talk to Sestak about Senate run

Senior White House advisers asked former President Bill Clinton to talk to Joe Sestak about whether he was serious about running for Senate, and to feel out whether he'd be open to other alternatives, according to sources familiar with the situation.

But the White House maintains that the Clinton-Sestak discussions were informal, according to the sources. The White House, under pressure to divulge the specifics of its interactions with Sestak, will release a formal statement later today outlining their version of events, including Clinton's involvement.

According to the sources, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel asked Clinton and his longtime adviser, lawyer Doug Band, to talk to Sestak about the race. It's unclear right now whether the White House will say that Clinton was asked to suggest specific administration positions for Sestak, whether Clinton floated positions on his own, whether Clinton discussed other options not related to the adminstration, or whether employment even came up at all in the talks.

But the news that Clinton is at the center of this whole story is noteworthy on its own because of the former president's stature, and underscores how heavily invested the White House was in dissuading Sestak from running. The White House sent Clinton to talk to Sestak because Arlen Specter, constituting the 60th Dem vote in the Senate, was viewed as key to enacting Obama's agenda.

The White House maintains that Clinton's overtures to Sestak merely constituted an effort to gauge his seriousness about the race, the sources say, adding that Clinton was informally discussing the range of options open to Sestak as part of a larger conversation meant to ascertain Sestak's thinking.

I've been unable to ascertain precisely what Clinton discussed with Sestak in terms of his future options, but the release of the White House's formal response will clear that up.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/exclusive_white_house_asked_cl_1.html

ClevelandBronco
05-28-2010, 09:31 AM
OMG I can't believe you wingtards are melting down over this!!!! LOOK at all you wingtards just melting down! Where were you wingtards when Bush did this other thing? I mean, Bush did ___ and ____, and Bush and Bush, Bush to the Bush the Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush you wingatards are all melting down over something so petty when Bush did Bush Bush Bush! Let me go find a Huffington Post article about Bush doing something similar!

Your memory is about as short as BEP's dick. It was Cheney, not Bush.

talastan
05-28-2010, 09:45 AM
EXCLUSIVE: White House asked Clinton to talk to Sestak about Senate run

Senior White House advisers asked former President Bill Clinton to talk to Joe Sestak about whether he was serious about running for Senate, and to feel out whether he'd be open to other alternatives, according to sources familiar with the situation.

But the White House maintains that the Clinton-Sestak discussions were informal, according to the sources. The White House, under pressure to divulge the specifics of its interactions with Sestak, will release a formal statement later today outlining their version of events, including Clinton's involvement.

According to the sources, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel asked Clinton and his longtime adviser, lawyer Doug Band, to talk to Sestak about the race. It's unclear right now whether the White House will say that Clinton was asked to suggest specific administration positions for Sestak, whether Clinton floated positions on his own, whether Clinton discussed other options not related to the adminstration, or whether employment even came up at all in the talks.

But the news that Clinton is at the center of this whole story is noteworthy on its own because of the former president's stature, and underscores how heavily invested the White House was in dissuading Sestak from running. The White House sent Clinton to talk to Sestak because Arlen Specter, constituting the 60th Dem vote in the Senate, was viewed as key to enacting Obama's agenda.

The White House maintains that Clinton's overtures to Sestak merely constituted an effort to gauge his seriousness about the race, the sources say, adding that Clinton was informally discussing the range of options open to Sestak as part of a larger conversation meant to ascertain Sestak's thinking.

I've been unable to ascertain precisely what Clinton discussed with Sestak in terms of his future options, but the release of the White House's formal response will clear that up.


http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/exclusive_white_house_asked_cl_1.html

So blaming the past administration isn't enough...Obama has to blame the president before Bush? :p

RaiderH8r
05-28-2010, 09:48 AM
So blaming the past administration isn't enough...Obama has to blame the president before Bush? :p

I'm pretty sure this is all Warren G. Harding's fault. That guy was just a prick.

petegz28
05-28-2010, 09:50 AM
So blaming the past administration isn't enough...Obama has to blame the president before Bush? :p

Seems that way

Direckshun
05-28-2010, 09:52 AM
This is newsworthy.

petegz28
05-28-2010, 10:25 AM
This is newsworthy.

Dude, if this were Bush you would be throwing a fit.

Donger
05-28-2010, 10:30 AM
This is newsworthy.

I was under the impression that this would be a felony. That's isn't newsworthy?

mlyonsd
05-28-2010, 10:34 AM
I was under the impression that this would be a felony. That's isn't newsworthy?

There were about 8 years there where I remember it was kind of newsworthy.

notorious
05-28-2010, 10:40 AM
This is newsworthy.

Jesus.


This is rediculous.

vailpass
05-28-2010, 11:00 AM
How much longer must we endure that mumble-mouthed buffoon in our White House? obama should be made to wear clown shoes.

bigfoot
05-28-2010, 11:10 AM
.......and Clinton and Obummer just happened to share lunch yesterday!

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 11:16 AM
Either Obama committed a felony, or Admiral Sestak is lying.

Ticklegate?

talastan
05-28-2010, 11:22 AM
.......and Clinton and Obummer just happened to share lunch yesterday!

(Yesterday)
BO: Hey Willy, just wanted to let you know I've got this guy named Sestak I need to take care of.
BC: (stuffing face with cheeseburger) umm-hmmm....
BO: I just wanted to drop your name as a contact to this guy so we can have a point of reference for the media, okay? He is looking for a job and I need someone to take the blam...er the credit.
BC: (continues eating cheeseburger) ...soouurree..thing.
BO: Alright sounds like a plan.

(Fast forward to today.)

Fox news anchor: Clinton contact in possible illegal job offer to Sestak.
BC: Whaaattt!?
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:nghwEhJwZUeYLM:http://videothumb.vidoemo.com/MzVMdDRicWuRpSVh5clk.jpg

FD
05-28-2010, 11:27 AM
I haven't seen anyone other then some GOP politicians suggest there was a crime committed. Can someone link to a credible source backing up this felony stuff? I have no opinion on this am just genuinely curious.

Cave Johnson
05-28-2010, 11:37 AM
OMG I can't believe you wingtards are melting down over this!!!! LOOK at all you wingtards just melting down! Where were you wingtards when Bush did this other thing? I mean, Bush did ___ and ____, and Bush and Bush, Bush to the Bush the Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush Bush you wingatards are all melting down over something so petty when Bush did Bush Bush Bush! Let me go find a Huffington Post article about Bush doing something similar!

Bush, no. The patron saint, yes.

"President Reagan offered California Sen. S.I. Hayakawa a job in his administration if he dropped out of the Senate primary race in California -- an offer that Hayakawa, like Sestak, rejected. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/27/sestak-scandal-is-busines_n_592012.html

blaise
05-28-2010, 11:51 AM
Bush, no. The patron saint, yes.

"President Reagan offered California Sen. S.I. Hayakawa a job in his administration if he dropped out of the Senate primary race in California -- an offer that Hayakawa, like Sestak, rejected. "

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/27/sestak-scandal-is-busines_n_592012.html

Oh boy, orange is going to be mad that you beat him to it.

Cave Johnson
05-28-2010, 12:02 PM
Oh boy, orange is going to be mad that you beat him to it.

HuffPo's a pretty reliable mouthpiece for the counter-argument.

I'm actually ok with the R's attempt to get as much mileage out of this as possible. The President campaigned on no politics as usual and this is yet another example of how he's just a regular politician. Which I'm perfectly fine with, but it might disillusion the less cynical.

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 12:55 PM
Oh boy, orange is going to be mad that you beat him to it.

ROFL

mlyonsd
05-28-2010, 12:56 PM
FTR, the Reagain administration never contacted Hayakawa and he never contacted them for a job offer. It was something mentioned publicly by a Reagan administration official in an inteview because Hayakawa was behind in the polls and a sure loser.

Hayakawa served one term as Senator and then retired from government life.

I could see how the correlation would be made by the left though. This is what they're excited about...http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1454&dat=19811126&id=ibcsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HhQEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5060,5317656

So I should have had another option.

6) We refused to answer the allegations until some fine staffer dug up an article from 1981 which sort of in a vague way implicate the right's God, Reagan, as doing the same thing.

craneref
05-28-2010, 01:22 PM
Seriously though, Obama is going to announce he meant to offer the job to a Sleestack from Land of the Lost.

Which makes perfect sense, since that is the same speed as a sleestack that his administration is acting on the illegal immigrant problem and the oil spill.

alpha_omega
05-28-2010, 01:32 PM
"President Reagan offered California Sen. S.I. Hayakawa a job in his administration if he dropped out of the Senate primary race in California -- an offer that Hayakawa, like Sestak, rejected. "



Another example of justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.

jettio
05-28-2010, 01:38 PM
Anyone that thinks that this is a big deal ought to explain exactly why he/she thinks that.

What political appointment job is not based on favors and rewards for prior or future political support or loyalty?

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 01:41 PM
Anyone that thinks that this is a big deal ought to explain exactly why he/she thinks that.

What political appointment job is not based on favors and rewards for prior or future political support or loyalty?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Elena_Ceausescu_portrait.jpg/200px-Elena_Ceausescu_portrait.jpg

RaiderH8r
05-28-2010, 01:42 PM
Another example of justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior.

Dude, Boss Tweed was totally worse so, you know, bribing Sestak really ain't shit. You see? Their arguably worse shit totally trumps Barry's bad shit.

Christ.

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 01:46 PM
http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/BritannicaConcise/thumbnails/10164.gif

FD
05-28-2010, 01:46 PM
It looks like this is nothing illegal, but unethical nonetheless. No less unethical than pretty much every president ever, but Obama campaigned on changing these kinds of things and should be held to a higher standard.

mlyonsd
05-28-2010, 01:47 PM
Anyone that thinks that this is a big deal ought to explain exactly why he/she thinks that.

What political appointment job is not based on favors and rewards for prior or future political support or loyalty?

So you pick option 5.

blaise
05-28-2010, 01:47 PM
Anyone that thinks that this is a big deal ought to explain exactly why he/she thinks that.

What political appointment job is not based on favors and rewards for prior or future political support or loyalty?

Apparently Obama thinks it's a big enough deal that he has to give an official explanation of what happened.

jettio
05-28-2010, 01:47 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Elena_Ceausescu_portrait.jpg/200px-Elena_Ceausescu_portrait.jpg

And what is this about?

mlyonsd
05-28-2010, 01:48 PM
Apparently Obama thinks it's a big enough deal that he has to give an official explanation of what happened.

Apparently Rahm thought it was a big enough deal they asked Clinton to approach Sestak instead of just picking up the phone themselves.

FD
05-28-2010, 01:49 PM
Whats interesting about this is that getting Clinton involved is really bringing out the big guns, when the Obama administration would probably prefer Sestak in the Senate over Specter. My guess is they wanted to send a message to wavering GOP moderates that if they come to the other side they will be taken care of.

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 01:50 PM
And what is this about?

http://www.thepeoplescube.com/images/Che_Spotting_160.gif

jettio
05-28-2010, 01:52 PM
So you pick option 5.

So you can not explain what is wrong with what you are complaining about?

Why not explain?

Cave Johnson
05-28-2010, 01:52 PM
So you pick option 5.

What law was allegedly broken, yo?

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 01:55 PM
What law was allegedly broken, yo?

I heart Mao

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_klxRPEKq4eo/Stc8BJagfEI/AAAAAAAAC_0/CnvuM8b-ETw/s400/Anita+Dunn,+communications+chief,+wasn%27t+always+a+supporter+of+Barack+Obama.jpeg

healthpellets
05-28-2010, 02:15 PM
What law was allegedly broken, yo?

since no one else would answer your question...

However, what is illegal and not normal practice in Washington is to promise federal employment to an individual in exchange for future political activity. 18 U.S.C. § 600 prohibits public officials from using government-funded jobs or programs to advance their partisan political interests. The statute makes it unlawful for anyone to “directly or indirectly, promise[ ] any employment, position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit” to any person as a “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 primary election” (emphasis added). As the OLC opinion says, § 600 “punishes those who promise federal employment or benefits as an enticement to or reward for future political activity, but does not prohibit rewards for past political activity.” Future political activity would arguably include dropping out of a contested primary in order to benefit the White House-endorsed candidate (here, Senator Specter).

Another federal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 595, prohibits any person employed in any administrative position by the United States “in connection with any activity which is financed…by the United States…us[ing] his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the office of…Member of the Senate.” Any position offered to Sestak in the administration would be financed by the United States, so offering such a job in order to interfere with the election process for the Senate race in Pennsylvania would undoubtedly constitute a violation of this statute on its face.

http://blog.heritage.org/2010/05/26/sestak-obama-and-the-law/

Sec. 595. Interference by administrative employees of Federal,
State, or Territorial Governments


Whoever, being a person employed in any administrative position
by the United States, or by any department or agency thereof, or by
the District of Columbia or any agency or instrumentality thereof,
or by any State, Territory, or Possession of the United States, or
any political subdivision, municipality, or agency thereof, or
agency of such political subdivision or municipality (including any
corporation owned or controlled by any State, Territory, or
Possession of the United States or by any such political
subdivision, municipality, or agency), in connection with any
activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants
made by the United States, or any department or agency thereof,
uses his official authority for the purpose of interfering with, or
affecting, the nomination or the election of any candidate for the
office of President, Vice President, Presidential elector, Member
of the Senate, Member of the House of Representatives, Delegate
from the District of Columbia, or Resident Commissioner, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or
both.
This section shall not prohibit or make unlawful any act by any
officer or employee of any educational or research institution,
establishment, agency, or system which is supported in whole or in
part by any state or political subdivision thereof, or by the
District of Columbia or by any Territory or Possession of the
United States; or by any recognized religious, philanthropic or
cultural organization.

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/595.html

Sec. 600. Promise of employment or other benefit for political
activity


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.

http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/600.html

Direckshun
05-28-2010, 02:40 PM
Dude, if this were Bush you would be throwing a fit.

I just throw fits about everything Bush did. I'm a liberal. Check your handbook.

notorious
05-28-2010, 02:58 PM
I just throw fits about everything Bush did. I'm a liberal. Check your handbook.

I throw fits about what both sides do/did.


What does that make me?

healthpellets
05-28-2010, 02:59 PM
I throw fits about what both sides do/did.


What does that make me?

an observant realist.

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 03:27 PM
The greasy turd from Chicago is going down. Sestak's story is total concocted BS and he will crack under a congressional investigation.

go bowe
05-28-2010, 03:47 PM
The greasy turd from Chicago is going down. Sestak's story is total concocted BS and he will crack under a congressional investigation.sestak isn't from chicago...

The Mad Crapper
05-28-2010, 03:56 PM
sestak isn't from chicago...

You're such a kidder. ROFL

http://www.politicspa.com/toomey-i-sure-don’t-know-why-it-took-three-months-to-say-so/11925/

CoMoChief
05-28-2010, 04:27 PM
What will the explanation be?

1) The dog ate our homework.
2) Sestak misunderstood the word 'job' didn't really mean 'employment'.
3) Sestak is seriously deranged which is why we backed Specter.
4) Bush originally offered Sestak the job and we were just extending the offer again.
5) Yes we actually might have broken the law but we're the Obama administration so who cares?


Just like his birth certificate.

God what a fuckin clown this guy is.

Direckshun
05-28-2010, 11:34 PM
I throw fits about what both sides do/did.

What does that make me?

Hm. Possibly a liberal.

Do you hate America? That's the liberal litmus test.

go bowe
05-28-2010, 11:40 PM
Hm. Possibly a liberal.

Do you hate America? That's the liberal litmus test.:LOL: :LOL: :LOL:

The Mad Crapper
07-16-2010, 06:44 AM
An Obama Administration Job for Sen. Specter?

July 15, 2010 6:27 PM

Sen. Arlen Specter, D-Pennsylvania, has informed the White House that he would like to consider remaining in public service after his Senate term ends at the end of this session, and White House officials are keeping an open mind about possible job openings for him.

Specter, who was defeated in his March primary by Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Pennsylvania, is a close friend of Vice President Joe Biden and someone praised for his leadership in pushing for greater funding for the National Institutes of Health.

Sources said the job discussions are far from anything other than preliminary, and were not part of any "deal" when Specter switched parties and began supporting President Obama's agenda in earnest.

Neither the White House nor Specter had any comment.

Talk of such a job, however, has raised eyebrows among Specter’s Republican Senate colleagues, who are now eyeing his votes with added scrutiny. For instance, Specter seemed not particularly impressed with Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan, whose nomination as solicitor general Specter opposed last year. This week, he announced support for her Supreme Court nomination.

-Jake Tapper

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/07/an-obama-administration-job-for-senator-specter.html

notorious
07-16-2010, 06:58 AM
Hm. Possibly a liberal.

Do you hate America? That's the liberal litmus test.

LMAO


I just caught this today. :)