The Sestak Bribe - Who in the WH made the call?

[Toot La-Rue]

Offering a qualified person a real job is not a bribe, even if it has other benefits. The person could not hold both jobs simultaneously.

True on the first. Pointlessly obvious on the second.

But what if the job offer were as the congressman said it was (and that now twice, publicly) - an offer contingent on his not running in the senate race? Do you see any issues with this administration seeking to manipulate a senate race by bribing a United States Congressman not to run against "their guy?"

 

[Toot La-Rue]

If found to be true, it is a serious offense. Unfortunately all we have is Sestak's accusation with no evidence or names. Apparently, this happend months ago. If Sestak's story is true, wouldn't he also be in trouble for not coming forward with information to a crime? If Sestak is lying, then he is again in trouble. Either way, Sestak may be in trouble regardless if the story is true or false.

I quite agree - serious enough that it ought to be investigated, at the very least. And if the Justice Department (or the media for that matter) had the integrity it is supposed to represent, it OUGHT to initiate an investigation.

 

[ArteestX]

LOL not a scandal? Sorry bribery is a scandal. If Bush had done something like this, liberals would be calling for impeachment. Total double standard.

Are you kidding? Bush and Cheney DID do this, and no one called for their impeachment. Cheney told Pawlenty in 2001 to drop his primary challenge to Norm Coleman in exchange for future support. They clearly interfered in a Republican primary and offered monetary support in exchange for dropping out of a Senate race. And it wasn't a scandal! Whatsoever!!!

If we're going to lower the standard of bribery to this level, then you might as well recall every ambassador who ever served. The vast majority of those people got the job because they donated money to a candidate. Donate money to politician, politician gets you a job! It's a bribe!!!

Come on, at least come up with a REAL scandal......

 

[katherine2001]

Haven't you heard? Anything Republicans do is fine--no matter how corrupt the actions they commit are, they will be defended! While non Republicans will admit when one of theirs does something wrong, the Republicans never admit such a thing.

 

[Toot La-Rue]

Haven't you heard? Anything Republicans do is fine--no matter how corrupt the actions they commit are, they will be defended! While non Republicans will admit when one of theirs does something wrong, the Republicans never admit such a thing.

You're kidding, right? Like if this happened in a Republican administration the media - AND all donkey iconers here - wouldn't be all over it like flies on doodoo?

You know darn well you would - so why the pretense?

 

[Toot La-Rue]

Are you kidding? Bush and Cheney DID do this, and no one called for their impeachment. Cheney told Pawlenty in 2001 to drop his primary challenge to Norm Coleman in exchange for future support. They clearly interfered in a Republican primary and offered monetary support in exchange for dropping out of a Senate race. And it wasn't a scandal! Whatsoever!!!

If we're going to lower the standard of bribery to this level, then you might as well recall every ambassador who ever served. The vast majority of those people got the job because they donated money to a candidate. Donate money to politician, politician gets you a job! It's a bribe!!!

Come on, at least come up with a REAL scandal......

Was what they did wrong?

 

[JustOneWay]

You're kidding, right? Like if this happened in a Republican administration the media - AND all donkey iconers here - wouldn't be all over it like flies on doodoo?

You know darn well you would - so why the pretense?

post #23 seems a lot like the OP.

 

[ArteestX]

Was what they did wrong?

No! That's business as usual. You scratch my back, I scratch yours. You do me a favor, I do you a favor. Cheney did nothing illegal or unethical, which is why no Democrat feigned fake outrage or tried to drum it up into a stupid scandal at the time.

The question is, do YOU think what they did was wrong? Do you think the Justice department should, at the very least, open an inquiry into what Cheney did? I say no to Cheney and to Obama. You say yes to Obama. What about Cheney? Was it wrong?

 

[katherine2001]

You're kidding, right? Like if this happened in a Republican administration the media - AND all donkey iconers here - wouldn't be all over it like flies on doodoo?

You know darn well you would - so why the pretense?

No, I am not kidding. There are very, very few Conservative posters on this board who will admit that the Republicans have ever done anything wrong, including Bush/Cheney.

And isn't the media you are talking about, supposedly a bunch of lefties and communists? Would Fox news be all over Conservatives who did corrupt things and would they condemn them for their actions? And also, has the donkey now become the icon of Conservatives? My point is that the Conservatives (at least on this forum) never admit that something a Republican may have done was wrong (Edmund Burke is one of the very few and we see what he is getting from his fellow Conservatives here).

 

[DaisyDay]

You're kidding, right? Like if this happened in a Republican administration the media - AND all donkey iconers here - wouldn't be all over it like flies on doodoo?

Because everyone behaves just as badly as you have, trying to drum up scandal where there is none?

You know darn well you would - so why the pretense?

Prove it - there are still posts here from the last adminstration - years and years and years of posts - so find some that back your contention or apologize.

Calling a job offer a bribe doesn't make it one.

The Republican majority whip was remarkable strict in keeping its fellow Republicans in line by threatening and meting out punishments and incentives (withholding or granting chairmanships, appropriations, campaign funds) - why do you think Jeffers jumped ship? The K Street Project went even further and coerced lobbying firms to hire Republicans only.

Find some real scandal - making it up is taking the easy way out. Wolf!

 

[Toot La-Rue]

No, I am not kidding. There are very, very few Conservative posters on this board who will admit that the Republicans have ever done anything wrong, including Bush/Cheney.

And isn't the media you are talking about, supposedly a bunch of lefties and communists? Would Fox news be all over Conservatives who did corrupt things and would they condemn them for their actions? And also, has the donkey now become the icon of Conservatives? My point is that the Conservatives (at least on this forum) never admit that something a Republican may have done was wrong (Edmund Burke is one of the very few and we see what he is getting from his fellow Conservatives here).

Well I'm a conservative and I'm not one of those who will unequivocally absolve Republicans of any wrongs whatsoever, because it would be untrue. So to suggest that "anything Republicans do is fine, no matter how corrupt the actions they commit are" is just wrong - and wrong in particular of me because I've never taken such a stance as you inferred I did/do.

But frankly, I've seen little in the way of acknowledgements from liberals and leftists (and masquerading conservatives) on this site that their Democrat politicians are anything but pristine in their behaviors either.

From what I can tell, discussions here are more driven by emotion and immediate partisan side-taking than they are about seeking the truth of a matter - or even just to discuss it rationally - and one's opinions on a matter, when facts may be lacking or yet forthcoming, are nevertheless instantly labeled, categorized, challenged, and/or ridiculed as "being of the other side" - as they have been in this case. One mentions "Fox News" or "CNN" and the immediate reaction is "sheeyaahh - like they're credible" - as if neither entity has anything credible at all to say - ever.

Now perhaps a lot of this is due to the fact that the lines have been drawn in the sand long ago and these issues addressed so many times ad nauseum that all anyone on this site can do is instantly label, categorize, challenge, and ridicule. Dunno - but the blanket generalizations and overt animosity so readily apparent when either side starts a thread here is anything BUT constructive, let alone healthy.

But I stand by my reasons for starting this thread - and my opinion stands that this sort of stuff is wrong and bad for the country, regardless which party does it. Moreover, I'm disgusted by the lack of press it's getting - but that's me (I can't help it, that's how I feel). If you disagree or think that's ridiculous, that I'm ridiculous for feeling that way, fine - but don't in the process blindly accuse me, or judge my intent in posting this thread of being like every other conservative here - because if nothing else, it's simply propogating the very thing you're accusing me of.

 

[JustOneWay]

Well I'm a conservative and I'm not one of those who will unequivocally absolve Republicans of any wrongs whatsoever, because it would be untrue. So to suggest that "anything Republicans do is fine, no matter how corrupt the actions they commit are" is just wrong - and wrong in particular of me because I've never taken such a stance as you inferred I did/do.

But frankly, I've seen little in the way of acknowledgements from liberals and leftists (and masquerading conservatives) on this site that their Democrat politicians are anything but pristine in their behaviors either.

From what I can tell, discussions here are more driven by emotion and immediate partisan side-taking than they are about seeking the truth of a matter - or even just to discuss it rationally - and one's opinions on a matter, when facts may be lacking or yet forthcoming, are nevertheless instantly labeled, categorized, challenged, and/or ridiculed as "being of the other side" - as they have been in this case. One mentions "Fox News" or "CNN" and the immediate reaction is "sheeyaahh - like they're credible" - as if neither entity has anything credible at all to say - ever.

Now perhaps a lot of this is due to the fact that the lines have been drawn in the sand long ago and these issues addressed so many times ad nauseum that all anyone on this site can do is instantly label, categorize, challenge, and ridicule. Dunno - but the blanket generalizations and overt animosity so readily apparent when either side starts a thread here is anything BUT constructive, let alone healthy.

But I stand by my reasons for starting this thread - and my opinion stands that this sort of stuff is wrong and bad for the country, regardless which party does it. Moreover, I'm disgusted by the lack of press it's getting - but that's me (I can't help it, that's how I feel). If you disagree or think that's ridiculous, that I'm ridiculous for feeling that way, fine - but don't in the process blindly accuse me, or judge my intent in posting this thread of being like every other conservative here - because if nothing else, it's simply propogating the very thing you're accusing me of.

I am not sure you quite understand American politics. It is all based upon lobbying, which is "legal" bribery. It is so overwhelming that this issue in the thread pales in comparison. The reason this is getting no press is because it is not important in the scheme of things.

 

[Toot La-Rue]

Because everyone behaves just as badly as you have, trying to drum up scandal where there is none?

Let me clue you in on something - "OPINION does NOT equal BEHAVIOR." Yet you apparently think it does, because I hold an opinion on something that you don't share or don't like - and because I EXPRESS IT - you somehow feel it right or proper to accuse me of "behaving badly."

Do you have ANY idea what manner of slippery slope equating opinions with behaviors is?

Find some real scandal - making it up is taking the easy way out. Wolf!

Let me clue you in on something else - I didn't make this up, as you accuse me of doing - nor am I the only one who believes it scandalous behavior.

http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/05/27/joe_sestak_story_will_not_die
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...issa-sestak-scandal-could-be-obamas-watergate
http://michellemalkin.com/2010/05/27/obama-responds-to-sestak-scandal-just-trust-me/
http://www.judicialwatch.org/news/2010/may/judicial-watch-statement-sestak-scandal
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://...sAcwAg&usg=AFQjCNFMgrTOdu9gg83t4SvJBtfHCE6ZZw

...and these are just some of those on the first page of a Google Search for "Sestak Scandal" - perhaps I made all these up too?

If you don't think it's scandalous behavior, fine - and if you don't like people who hold, let alone express their opinions to the contrary, fine - you had every opportunity NOT to respond to this thread. No one FORCED you to post what you did - no one but you - who for some unknown reason felt compelled to respond.

You felt you just HAD to say something, you just HAD to express YOUR OPINION - so what do you do?

You accuse me of "behaving badly" for expressing my opinion. Hypothetically speaking, what would that say of your "behavior?"

Well if someone's opinion now constitutes "bad behavior" - then all I can say is that Obama's "fundamental transformation" of America is unfortunately working just fine - at least on some.

 

[Toot La-Rue]

I am not sure you quite understand American politics. It is all based upon lobbying, which is "legal" bribery. It is so overwhelming that this issue in the thread pales in comparison. The reason this is getting no press is because it is not important in the scheme of things.

Now I don't "quite understand American politics." I will grant this - I definitely don't understand what "legal bribery" is. Is that sort of like "legal theft" or "legal murder" - or "legal illegality?"

Here's part of my problem with ANY white house doing this - we have three distinct branches of government - purposefully separated by the Constitution as a "balance of power" - a system of checks and balances that is part of the fundamental structure of our government.

When you have an executive branch attempting to influence the outcome of a legislative branch process, you coopt the balance of power and, at best, strain the built-in checks and balances set up in our Constitution.

Now, in the Sestak case - the "scandal" encompasses both that, and the fact that Mr. Sestak himself is the one who made the allegation. Either Sestak is telling the truth or he is lying. I'm assuming he's telling the truth - but the scandal morphs significantly if he's lying. Now you have a sitting member of congress and an ex-Navy admiral lying, not once, but twice about what he alleged took place. Honestly, if I were president, and knew such allegations to be a lie - I'd do something about it.

At the same time, the white house did something similar to a Mr. Andrew Romanov in Colorado last year - offering him a job if he wouldn't run against Senator Bennett (the "accidental" Senator from Colorado). Personally, I find this behavior by the white house just as disgusting - because now the wh - the executive branch of the federal government is attempting to coopt the political process of one of the individual states.

Frankly, "that everyone does it" or that this is "politics as usual" in no way constitutes an excuse for such behaviors.

 

[JustOneWay]

Now I don't "quite understand American politics." I will grant this - I definitely don't understand what "legal bribery" is. Is that sort of like "legal theft" or "legal murder" - or "legal illegality?"

I did not write "legal bribery" If you cant even get a quote correct, how can you figure out politics?

 

[TeaPartier]

No, I am not kidding. There are very, very few Conservative posters on this board who will admit that the Republicans have ever done anything wrong, including Bush/Cheney.

And isn't the media you are talking about, supposedly a bunch of lefties and communists? Would Fox news be all over Conservatives who did corrupt things and would they condemn them for their actions? And also, has the donkey now become the icon of Conservatives? My point is that the Conservatives (at least on this forum) never admit that something a Republican may have done was wrong (Edmund Burke is one of the very few and we see what he is getting from his fellow Conservatives here).

I will admit Republicans have not been perfect, but the hypocrisy and lies on the part of the Democrats is laughable.

They try to blame Republicans for the current financial mess when it was clear
1. Democrats were the ones that started the mess by wanting to put people into houses that could not afford them
2. Clinton and Rubin were instrumental in getting Glass Steagall repealed-then Rubin went onto work for Citibank and use the changed law to his advantage.
3. BUSH and MCCAIN warned of the dangers Freddie and Fannie were posing, but the warnings fell on deaf ears as Democrats and Freddie and Fannie were sometimes literally in the bed with one another (Barney Frank and his lover)

 

[ArteestX]

But I stand by my reasons for starting this thread - and my opinion stands that this sort of stuff is wrong and bad for the country, regardless which party does it. Moreover, I'm disgusted by the lack of press it's getting - but that's me (I can't help it, that's how I feel).

Then again I ask, do you support a Justice department investigation of how Cheney interfered with a Minnesota Senate election and offered financial reward to someone for dropping out? Was what Cheney did wrong and do you think he should be investigated? Does your outrage and disgust apply equally to Cheney?

 

[JustOneWay]

3. BUSH and MCCAIN warned of the dangers Freddie and Fannie were posing, but the warnings fell on deaf ears as Democrats and Freddie and Fannie were sometimes literally in the bed with one another (Barney Frank and his lover)

Bush, McCain and the republicans held the the White House, Senate and Congress for 5 years. The republicans were too busy blowing up innocent Iraqis to worry about what was going on at home. Where were you?

 

[DaisyDay]

I will admit Republicans have not been perfect, but the hypocrisy and lies on the part of the Democrats is laughable.

They try to blame Republicans for the current financial mess when it was clear
1. Democrats were the ones that started the mess by wanting to put people into houses that could not afford them

That's a ridiculous Republican lie designed to smear the Democrats. It usually refers to the Community Reinvestment Act which required banks that accepted deposits in a community to lend back to that community - it did not require interest only loans or faulty/fraudulent credit check procedures.

2. Clinton and Rubin were instrumental in getting Glass Steagall repealed-then Rubin went onto work for Citibank and use the changed law to his advantage.

You're referring to the Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act? Senator Phil Gramm, Rep. Jim Leach and Rep. Thomas Leach were all Republicans in a Republican majority House and Senate. Please show how Clinton and Rubin were instrumental, more instrumental, in cobbling together and passing this bill.

3. BUSH and MCCAIN warned of the dangers Freddie and Fannie were posing, but the warnings fell on deaf ears as Democrats and Freddie and Fannie were sometimes literally in the bed with one another (Barney Frank and his lover)

Bush had a Republican majority House and Senate for much of his two terms - why didn't he do something?

What a sleazy, slimy joke that doesn't make sense. What has Barney Frank's lover got to do with any of this?

What is funny is your castigating other posters here for lies and hypocrisy when you are clearly living in a glass house. (hey, a Tom Swifty!)

 

[Toot La-Rue]

Then again I ask, do you support a Justice department investigation of how Cheney interfered with a Minnesota Senate election and offered financial reward to someone for dropping out? Was what Cheney did wrong and do you think he should be investigated? Does your outrage and disgust apply equally to Cheney?

I would support a Justice Department investigation of these practices in general. I wouldn't support ONLY an investigation of the Cheney affair (and not, say of the Sestak affair) - but if the investigation looked into what both parties are / were doing, I would support that, yes - because I think it needs to stop.

As I responded to another above, yes, my "outrage" applies to whomever does this sort of stuff because I think, among other things, it fundamentally violates the principle of checks and balances established by the Constitution. I don't want the White House attempting to influence the legislative mix with these sort of practices. I'm fine if they want to speak on behalf of this candidate or that, or voice their support for - but offering compensation to a candidate so they won't run against "their" candidate is imho wrong because it unduly influences candidacies by bypassing the citizenry of the individual states who would otherwise determine, via the caucus process who they want to run for office.

Congress should not be a tool of the executive office to manipulate to whatever "mix" would best support it. Members of congress are those who are elected by the citizens of their respective states. Who runs for a particular office in congress is not, nor should it be, the decision of the White House. Such practices are imho tantamount to "fixing" races - regardless who does it or why.