A Felon in the White House?

[GMScud]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I'm not sure what Chicago style politics mean, but IF a crime was committed ---and I've heard Rep. Darrell (R) Issa throw this same violation around-- I would have to think that at least a specific offer for a paid position had to be offered.

At issue, is whether the White House broke federal law that prohibits exerting the promise of influence for obtaining a federal job, interfering in elections of promising employment for political activity. (I pulled this from a source)

Sestak was offered a non-compensated position, not a federal paying job. He had a thirty second conversation with Bill Clinton about a position on a "presidential board". Nothing specific was offered or declined, per Sestak. This is a bunch of political hay that's going nowhere except for the Sunday talk shows.

I wouldn't go that far. Gibbs is getting peppered with questions about it daily. Most likely it's not as serious as some are saying, but I don't think it's the "nothing to see here, move along" afterthought that the White House claims it to be.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GMScud

I wouldn't go that far. Gibbs is getting peppered with questions about it daily. Most likely it's not as serious as some are saying, but I don't think it's the "nothing to see here, move along" afterthought that the White House claims it to be.

Gibbs is referring to the memo because he/they want to stay on message and not give the media a sound bite and keep this thing going for another week. Why create a story when there isn't one? When the president was asked during the his oil spill presser about the "deal", he essentially dodged the question. Smart move. I think Joe Sestak is the best person to answer all the questions and he's doing that.

The mistake that was made, if any, was involving Bill Clinton. He's just an easy target. But from what I understand Bill Clinton and Joe Sestak have been close friends for years, so it makes sense that he was the messenger.

As far as arm twisting goes, I would say it's organizing your political party to maintain power and advance your agenda. Each party has that right to do that and should position themselves to be as powerful and effective as possible to serve their interests and the people they must answer to. As long as everything is done above board, let's play chess. There's nothing unethical, unusual, or as far as I can see, any impropriety occurred. The irony in all of this is that Sestak is probably more in line with Obama's views than Arlen Specter ever was, so it's still a win for the White House.

Anyway, 'nuff of that.