• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Obama Administration Bribery?

BeAChooser

Banned
B
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
11,716
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/feb/obama-tried-buy-specter-s-opponent

a popular Democratic congressman from Pennsylvania has revealed that the White House tried bribing him to drop out of the upcoming U.S. Senate race.

Congressman Joe Sestak said in a television news show that the White House offered him a top federal job in an effort to keep him from challenging Senator Arlen Specter in the state’s Democratic primary.
Click to expand...

You realize, this is a federal crime.

"Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." -- 18 USC Sec. 211 -- Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Now the accusation is that Obama's deputy chief of staff is the one who offered the bribe. If Obama was involved in this as well, it also becomes an impeachable offense.

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." --US Constitution. Article II, Sec. 4.

At the very least, this should be investigated, and if found true, his Deputy Chief of Staff should be removed from office. Wouldn't everyone here agree?
 
Last edited:
BeAChooser said:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/feb/obama-tried-buy-specter-s-opponent



You realize, this is a federal crime.

"Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." -- 18 USC Sec. 211 -- Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Now the accusation is that Obama's deputy chief of staff is the one who offered the bribe. If Obama was involved in this as well, it also becomes an impeachable offense.

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." --US Constitution. Article II, Sec. 4.

At the very least, this should be investigated, and if found true, his Deputy Chief of Staff should be removed from office. Wouldn't everyone here agree?
Click to expand...

Yep. And if it's found false it should be dropped.
 
BeAChooser said:
"Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." -- 18 USC Sec. 211 -- Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Now the accusation is that Obama's deputy chief of staff is the one who offered the bribe. If Obama was involved in this as well, it also becomes an impeachable offense.
Click to expand...

Depends. Is there evidence that Obama caused the bribery? A superior is not always impeached for the actions of his subordinate.
 
BeAChooser said:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/feb/obama-tried-buy-specter-s-opponent



You realize, this is a federal crime.

"Whoever solicits or receives … any….thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both." -- 18 USC Sec. 211 -- Bribery, Graft and Conflicts of Interest: Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Now the accusation is that Obama's deputy chief of staff is the one who offered the bribe. If Obama was involved in this as well, it also becomes an impeachable offense.

"The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors." --US Constitution. Article II, Sec. 4.

At the very least, this should be investigated, and if found true, his Deputy Chief of Staff should be removed from office. Wouldn't everyone here agree?
Click to expand...

Offering somebody a Federal job is not a crime. While it may well be that Obama (or his deputy chief of staff) offered this Congressman a job in the hope that he would take it rather than run against Specter, I seriously doubt that there was an explicit quid pro quo offered. Trying to make this into a crime by the deputy chief of staff or an impeachable offense by Obama is beyond silly.

Nothing to see here folks; just more of BeAChooser's moronic anti-Obama propaganda.
 
The idea that any politician would specifically offer someone a job if they didn't run against a specific opponent is silly. Inside the beltway they are quite well practiced in plausible deniability regarding the quid and the quo. They don't say, "I will give you $10,000 if you vote against this bill." They say, "Are you voting for this bill? No? That's very interesting. In a completely unrelated side note, here is $10,000 for you re-election campaign."

It's obvious that the Obama administration offered him this job in order to get him out of the way, but there is no way they would have said that specifically when they made the offer.

Of course, this will not slow down the wingnuts in the slightest. They have already put on their junior airmen goggles and are running around willy-nilly looking for a non-existent smoking gun. Wake me when they find the Michele Obama "Whitey" tape... Or Larry Sinclair's phone records... Or Barrack's Kenyan birth certificate...
 
No.

It's somewhat common, for example, to get the 13th Amendment passed, Lincoln said

"Just remember I am the President of the United States, cloaked in great power, and I expect those votes." A few Democrats who decided to vote for it got rewarded with pretty good positions within the government.

(Generally speaking, you COULD call it bribery, but it's simply a way to reward them. Carrot and stick behaviors.)
 
Last edited:
BeAChooser said:
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2010/feb/obama-tried-buy-specter-s-opponent

You realize, this is a federal crime.
Click to expand...

You realize, Judicial Watch highly cherry-picked the link they sourced that from. What Judicial Watch didn't mention at all was that the White House had already denied Joe Sestak claim, which puts it his word against theirs.

I assume you will now entertain us with lengthy blocks of biased quotes that don't really support your OP, but you think does, despite the fact that it really boils down to nothing?
 
Upchurch said:
I assume you will now entertain us with lengthy blocks of biased quotes that don't really support your OP, but you think does, despite the fact that it really boils down to nothing?
Click to expand...
I will also assume that thermodynamics are valid, that the tide will roll in and out, ...
 
KingMerv00 said:
Originally Posted by BeAChooser
If Obama was involved in this as well, it also becomes an impeachable offense.

Depends. Is there evidence that Obama caused the bribery? A superior is not always impeached for the actions of his subordinate.
Click to expand...

Learn to read.
 
CORed said:
Offering somebody a Federal job is not a crime.
Click to expand...

But doing what that democrat Congressman accuses Obama of doing is a crime:

http://vlex.com/vid/acceptance-solicitation-obtain-appointive-19190192

18 USC 211 - Sec. 211. Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office

Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution, or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. Whoever solicits or receives any thing of value in consideration of aiding a person to obtain employment under the United States either by referring his name to an executive department or agency of the United States or by requiring the payment of a fee because such person has secured such employment shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned not more than one year, or both. This section shall not apply to such services rendered by an employment agency pursuant to the written request of an executive department or agency of the United States.
Click to expand...

Nothing to see here folks; just more of BeAChooser's moronic anti-Obama propaganda.
Click to expand...

LOL! I quote the federal statute and you still don't believe me. Talk about "moronic". :D
 
Upchurch said:
What Judicial Watch didn't mention at all was that the White House had already denied Joe Sestak claim, which puts it his word against theirs.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but we already have dozens of examples of the White House lying about this or that issue. And you really didn't expect the White House to agree with Sestak, did you Upchurch? You're not that naive, are you? :D
 
I further promote that the sun will be visible at 9:00am central time. Please put this down on the MDC if you will. :rolleyes:
 
Random said:
The idea that any politician would specifically offer someone a job if they didn't run against a specific opponent is silly. Inside the beltway they are quite well practiced in plausible deniability regarding the quid and the quo. They don't say, "I will give you $10,000 if you vote against this bill." They say, "Are you voting for this bill? No? That's very interesting. In a completely unrelated side note, here is $10,000 for you re-election campaign."

It's obvious that the Obama administration offered him this job in order to get him out of the way, but there is no way they would have said that specifically when they made the offer.

Of course, this will not slow down the wingnuts in the slightest. They have already put on their junior airmen goggles and are running around willy-nilly looking for a non-existent smoking gun. Wake me when they find the Michele Obama "Whitey" tape... Or Larry Sinclair's phone records... Or Barrack's Kenyan birth certificate...
Click to expand...

Ah, but they have found Obama's Kenyan birth certificate. The only problem is that it came out of the same Crackerjack box as Bush's National Guard document.
 
BeAChooser said:
Yeah, but we already have dozens of examples of the White House lying about this or that issue. And you really didn't expect the White House to agree with Sestak, did you Upchurch? You're not that naive, are you? :D
Click to expand...

So, given the complete lack of evidence one way or the other, fall back on your own bias then? Yay! The system works. :rolleyes:

No evidences = no conclusions.

Do you have evidence, BAC?
 
Random said:
It's obvious that the Obama administration offered him this job in order to get him out of the way, but there is no way they would have said that specifically when they made the offer.

Of course, this will not slow down the wingnuts in the slightest. They have already put on their junior airmen goggles and are running around willy-nilly looking for a non-existent smoking gun.
Click to expand...

This is some interesting logic: "It's obvious" that it actually happened, but people who attempt to find actionable proof are crazy.

I agree that they would likely be tilting at windmills, but it doesn't mean that they have "put on their junior airmen goggles".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom