Friday, May 28, 2010

Sestak Scandal Update

Here's the latest, as reported by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann:

The New York Times revealed this afternoon that anonymous sources have informed it that Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel asked former President Bill Clinton to offer Congressman Joe Sestak a high but unpaid advisory post in the Administration if he would drop out of the Senate race against Senator Arlen Specter. One post mentioned was service on the President's Intelligence Advisory Board.

The idea was to immunize Obama and Rahm from possible criminal prosecution by using Clinton, not a government employee, as a cut out and to keep the offer to an unpaid job in hopes of not running afoul of the federal bribery statute.

But these evasions will not blunt the force of the law. If Clinton acted at Emanuel's request, he was Rahm's agent and the Chief of Staff is still on the hook. And, an unpaid position is still "something of value" within the meaning of the bribery statute which prohibits the offering of something of value in return for a vote.

And, remember why they wanted Sestak out of the race. The White House needed Specter's vote to kill filibusters and could only get it if he would switch parties, a move he conditioned on getting Sestak to drop out and assure him a clear field for the nomination of his new party. So the bribe offer to Sestak was made by an agent of a government employee, it involved something of value, and it was to procure a vote in the Senate -- all the elements needed for a felony to have taken place.


Nameless Cynic said...

Where's the scandal? No-pay for no-play? How are you going to make that into a bribe?

Can I point out that in 1982 President Reagan offered Senator S.I. Hayakawa an actual job if he dropped out of the California GOP primary? Are you saying Reagan was guilty of bribery?

This is all just standard politics. Unbunch your panties - there's no scandal that you don't invent yourself.

Anonymous said...

If Reagan did this--then yes---he is guilty---wrong is wrong--bringing up something that happened 28 years ago--doesn't make what took place in the current administration right. So unbunch your panties and realize it wasn't an invented scandal---it is a scandal. Period.

Nameless Cynic said...

Really? Where's the scandal?

I mean, a bribe normally consists of something of value being offered, right? As opposed to, say, an unpaid advisor position?

And, incidentally, are you serious? You're going to come onto a blog calling itself "Reagan Conservatives" and say that Saint Ronnie committed a crime?


Calm down, take some deep breaths, and go have a drink with your birther buddies. Maybe they can convince you that you aren't delusional.

Anonymous said...

Actually, the law makes no differentiation between unpaid and paid positions. It is against the law regardless...

Nameless Cynic said...

Actually, the law makes no differentiation between unpaid and paid positions. It is against the law regardless...

Then we'd better start rounding up all the living presidents, and teh CEO's from every company in America. They're all guilty, by your standard.

And by the way, it's going to be hell to set up a White House administration from now on, since every job offer has to be looked on as "bribery" is an independent site and is not affiliated with any official web sites, associations, or organizations associated with President Reagan. Any views expressed or content included on this site do not necessarily reflect the views, positions, or opinions of any of the organizations or individuals named, linked, or advertised.

Questions? Contact

Copyright © 2008-2011, All rights reserved.