Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

MSNBC: Sestak avoids questions on WH job offer

Teller

By Teller
in The Tailgate

Recommended Posts

Burgold

Burgold

Posted
Posted
This makes me scratch my head a bit. I got the impression that while the administration would have liked to have Specter win, they weren't exactly going all out to back him.

Well, we may also be jumping the gun. There are job offers and job offers. It could be that Sestak was part of a feeling out process where staffers were preinterviewing guys who they thought might have the credentials to get a gig. It's possible that despite being talked to that there there were suggestions, but no offers actually made. Possible that he was talked to about a job, but not offered a job.

It could be he heard a job offer where there was none. It could be that this was a shady deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thiebear

Thiebear

Posted
Posted

From the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/16/us/politics/16legal.html

There is no evidence, at least none that has been disclosed, that the governor actually received anything of value — and the Senate appointment has yet to be made.

Ever since the country’s founding, prosecutors, defense lawyers and juries have been trying to define the difference between criminality and political deal-making. They have never established a clear-cut line between the offensive and the illegal, and the hours of wiretapped conversations involving Mr. Blagojevich, filled with crass, profane talk about benefiting from the Senate vacancy, may fall into a legal gray area.

Can someone show me where Pres. Obama's is different, other than the fact we have Sestak saying its true in this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
aREDSKIN

aREDSKIN

Posted
Posted
Well, we may also be jumping the gun. There are job offers and job offers. It could be that Sestak was part of a feeling out process where staffers were preinterviewing guys who they thought might have the credentials to get a gig. It's possible that despite being talked to that there there were suggestions, but no offers actually made. Possible that he was talked to about a job, but not offered a job.

It could be he heard a job offer where there was none. It could be that this was a shady deal.

I'll give you an A for your efforts in the plausible denialbility spin albeit it's simply ludicrous.

Are you dizzy yet?? :rolleyes::D

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ax

Ax

Posted
Posted
Oh goody, another well-reasoned position from the right wingers!

The only good thing arguments like this - equating two different things and claiming they are the same thing because it suits your purpose - is that they are so easy to dismiss.

Oh goody, another piss poor defensive spin position from worshipers of the Haavard Hypocrite.

The only good thing arguments like this - equating two different standards to a party and claiming that what your party does is not the same thing because it suits your purpose - is that they are even easier to dismiss.

Don't be a hack.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted

Even the LA Times wants an answer

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-sestak-20100527,0,4865824.story

It's no secret that the Obama administration wanted Rep. Joe Sestak (D-Pa.) to drop his primary challenge to Republican-turned-Democrat Sen. Arlen Specter. But did President Obama's representatives try to entice Sestak into leaving the race by promising him a job? It's a simple question, and one that Sestak already has answered in the affirmative, but the administration continues to treat the issue as much ado about nothing.

Actually, it's much ado about something. Yes, political factors often influence appointments in unsavory ways — witness the practice of awarding ambassadorships to campaign contributors. But as Rep. Darrell Issa of Vista, the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, points out, a federal statute makes it a crime, punishable by a fine or a year's imprisonment, to offer a job to someone "as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity or for the support of or opposition to any candidate or any political party."

We seldom agree with Issa, but in this case we believe his questions deserve a response. Sestak too owes Congress and the public a thorough explanation. After raising the issue when he was challenging Specter, he has turned coy. Now that he's the Democratic nominee, his position is that further details are "for others to talk about."

"Others" means the administration, which has been evasive about whether a job was discussed with Sestak, and if so, what it was and who made the overture. White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has said that conversations between the administration and Sestak "weren't inappropriate in any way." If that's the case, why not describe those conversations in detail?

» Don't miss a thing. Get breaking news alerts delivered to your inbox.

The administration no doubt thinks that Issa has a partisan agenda and has been carried away by inquisitorial enthusiasm. Not only has he called for an explanation from the White House, he also has asked the Justice Department to appoint a special prosecutor to determine whether laws were broken. (The department declined, telling Issa that any criminal investigation would be handled by career prosecutors.) But the easiest way to take the wind out of Issa's political sails is to answer his questions.

Copyright © 2010, The Los Angeles Times

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted

Full CYA mode right now.

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

Obama Says 'Official' Explanation Coming 'Shortly' on Alleged Sestak Job Offer

Published May 27, 2010

| FOXNews.com

Print Email Share Comments (0) Text Size

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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Thiebear

Thiebear

Posted
Posted

Please remember from the past....

Don't Formulate an answer: Tell the truth that nothing happened.

Or don't say anything and wait for the lawyers to talk.

Anything else will repeat the past and remind us all that the coverup is 10x worse than the issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mcsluggo

mcsluggo

Posted
Posted
Full CYA mode right now.

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

Obama Says 'Official' Explanation Coming 'Shortly' on Alleged Sestak Job Offer

Published May 27, 2010

| FOXNews.com

Print Email Share Comments (0) Text Size

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.

Kilmer, you are such a useless hack. seriously. :)

Would you care to elaborate on how the president and his press secretary saying <we did nothing wrong and we will issue an offical statement on the matter>> is "cover your ass" mode?

have you EVER actually provided insight? :) really!?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MEANDWARF

MEANDWARF

Posted
Posted
I'm pretty sure this is not accurate in this context. If it were, every President since John Adams probably broke the law.

(I admit that I am speaking out of my azz on this subject - I know nothing of the law in this area).

Oh yeah, can you be more pacific, or give an example of who and when this has previously happen?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
MEANDWARF

MEANDWARF

Posted
Posted
Well, on the right wing side they are talking impeachment. Left wing side, probably saying it's a big right wing Sean Hannity-Sarah Palin conspiracy!

I think some of the left want Sestak to be more pacific and name names. Both sides want answers from the White House.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Evil Genius

The Evil Genius

Posted
Posted
Oh yeah, can you be more pacific, or give an example of who and when this has previously happen?

Famous example would be Reagan. Reagan offered a California senator a job in his administration if he dropped out of a senate primary race in California.

That's why I am curious about the actual law(s) broken and when/how they came into existence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
88Comrade2000

88Comrade2000

Posted
Posted
Famous example would be Reagan. Reagan offered a California senator a job in his administration if he dropped out of a senate primary race in California.

That's why I am curious about the actual law(s) broken and when/how they came into existence.

Well, it's time to impeach Reagan. Oh, he died 6 years ago. Well, impeach his son. Send Ronnie to jail for his father's crimes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted
Kilmer, you are such a useless hack. seriously. :)

Would you care to elaborate on how the president and his press secretary saying <we did nothing wrong and we will issue an offical statement on the matter>> is "cover your ass" mode?

have you EVER actually provided insight? :) really!?

seriously, you can call me names and ignore my points, but you do it because the facts are never your friend. You (and the majority of the left wing here) rely on lies, deceit and 8th grade debate tactics that are easily exposed and refuted.

If this was a simple issue, then it would have been answered with a simple "We offered him this" Or "We didnt offer him a job". The fact that they have done neither means they are checking with council to make sure nobody ends up in front of a grand jury.

Which will come up again if the GOP takes over either house this fall because they will get supeona power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...