• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Sestak job offer a bribe?

The logic to apply the Hatch Act is too twistedto take seriously.

And then we have talking heads like the old toe-sucker Morris calling this worse than oputting Valerie Plame.

When people with a real brain start calling it a felony, I might listen.

Sestak wouldl be a benefit to the country in any job he could be appointed or elected to. The administration just didn't want him to go after this senate seat.

Nobody could have been harmed in any way.

It's kind of stupid that the same people shrieking about this are not insisting on prosecuting Cheney and Rummy for war crimes or the BP executives for murder.
 
So, is a President also not allowed to endorse any candidates too? Doesn't that also constitute "interfering" in an election?
 
I think is going to warrent an apology...and a promise never to do it again.

and then that will be that.

though, Hannity thinks this may be bigger than Watergate.

:)
 
Thunder said:
I think is going to warrent an apology...and a promise never to do it again.

and then that will be that.

though, Hannity thinks this may be bigger than Watergate.

:)
Click to expand...

Apologize? For what?

Not only is this politics as usual, it's politics as it ought to be. Really. It's ok for political parties to get together and work toward a common goal. Sometimes that means that an ambitious person decides not to seek something he desires, like a Senate seat, because his participation in the race doesn't fit with party goals. Sometimes, the party leadership tries to convince someone not to seek an office, and part of that process is to find a role for the person they want to bow out.

Fortunately for the Republicans they don't have the votes in the House of Representatives to bring up an impeachment measure on this. That way, they won't look as stupid as they did in 1998. The embarassment will be confined to the Tea Party and the talk radio yappers, and the rest of the country already thinks that they're nuts.

By the way, the next thing I'm going to look up on google is whether anyone has ever been prosecuted for violating the Hatch Act in this manner. I'm pretty certain I won't be finding any.
 
Meadmaker said:
By the way, the next thing I'm going to look up on google is whether anyone has ever been prosecuted for violating the Hatch Act in this manner. I'm pretty certain I won't be finding any.
Click to expand...

Worse has happened. A crooked federal prosecutor threw Don Siegelmann in prison for something like this. Why Obama hasn't cleaned out the worthless thugs that the Shrub appointed is beyond me.
 
leftysergeant said:
Worse has happened. A crooked federal prosecutor threw Don Siegelmann in prison for something like this. Why Obama hasn't cleaned out the worthless thugs that the Shrub appointed is beyond me.
Click to expand...

The Sieglemann case is nothing like this. In that case, Siegelmann was accused of soliciting a very large campaign contribution in exchange for placing someone in a position where that someone would have significant influence over funneling of state funds to corporations in which he had a vested interest.

Whether or not that really happened is a separate issue, but the charge itself concerned a matter that, if true, would be genuine corruption.

In the case of Obama/Emmanuel/Clinton/Sestak, there's nothing to see here. Even if the charges were absolutely true, there would not be anything illegal, or even unethical, or even immoral, or even embarassing. Dealmaking as part of politics is ok.

(As an aside, there is only one thing that made my ears perk up this week about this situation. When it was revealed that the position offered was an unpaid one, my skeptic ears went up a bit. Who would seriously ask a sitting Congressman to drop out of a Senate race, and offer an unpaid job in return? An appointment to a government position, sure, but an unpaid advisory board? Something's fishy. Still, that's no excuse to launch a government fishing expedition in the hopes of turning up something.)
 
Meadmaker said:
The Sieglemann case is nothing like this. In that case, Siegelmann was accused of soliciting a very large campaign contribution in exchange for placing someone in a position where that someone would have significant influence over funneling of state funds to corporations in which he had a vested interest.

Whether or not that really happened is a separate issue, but the charge itself concerned a matter that, if true, would be genuine corruption.
Click to expand...

Not really, the campaign was for an issue rather than a candidate, and the position was one that the individual had alrrady held, for no pay. The fact that the prosecutor and judge had ties tro the krank Rove had nothing to do with it, right?

(Wanna buy a toll bridge over the Hudson?)

Who would seriously ask a sitting Congressman to drop out of a Senate race, and offer an unpaid job in return? An appointment to a government position, sure, but an unpaid advisory board? Something's fishy. Still, that's no excuse to launch a government fishing expedition in the hopes of turning up something.)
Click to expand...

I am thinking of logistics and the cost of a campoaign paid out of pocket, with no help from the party - for now. Sestak is still green in terms of elected office. The party wanted to fulfill the committment they made to Specter. They also wanted to keep the House seat.

Don't even look for Spector to be in adequate health to make another run in six years.

That would clearly be Sestak's turn to run with full party support from the day he files. In the mean time, he could be making a name for himself in some visible though not remunerative position. This is not illegal.
 
leftysergeant said:
In the mean time, he could be making a name for himself in some visible though not remunerative position. This is not illegal.
Click to expand...

I see what you mean. That could be the thought behind it. Perhaps there could be an implied offer of support in 2016, or perhaps the unpaid job was some other variation on a temporary offer until something more prestigious rolls around, which, again, would not be illegal, immoral, or unethical.
 
The long and the short of it is that nothing of value was offered in exchange for an affirmative action. Case closed.
 
"Mr. Brown, if you drop out of the race, I'll give you a great big hug!"

"Men, take this man to jail!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom