How to Join Member's Area Private Library Search Today's Topics p Login
Main Forums Discussion Tech Talk Mature Content Archives
   Nav Win
 Discussion
 The Alley
 Sestak - Liar or Destroyer?   [ Page: 1  2  ]
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
Follow us on Facebook

 Moderated by: Ron   (Admins )

 
User Options
Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Admin Print Send ECard
Passions in Poetry

Sestak - Liar or Destroyer?

 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


0 posted 05-26-2010 01:21 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Either Sestak is a big Liar or the White House is in real trouble....and nobody's talking.
Mysteria
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Laureate
since 03-07-2001
Posts 19652
British Columbia, Canada


1 posted 05-26-2010 02:04 PM       View Profile for Mysteria   Email Mysteria   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Mysteria

More research.  See email
threadbear
Senior Member
since 07-10-2008
Posts 729
Indy


2 posted 05-26-2010 06:54 PM       View Profile for threadbear   Email threadbear   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for threadbear

This story has legs.

It will be huge down the road.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


3 posted 05-27-2010 12:16 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

No doubt..
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


4 posted 05-27-2010 08:31 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Holder is doing a lot of double-talking to try to get out of appointing a special prosecutor...says he doesn't deal with hypothetical situations.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


5 posted 05-27-2010 09:14 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

You KNOW that Blagojevich is following this one closely. it's looking like multiple attempts by the White House to "fix" things by offering bribes to it's own members.

Well, it IS Chicago....
Bob K
Member Elite
since 11-03-2007
Posts 3860


6 posted 05-28-2010 05:29 AM       View Profile for Bob K   Email Bob K   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Bob K



     Am I supposed to start talking about Texas Politics now?  Or Florida Politics?  Or is "Chicago Politics" supposed to be code for something?  How about Mississippi Politics?  I know, what about "Republican Dirty Tricks?"

     I tell you what, why not specify if you can, exactly what you mean by "Chicago Politics?" and try to differentiate it from any of the other kinds of politics I mentioned above.  What about Chicago Politics makes it meaningful to you folks?  How is it distinct from Georgia Politics? and Alabama Politics?

     I'd simply like to see how this sort of thing is distinguished from, say, a smear.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


7 posted 05-28-2010 08:09 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

How about discussing the topic instead of trying to change it?
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


8 posted 05-28-2010 08:20 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Jeff, the general consensus is that Sestak will come out saying he "misunderstood" the offer. (ref my Democrat dictionary to understand that one). I'm not sure that's gonna fly. Obama said yesterday there will be an explanation coming soon, which means they haven't worked out the kinks yet in what they plan to peddle to the public.

Long legs......
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


9 posted 05-28-2010 11:43 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

It seems Rahm had Bill Clinton chat with Sestak about the possibility of a position for dropping out of the race and that the White House lawyers are describing it as a 'casual' conversation, unhinged from an actual job offer, since Clinton couldn't guarantee Sestak anything, being just an ex-president. Still seems corrupt to me if Clinton did it at the behest of Rahm and/or Obama. They may have skirted the law, managing to stay on the right side of it, technically, but it seems to me that attempts were made to rig an election, and I think Sestak and Clinton both need to be put under oath, to attempt to find out just how casual the conversation was.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/28/white-house-asked-clinton-urge-sestak-drop-senate-race/
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


10 posted 05-28-2010 03:44 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

it's looking like multiple attempts by the White House to "fix" things by offering bribes to it's own members.



A "bribe" is an offer of something of value for an in-kind official act -- such as a vote on a particular bill before congress.

Being offered a job is not a 'bribe'.  When Hilary Clinton was offered the job of Secretary of State she had to resign her seat in Senate.  That's not a bribe -- nor is it interfering in the election of New York's Senate elections.

This is much ado about naught.

I'm shocked, shocked that there's gambling here!
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


11 posted 05-28-2010 06:05 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Lr, that's about as bad of a definition I have seen and the comparison to Hillary rather foolish. A bribe can also be a payment for an official INaction, as it was in this case. Sestak doesn't run against Spector, Sestak gets rewarded. That's a bribe in any dictionary you care to use.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


12 posted 05-28-2010 06:40 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

Well, damage control has begun. Bill Clinton now says he's the one who acted as an intermediary with regards to Sestek, offering him an unpaid job on an advisory board.

Are these people real? A congressional participant would drop out of the race for an unpaid job? And who should we believe? Bill (I did not have sex with that woman!) Clinton. Riiiiight!!!
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


13 posted 05-28-2010 07:48 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

quote:
18 U.S.C. § 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.


18 U.S.C. § 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.



There's no doubt in my mind that they broke the law, and no doubt that they will get away with it.

The law doesn't stipulate that the position has to be a paid position, and I think using Clinton as the go-between, qualifies as an indirect offer, which is also illegal.

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


14 posted 05-28-2010 07:51 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

A bribe can also be a payment for an official INaction



Certainly.  If I offered a police officer money not to give me a ticket -- that's a bribe.

The keyword here Mike is OFFICIAL -- as in -- pertaining to the office one holds -- the duties that fall within the powers of the officeholder.  If I offered a congressman money to write a book so that I might publish it -- say, Newt Gingrich, that's not a bribe -- it's a business deal.  If I offered him a "book deal" so that he would vote or not-vote for a particular piece of legislation -- that's a bribe.

Every person who works in the Obama administration was OFFERED A JOB! That's going to require a lot of special prosecutors.  

What happened here was simply political horsetrading.  
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


15 posted 05-28-2010 07:59 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Political horsetrading which happens to be illegal because its intent was to rig an election, L.R. It's spelled out quite clearly in the two statutes I listed above.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


16 posted 05-28-2010 08:24 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

That's right, Denise.
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


17 posted 05-28-2010 09:56 PM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

WASHINGTON – Forced to disclose backstage political bargaining, President Barack Obama's embarrassed White House acknowledged on Friday that it enlisted Bill Clinton  to try to ease Rep. Joe Sestak out of Pennsylvania's Senate primary with a job offer.

The admission left many questions unanswered, however, and Republicans aren't likely to let the issue rest. For Obama, the revelations called into question his repeated promises to run an open government that was above back room deals.

Seeking to quiet the clamor from Republicans and some Democrats over a possible political trade, the White House released a report describing the offer that was intended to clear a path for Sen. Arlen Specter to win the Democratic nomination.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_pennsylvania_senate
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


18 posted 05-28-2010 10:27 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Perhaps the PA Attorney General will convene a grand jury to investigate and put these people under oath, as recommended by Dick Morris and Judge Napolitano:
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/05/27/penn-ag-tom-corbett-should-empanel-grand-jury-in-sestak-affair/#more-1026
http://www.dickmorris.com/blog/2010/05/28/sestak-scandal-grows-and-still-stinks/
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 06-05-99
Posts 26302
Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA


19 posted 05-29-2010 08:54 AM       View Profile for Balladeer   Email Balladeer   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems   Click to visit Balladeer's Home Page   View IP for Balladeer

WASHINGTON — Forced to disclose backstage political bargaining, President Barack Obama's embarrassed White House said Friday it had enlisted Bill Clinton to try to ease Rep. Joe Sestak out of Pennsylvania's Senate primary by offering him an unpaid position on an advisory board.

Nothing wrong with that, the White House said. Oh, yes, there was, Republicans countered.

The administration admission — it said Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had asked the former president to call Sestak — left many questions unanswered, and it seemed unlikely the issue had been put to rest. For Obama, the revelations called into question his repeated promises to run an open government that was above back room deals. And for Sestak, they raised questions why he kept talking about up the offer — a 60-second conversation, he said Friday — in the first place.


White House Counsel Robert Bauer rendered his own verdict in a two-page report that said there was no improper conduct in the offer. No one in the administration discussed the offer with Sestak, Bauer said. The report did not say what, if any, contacts or promises the White House had with Specter on the matter. It also did not reveal whether Obama was aware of Clinton's role.


Obama not aware of Clinton's role? Billy just decided to do it himself? Or Emmanuel and company just decided to do it behind Obama's back?

Clinton and Obama shared a private lunch at the White House on Thursday, although White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said he was not aware the Pennsylvania primary was a topic.

Of course not. Just because it was a front page topic with criminal implications, why would Obama and Clinton discuss it?

Specter declined to comment. Clinton, campaigning in Little Rock, for Sen. Blanche Lincoln's re-election bid, ignored reporters' shouted questions.

Wonder why......
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-05-28-sestak-obama-specter-clinton_N.htm?csp=34news&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomWashington-To pStories+%28News+-+Washington+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo


Ringo
Deputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 10 ToursDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 TourDeputy Moderator 1 Tour
Member Elite
since 02-20-2003
Posts 3696
Saluting with misty eyes


20 posted 05-29-2010 09:50 AM       View Profile for Ringo   Email Ringo   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Ringo

The hassle with this is that EVERY administration, both sides of the isle, have done it.
Everyone here knows I have no love for this administration and would do just fine seeing it out of office (although, in order, Biden, Pelosi, and r are next in line... might have to re-think this for now); however, the White House Council has stated that they investigated it and there was nothing illegal done.
I know they were appoinged by Democrats, yet there is this pesky thing called the Bar Association that will annhialate them if they are covering up a felony.

While Mike and Denise are talking about the various Republicans demanding action, I figure we need some equal time:
quote:
Even some Democrats are sounding-off on the matter. On Wednesday, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell -- one of Specter's strongest allies during the primary fight -- became the latest high-profile Democrat to call on the White House to cough up information on the matter.

This is coming from the Huffington Post
quote:
Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin and Sestak ally Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-N.Y.) also called on the the White House to provide an explanation for Sestak's repeated claims that he was offered a high-ranking position.

Also from the Huffington Post
quote:
Two top Democrats — party chief Tim Kaine and Dick Durbin of Illinois, the party’s second-ranking leader in the Senate — said during the week that the White House and Sestak needed to address the questions.

The Boston Herald chiming in.

If this is indeed "business as usual, then where is the "Change" we were promised... it certainly isn;t in my pocket (but that is another discussion)? Where is the "open government"? (well, to be fair, it is open to anyone willing to give them cash or to be involved in their back-room dealings, and to assist them with their agenda).

There are people from both sides of the isle requesting more information and a fullo accounting. If nothing improper was done- as was stated by White House counsil- then where in the name of Thor's Holy Hammer is the hassle in letting us know the full story?

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting, "WHAT A RIDE

Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


21 posted 05-29-2010 10:14 AM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

quote:

    Sen. S.I. Hayakawa on Wednesday spurned a Reagan administration suggestion that if he drops out of the crowded Republican Senate primary race in California, President Reagan would find him a job.  

    "I'm not interested," said the 75-year-old Hayakawa.

    "I do not want to be an ambassador, and I do not want an administration post."

    [...]

    In an interview earlier this week, Ed Rollins, who will become the president's chief political adviser in January, said Hayakawa would be offered an administration post if he decided not to seek re-election. No offer has been made directly to Hayakawa, Rollins said.

    Similarly, Hayakawa said in a statement, "I have not contacted the White House in regard to any administration or ambassadorial post, and they have not been in contact with me."  
http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1454&dat=19811126&id=ibcsAAAAIBAJ&sjid=HhQEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5060,5317656



quote:

President Bush occasionally intervened in Republican primaries (including on behalf of Senator Specter in 2004).  The less partisan politics in the White House the better (I would like to see the President abolish the White House Office of Political Affairs).  This, however, is nothing new and it hardly rises to the level of a major ethics controversy.



The allegation that the job offer was somehow a “bribe” in return for Sestak not running in the primary is difficult to support.  Sestak, if he had taken a job in the Administration, would not have been permitted to run in the Pennsylvania primary.   The Hatch Act prohibits a federal employee from being a candidate for nomination or election to a partisan political office.  5 U.S.C. § 7323(a)(3).  He had to choose one or the other, but he could not choose both.



The job offer may have been a way of getting Sestak out of Specter’s way, but this also is nothing new.  Many candidates for top Administration appointments are politically active in the President’s political party.  Many are candidates or are considering candidacy in primaries.  White House political operatives don’t like contentious fights in their own party primaries and sometimes suggest jobs in the Administration for persons who otherwise would be contenders.  For the White House, this is usually a “win-win” situation, giving the Administration politically savvy appointees in the Executive Branch and fewer contentious primaries for the Legislative Branch.  This may not be best for voters who have less choice as a result, and Sestak thus should be commended for saying “no”.  The job offer, however, is hardly a “bribe” when it is one of two alternatives that are mutually exclusive.

--Ron Painter (chief ethics lawyer to President G.W. Bush) http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2010/05/joe-sestaks-bribe-scandal-another-ethics-sideshow.html


Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


22 posted 05-29-2010 11:39 AM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

The practice still violates 18 U.S.C. § 600 and 18 U.S.C. § 595, no matter how commonplace the practice has become and no matter how many previous Administrations may have engaged in violating them. Pointing to the bad acts of others is not a valid defense.
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 08-22-99
Posts 23002


23 posted 05-29-2010 01:37 PM       View Profile for Denise   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Denise

Interesting. A little sloppy in their coverup story:
http://ht.ly/17xRmV
Local Rebel
Member Ascendant
since 12-21-1999
Posts 5742
Southern Abstentia


24 posted 05-29-2010 07:34 PM       View Profile for Local Rebel   Email Local Rebel   Edit/Delete Message      Find Poems  View IP for Local Rebel

Byron York is an idiot. (and so is Ed Morrisey) He's good for comic relief though Denise;

quote:

In a little-noticed passage Friday





By those who CAN'T READ!

The actual passage;

quote:

The White House did not disclose what those options were, but people briefed on the matter said one option was an appointment to the president’s Intelligence Advisory Board, a panel of prominent Americans outside government who provide independent oversight of the nation’s spy apparatus and advise the president. But White House officials discovered that it would not work because Mr. Sestak could not serve on the board while still serving in Congress.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/05/28/white-house-used-bill-clinton-to-ask-sestak-to-drop-out-of-race/



Looks like somebody's trying to do some 'gotcha journalism' in there Denise.  

Tbe 9/12 project...

quote:

Pointing to the bad acts of others is not a valid defense.



With this I quite agree Denise -- but these are not bad acts... merely politics.  We would have no government at all if the White House could never offer jobs to politicians, and there would be no political parties if coordination of candidates is illegal.

Sorry.  This is not your impeachable moment.
 
 Post A Reply Post New Topic   Go to the Next Oldest/Previous Topic Return to Topic Page Go to the Next Newest Topic 
All times are ET (US) Top
  User Options
>> Discussion >> The Alley >> Sestak - Liar or Destroyer?   [ Page: 1  2  ] Format for Better Printing EMail to a Friend Not Available
Print Send ECard

 

pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Today's Topics | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary



© Passions in Poetry and netpoets.com 1998-2013
All Poetry and Prose is copyrighted by the individual authors