Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 113

Thread: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

  1. #61
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,156

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuz Life View Post
    The key determinating factor that you have (not so) cleverly omitted is the fact that the Admiral was not just offered a job,.... But that he was (according to his own words) offered a job in exchange for a political favor (namely; to drop out of a political race).

    That's a federal crime.
    for this to be a valid charge then it must have been possible for sestak to accept the appointment to the position of secretary of the navy while simultaneously running for the senate
    under the law that could not happen
    he was given an opportunity to accept the secretary of the navy position
    that acceptance - his own decision to accept that position - would have caused him to no longer be able to run for elected office
    that was nothing more than a consequence of his choosing to accept the offered position

    go here Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses
    and then page 134
    and read the following:
    As with Section 606, the Criminal Division believes that Sections 600 and 601 were not intended to reach the consideration of political factors in the hiring or termination of the small category of senior public employees who perform policymaking or confidential duties for elected officials of federal, state, or local governments. With respect to such employees, a degree of political loyalty may be considered a necessary aspect of competent performance.
    the government does not find such offers of positions in the federal sector to fall within the intent of the law, which is to ferret out and prosecute quid pro quo circumstances ... such consideration is not to be found in this instance
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  2. #62
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nun-ya-dang Bidness
    Last Seen
    02-19-11 @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,981

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    for this to be a valid charge then it must have been possible for sestak to accept the appointment to the position of secretary of the navy while simultaneously running for the senate
    under the law that could not happen
    he was given an opportunity to accept the secretary of the navy position
    that acceptance - his own decision to accept that position - would have caused him to no longer be able to run for elected office
    that was nothing more than a consequence of his choosing to accept the offered position

    go here Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses
    and then page 134
    and read the following:
    the government does not find such offers of positions in the federal sector to fall within the intent of the law, which is to ferret out and prosecute quid pro quo circumstances ... such consideration is not to be found in this instance
    No one ever specified what office or job was offered to the Admiral,...

    You are posting a red herring.

    And whether or not he could have accepted the job offer is a seperate issue. Offering a government job for political favor or leverage (as the Admiral himself implicated the Obama admin) is a federal crime.

    In my opinion, his allegation warrants further investigation.

  3. #63
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,156

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuz Life View Post
    No one ever specified what office or job was offered to the Admiral,...

    You are posting a red herring.

    And whether or not he could have accepted the job offer is a seperate issue. Offering a government job for political favor or leverage (as the Admiral himself implicated the Obama admin) is a federal crime.

    In my opinion, his allegation warrants further investigation.
    it has been widely speculated that the offered position was that of secretary of the navy
    do you think it would have been a lesser position which would not have fallen under the guidelines posted above? if so, why?

    whether he could have accepted the job offer is exactly the issue. no one needed to say to him, if you accept this offer you must get out of the senate race. it would have been obvious that he could not both accept the offered position and continue to run for federal office. one or the other was his choice to make - not the president's

    you want there to be taint so badly where there is none that you insist on believing it is there anyway
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nun-ya-dang Bidness
    Last Seen
    02-19-11 @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,981

    fyi Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    it has been widely speculated that the offered position was that of secretary of the navy do you think it would have been a lesser position which would not have fallen under the guidelines posted above? if so, why?
    Again,... it has no relevence or bearing on the charge. If he was offered the job of dog catcher to drop out of the Senate Race,... that would be a crime.

    The specifics of job offered has no relevance to the charge.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    whether he could have accepted the job offer is exactly the issue. no one needed to say to him, if you accept this offer you must get out of the senate race. it would have been obvious that he could not both accept the offered position and continue to run for federal office. one or the other was his choice to make - not the president's
    It was Sestak's allegation that the White House tried to buy him out of the Senate race.... whether they needed to or not is (again) secondary to the fact that Sestak claims they did. And it is the attempt to sell a government position that is the crime.... the attempt does not need to succeed in order for the crime to have been committed.

    It's the attempt itself that is the crime.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    you want there to be taint so badly where there is none that you insist on believing it is there anyway
    I'm just taking admiral Sestak at his word,...

    YouTube- Sestak Stands By Claim White House Offered Him Job

  5. #65
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    White House memo responding to the situation:
    http://assets.theatlantic.com/static...Memorandum.pdf

    Sestak corroborates much of that memo:
    Sestak: 'I Said No' When Clinton Offered | TPMDC

    Sestak's phraseology in this memo makes it sound far less shady.

    edit: Although I'm sure conservatives here will dismiss the White House memo without even reading it.
    Last edited by Deuce; 05-28-10 at 05:46 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #66
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Assuming that was true about the legality, and I don't know enough but we'll just go with that premise for a second, that still doesn't mean that they did just dangle it rather than quid pro quo. Simply because they COULD just do that doesn't mean they did that instead of doing the quid pro quo. For example, whoever did the offer may not have even thought of that aspect of it and thus made the offer even when he didn't need to.

    Its not always a good idea to find the best way to do something and just assume that's how it went down. People are notorious for being dumb, even smart people, when they are thinking there's no real danger or problem in it.
    That's true, but even if someone intended to offer a quid pro quo, I don't think it's a crime since a quid pro quo couldn't have possibly existed. If you do something legal which you believe is a crime (for example, if you smoke at age 18 when you incorrectly believe the smoking age is 21), you aren't prosecuted for it. So I would think the same thing would apply here.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  7. #67
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nun-ya-dang Bidness
    Last Seen
    02-19-11 @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,981

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    That's true, but even if someone intended to offer a quid pro quo, I don't think it's a crime since a quid pro quo couldn't have possibly existed. If you do something legal which you believe is a crime (for example, if you smoke at age 18 when you incorrectly believe the smoking age is 21), you aren't prosecuted for it. So I would think the same thing would apply here.
    And here,... I was constantly reminded in school and at home.... that "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

  8. #68
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:23 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,156

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by Chuz Life View Post
    And here,... I was constantly reminded in school and at home.... that "ignorance of the law is no excuse."
    ok, prove that you are not ignorant about the law. point out the bases which will be uses to bring criminal charges
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  9. #69
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Nun-ya-dang Bidness
    Last Seen
    02-19-11 @ 03:14 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,981

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    ok, prove that you are not ignorant about the law. point out the bases which will be uses to bring criminal charges
    With a dem majority and the House and Senate, I know better than to anticipate that there "will be" charges brought.

    But the basis is pretty much what Sean hannity laid out from the U.S. Code and with reference to Admiral Sestak's comments and claims.

    YouTube - Quid Pro Joe: Sestak vs. the White House Metastasizes

  10. #70
    Guru
    Crunch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    12-21-10 @ 05:24 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    4,063

    Re: Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    There was certainly a legal way for them to make this offer, but it's also possible for it to have crossed a line in terms of legality if they laid out the quid pro quo explicitly enough. I don't know why they would have bothered to do that, which is why I don't really believe Sestak's characterization of the discussion.
    It apears that wasn't the way the offer was made...

    In the statement, White House counsel Robert Bauer admits that the White House was trying to clear the political field for Specter. But Bauer says Sestak was never offered the job of Secretary of the Navy; instead, Sestak was offered only an unpaid position on a presidential advisory board. In return for the unpaid advisory position, Sestak would stay in the House of Representatives and not challenge Specter.
    Read more at the Washington Examiner: GOP: White House Sestak story not believable | Washington Examiner

    Note the statement was by "White House counsel". Note the Quid Pro Quo. The law covering this says nothing about cash having to change hands.... just you do this and I'll do that.

    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.
    Crimes and Criminal Procedure - 18 USC Section 600 - US Code

    Check out the White House statement.


    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plu...Memorandum.pdf


    In the 4th paragraph, 1st sentence, Bob Bauer admits to the crime and admits what Sestak has been saying is acurate. A crime has been commited, now, will justice be done?







    Don't bet on it.
    Last edited by Crunch; 05-28-10 at 06:21 PM.
    There is no such thing as a “Natural Born Dual-Citizen“.

    Originally Posted by PogueMoran
    I didnt have to read the article to tell you that you cant read.

Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •