Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

White House offered Joe Sestak unpaid advisory board position

I noted below that the White House asked Bill Clinton to meet with Joe Sestak to gauge whether he'd be open to alternatives other than running for Senate.

Now I've got some detail on precisely what alternatives were discussed.

According to a source familiar with the situation, the White House asked Clinton and his adviser, lawyer Doug Band, to suggest to Sestak an unpaid position on the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board.

This is similar to what The New York Times' Peter Baker was told by sources, and Baker adds that the White House counsel looked at the the offer and concluded it wasn't illegal:

The office of Robert F. Bauer, the White House counsel, has concluded that Mr. Emanuel's proposal did not violate laws prohibiting government employees from promising employment as a reward for political activity because the position being offered was unpaid. The office also found other examples of presidents offering positions to political allies to achieve political aims.

That dovetails with what I'm hearing the White House has concluded.

The fact that this is an unpaid position could be key. I've checked in with a good government expert to gauge this latest, and will update you when I hear back.

UPDATE, 12:02 p.m.: Here's the official response from the White House counsel on what happened. The White House says, as noted above, that it asked Clinton to suggest to Sestak an unpaid advisory board position.

The White House's response says no secretary of the Navy gig was discussed, and that this sort of offer has happened numerous times in past administrations.

Also: Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, says there's no "there" here. This couldn't be bribery, she says, because the position was unpaid.

Beyond that, Sloan adds, the Federal bribery statute requires an offer of something of value in exchange for an official act. Sloan says that not running for Senate would not constitute an official act in any case, even if a paid position were offered in return for dropping a run for office.

And: Sam Stein has more new detail, including the interesting fact that the White House looked into this and reached its conclusion over two months ago, making one wonder why they didn't put this to rest earlier.

By Greg Sargent  |  May 28, 2010; 11:35 AM ET
Categories:  Joe Sestak , Senate Dems  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: EXCLUSIVE: White House asked Bill Clinton to talk to Joe Sestak about Senate run
Next: Joe Sestak's version of the White House job offer story

Comments

If true, that certainly lets most of the air our of the rubber raft the anti-Obama crowd were hoping would keep this afloat as a controversy.

Doesn't mean they won't try pumping as much hot air into it as possible, but this will likely just go flat in short order.

Posted by: Gallenod | May 28, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Apologies for the typo. "Our" s/b/"out"

Posted by: Gallenod | May 28, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

If there is any silver lining to this playing at politics, it ought to be that the WH should stay out of Senate and congressional races that have a viable challenger to the incumbent.

They are doing themselves no favors backing candidates like Specter and Lincoln who BARELY (if at all) support the WH agenda. Plus, for god's sake, they can't even win the general!

They should have been saying to Specter, if anything: "we're going to back Sestak if you don't represent the party."

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 28, 2010 11:55 AM | Report abuse

Mr Bauer has had quite a while to come up with an explanation which allows for Sestak's admission, yet exposes no legal liability. I, want Joe Sestak under oath to verify, and when Sestak states under oath this is true, then I'll believe it. Until then, Sestak will simply have no comment and until he is under oath we will not have the truth.

Posted by: pauldia | May 28, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

What ever happened to the people choosing the representative they want?

Good grief this ADMINISTRATION IS SO INVASIVE.

Posted by: dottydo | May 28, 2010 12:00 PM | Report abuse

So, Bubba and Barry took lunch together yesterday to get thier "facts" straight... potential witness tampering. Also, this "unpaid job" job has value and a jury may determine that this offer is an exchange of value for a political favor and therefore is a bribe. That fact that it took them from February until today to come up with this defense is amazing.

When do we get Clinton saying "I did not offer a job to that man, Joe Sestak"... will probably bite his lower lip.

As they say, it's the coverup that gets them. Watergate, Martha Stewart, and even Scotter Libby who was covering a non-crime and was convicted of purjury about a non-crime.

Posted by: AZBob | May 28, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Boy, that exclusive sure got you lots of hits Greg. This has always been a bit of a non story for me but hopefully all ends well for the WH. It is a nice distraction for the GOP rather than deal with what de-regulation has wrought upon the masses.

Posted by: lmsinca | May 28, 2010 12:02 PM | Report abuse

Slave sargent:
"The fact that this is an unpaid position could be key. I've checked in with a good government expert to gauge this latest, and will update you when I hear back."

Not even YOU believe this nonsense.

An "UNPAID" gig...yeah, right!

So...the NEXT and the REAL question is WHO in the White House offered WHAT to Joe Sestak's brother.

See, some of us can see past and through the obfuscation that's meant only to induce the moonbat herd into resuming its cud-chewing.

Posted by: Bilgeman | May 28, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

It's politics, like business, that is the way it goes.

You agree to keep your product out of my territory, I will keep my out of your area. Done every day.

Seems the person most trying to distort this is drug user, liar and bigot Limbaugh, and of course his nimble thinking listeners.

Posted by: COWENS99 | May 28, 2010 12:03 PM | Report abuse

COWENS99, for the win!

The politics of distraction, perfected by the GOP.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 28, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Sestak said on national tv that "the White House offered me a JOB (emphasis mine)." There's no such thing as an unpaid job. But I suppose you're not interested in that aspect, are you. Pretty soon, you will be saying that Bush offered him the "job." What has happened to journalism in this country????

Posted by: caf2 | May 28, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

If all depends on what the definition of "unpaid" is.

Was Sestak wearing a blue dress at this meeting?

Posted by: mapson | May 28, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

So, we are expected to believe that someone running for a seat in the SENATE, the most exclusive club on the face of the earth, could reasonably be expected to settle for an unpaid advisory role on some presidential board?

That's what they offered a professional politician like Sestak?
They expect us to believe that this is what THEY expected him to accept? That he would leave his House seat for an unpaid advisory position instead of a Senate seat?

That's the stupidest back-story I think I've ever heard.

Who on earth would believe this rooster and bull story?

Maybe they've all got their stories straight now and we won't be able to find out what really happened - I grant you that. But there's NO WAY this is the real story.

Posted by: skellmeyer | May 28, 2010 12:06 PM | Report abuse

Ambinder has the WH memo:

http://assets.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/politics/Sestak%20Memorandum.pdf

This really stinks:

"We found that, as the Congressman has publicly and accurately stated, options for Executive Branch service were raised with him. Efforts were made in June and July of 2009 to determine whether Congressman Sestak would be interested in service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, which would avoid a divisive Senate primary, allow him to retain his seat in the House, and provide him with an opportunity for additional service to the public in a high-level advisory capacity for which he was highly qualified. The advisory positions discussed with Congressman Sestak, while important to the work of the Administration, would have been uncompensated.

"White House staff did not discuss these options with Congressman Sestak. The White House Chief of Staff enlisted the support of former President Clinton who agreed to raise with Congressman Sestak options of service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board."

Via Hot Air:

"Er, isn’t that at the least an admission of attempting to tamper with the Democratic primary in Pennsylvania? If this didn’t violate the law, why did Rahm Emanuel ask Bill Clinton to make the pitch rather than do it himself?"

Posted by: sbj3 | May 28, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

it's a good thing there are *absolutely* no examples of republicans politicians ever acting like politicians or else they're going to look very silly.

just like hatch, with his new proposed bill to outlaw lying about serving in combat, would put a lot of fellow republicans, like kirk in illinois, in legal jeopardy.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | May 28, 2010 12:08 PM | Report abuse

All, seee update, I posted the Whtie House memo and a response from a good government advocate

Posted by: Greg Sargent | May 28, 2010 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Sure! The Obama sent out an ex-President to offer Sestak a job with no pay & no power to drop out of a Senate race...... riiiight.

If the job was unpaid, the White House could have offered it themselves. Why go secretly through a middleman?

I'm sure the press would've just taken Bush & Rove's word for it, too, and not pushed for an independent prosecutor to have a look-see.

Posted by: george1776 | May 28, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

Looks like another swing and a miss by the teabaggers. Sorry Charlie.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 28, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

Bill Clinton? How convenient!

A non-White Houser delivered the offer and an unpaid one at that. No crime here. It's all up to Stestak to confirm this.

Will he? Remember the WH campaigned against him.

Posted by: corkyboyd1 | May 28, 2010 12:12 PM | Report abuse

If anyone thinks that a unpaid job doesn't turn into a paid job later, they are just fooling themselves.

Posted by: justamaz | May 28, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

BTW - There's no doubt that Sestak will confirm the accuracy of the WH memo. Per the NY Times:

"White House lawyers have been drafting [the memo] in recent days in consultation with Mr. Sestak’s brother, Richard, who runs his campaign."

The whole thing stinks and you can really tell who the blind Democratic partisans are by their reactions to this.

Posted by: sbj3 | May 28, 2010 12:17 PM | Report abuse

Impossible to put an end to something asshat Sestak keeps pushing. He is the one that told the interviewers it was a "highup" psition and even let some who asked assume it was Secy of Navy. He did that on Morning Joe in March and Joe has been screaming everyday it was the Navy position since then and Sestak let him think that. WH maybe didn't want to embarrass a stupid Sestak because he looks like a liar and fool now. The timeline for that allegation never worked out.

Posted by: carolerae48 | May 28, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

OT but anyone noticed the last few weeks @ fivethirtyeigh.com, Nate Silver has been going after Rasmussen polling trying to determine why their polling is nowhere near anyone else.

Pudgy Scottie must have his panties in a knot with all the negative publicity. Good, because Rasmussen is doing a disservice to this country with his bias polling methods.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 28, 2010 12:18 PM | Report abuse

So then this means Jos Sestak is lying and should withdraw from the race in PA... If he wasn't offered a job, by the definitions above, then he lied about the whole thing to win votes in the primary. And the best part is, that if the White House is being fully honest why didn't they issue something earlier to save Specter? They could have easily painted Sestak as the liar, especially since it says WH lawyers looked at it two months ago?

Something doesn't sound right here - smoke and mirrors, this is not on the 'up and up!' Open your eyes on this one!

Posted by: jeddie | May 28, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

Pauldia -- I trust the White House on this one. I am not too young to remember the impeachment/persecution of Bill Clinton. The GOP has absolutely no credibility on ethics. Getting anyone to testify about anything will invariably lead to the witch hunt. "He said he went to the bathroom Tuesday morning, but it was really Wednesday!!!! Let's prosecute him for perjury!" No way. No more. The GOP has no credibility on these issues.

To BG's point, though, the White House does nobody any favors by asking Bill Clinton to intervene in a primary involving Arlen Specter. Actually, the White House should not jump in when there is a primary -- period. What is odd to me is that it sort of demonstrates how consultants -- the consultant class -- still controls so much of DC. Obama the candidate would have applauded a take-down of a lifelong Republican who conveniently switched parties. Obama the president now frowns upon such antics.

Posted by: teoandchive | May 28, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

Where's that Brooklyn Bridge when you need it?

Posted by: imaginemore | May 28, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

skellmeyer:
"Who on earth would believe this rooster and bull story?"

Welcome to the Slum Line, Mr. Skellmeyer.

Meme-Master Slave Sargent's Moonbat livestock will believe it with every fiber of their defective beings.

Or at least, that's what they'll bleat publicly.

This is a Moonbat Sweat-Lodge, and therefore no deviation from the Hive-Mind's daily Truth is to be tolerated.

Posted by: Bilgeman | May 28, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

"So then this means Jos Sestak is lying and should withdraw from the race in PA... "

Show me a Republican politician and I'll show you someone who lies.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | May 28, 2010 12:25 PM | Report abuse

You swallowed this line of bunk hook, line and sinker. COME ON! Investigate like you would if this was a Republican administration.

Posted by: bonnie10 | May 28, 2010 12:26 PM | Report abuse


Whether it were a paid or an unpaid advisory position, it is a thing of value.

The US law that makes this a felony does not require money to exchange hands. It was an offer to take a post in exchange for dropping out of a political race: an offer that is criminal.

Sargent the WaPo hack who is completely in the bag for Obama is entitled to his opinion after all this is an "opnion" piece not a news article. Do not expect WaPo hack toady Sargent to play the story straight when it concerns Barry.

Posted by: screwjob15 | May 28, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

Obama has now boxed himself into a neat little box that may be an IUD.

Posted by: mascmen7 | May 28, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

"The politics of distraction, perfected by the GOP."

BINGO.

Nikki Haley = bombing

Jim DeMental = serious challenge from a Dem with months to go

Nevada = well, Ensign, Lowden, Angle

Florida = Crist redefining flip-flop

On and on and on.

Not lookin so good for the GOP-fishermen.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 28, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

"The politics of distraction, perfected by the GOP."

BINGO.

Nikki Haley = bombing

Jim DeMental = serious challenge from a Dem with months to go

Nevada = well, Ensign, Lowden, Angle

Florida = Crist redefining flip-flop

On and on and on.

Not lookin so good for the GOP-fishermen.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 28, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

teoandchive:
" I trust the White House on this one. I am not too young to remember the impeachment/persecution of Bill Clinton. "

Do you now?

Do you remember James Carville and his sub-minions sliming Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones?

Do you remember how they slandered Lucianne Goldberg?

And it turned out that all three of these women had been telling the truth about Clinton all along.

I bet you didn't try too hard to forget THOSE aspects of it.

But the facts are what they are.

Posted by: Bilgeman | May 28, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Dual citizens (Rahm), especially products of the corrupt Chicago political machine, should neither being running the White House nor residing in it.

Posted by: Spiritof761 | May 28, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

When you lie down with dogs you get up with fleas and these chicago mobsters in the white house are about as flea bitten as you can get.

Posted by: DavidInTexas | May 28, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

You're quoting CREW? You might point out they're funded by Soros-- her statement means nothing.

Subpoena Sestak.

Posted by: SheilaMn | May 28, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Unpaid my ass.

Posted by: Papagnello | May 28, 2010 12:30 PM | Report abuse

Seriously folks. Do you really believe he would be enticed with an unpaid position vs a senate seat with all of the power and perks it entails?

I'm sure most of you would rather work for free that have to deal with paychecks and bank balances. Sounds plausible to me.

Posted by: morgan366 | May 28, 2010 12:32 PM | Report abuse

So Bill Clinton is carrying water for Obama now, ha ha ha

Posted by: Phil6 | May 28, 2010 12:33 PM | Report abuse

Let's see, the President and former President have a private lunch, the President later tells the media an administration statement is forthcoming, and guess what, it involves Bill Clinton and secret dealings. This whole thing smells and the fact that Clinton is right in the middle of it makes the odor worse. Mr. President, even this poorly educated public school graduate can see through this. This is the most corrupt, incompetent and inept administration in at least the last 75-years. If this was so innocent, why not put it to rest weeks ago. The answer, they had to come up with what they thought would be a plausible story. Good grief, at least come up with something that wouldn't have them rolling in the aisles. Anybody who believes this, deserves them.

Posted by: GolferBG | May 28, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

teoandchive, good post. Right on.

And I love when someone with a Texas handle maligns "Chicago politics." Your state is a joke. You'd be lucky as hell to live in this city. Stay in TX, dude. You won't know what to do if you get off your little GOP reservation.

With apologies to the other good people of TX and the city of Austin.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 28, 2010 12:36 PM | Report abuse

this just seems like yet another example of rightwing republican overreach fueled by overconfidence brought on by isolation and, in some cases at least, narcissism showing signs of incipient solipsism.

they reinforce each other and so many of them seem to have cut out all reference to people who hold views that don't completely comport with their fringe perspective.

they think it's perfectly fine to advocate against the civil rights act. they think repeal of the 17th amendment is a good idea. a good chunk of them are outright birthers or fellow travelers. many think it's a 100 percent certainty that the republicans will retake the house and that it's about 50/50 that they'll get the senate. they think demonizing latinos is not only the right thing to do, but that it also makes good political sense. they think freaking out over a mosque near the world trade center site is what 'real' americans do.

they are wrong. and the more they overreach, the more people turn away from them.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | May 28, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Ha ha what a croc! Oh well, we knew who this chicago slimeball was when we voted him into the white house. We reap what we sow. The interesting part is the 25% - the 1 of 4 people in this country that are such completely blind followers that they still defend this joker.

Posted by: leeanthonyva | May 28, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

Poor Lucianne Goldberg!!! Except that her son, Jonah, made a fortune from the "slander." Please Bilgeman.

The GOP has absolutely no credibility on any ethics investigation. This is the party that outed a CIA agent to put down an administration critic. Putting you people in charge of looking into whether Obama broke an ethics law is like having a three-year-old guard the sucker jar.

As for Carville, I'm aware that federal judicial panels put to rest any libel claims that GOP operatives had against him because such claims had no merit. I know you don't really care about the facts, Bilgeman.

We've been here before. The GOP is the party out of power trying to create a scandal so it can bring itself back to power. But, there is no scandal here.

Posted by: teoandchive | May 28, 2010 12:37 PM | Report abuse

This thread has certainly brought the slime molds out. . .

Posted by: Michigoose | May 28, 2010 12:38 PM | Report abuse

Sargent is such a hack. Notice how he believes that Sestak was offered an unpaid position on an advisory council? Does anyone really believe that? Why would a former admiral and current congressman call an unpaid position a "high level job"?

None of this is believable, and the CYI press (Cover Your Idol) is pathetic. My 11 year old knows this a joke. On what planet would Sestak label Clinton as "someone from Obama's White House"?

Another Blumenthal mispeak left-wing media coverup.

Posted by: Cornell1984 | May 28, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

"Wait. We need to make sure our stories jive and whatever we come up with can't be illegal." I imagine the conversation went something like that. Offering to trade an "unpaid advisory position" for a senate seat? Most of the liberals will believe it because they believe whatever they want to, and the media will declare that it's the gods honest truth, but most of us know a scam when we see one. Just another sign of how corrupt our government really is.

Posted by: avatar666 | May 28, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

Doesn't "job" imply compensation? Unless uncompensated volunteer work is now defined as a "job".

Posted by: rheinstein | May 28, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

teoandchive, stick around after the trolls go back to clown college.

Good posts.

Posted by: BGinCHI | May 28, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

wow. the rightwing republicans on this thread *really* don't like chicago.

that's one of the silliest rightwing memes making the rounds on the intertuubz these days.

all you have to do is say 'chicago' -- or, better yet, 'the chicago way' in an atrocious sean connery accent -- and, in the minds of the rightwingers and republicans, you have won the argument conclusively.

fail.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | May 28, 2010 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Golfer-

"Most corrupt in 75 years"? Your slip is showing. Ever heard of "Tricky Dick"?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | May 28, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

All the mouth-breathers really oughta go take a Valium...or two. Talk about manfactured nothing. Good Lord.

Posted by: suekzoo1 | May 28, 2010 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"If true ... ."

Posted by: tw46 | May 28, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

i'm guessing golfer thinks nixon was mostly fine and his only real mistake was getting caught in his coverup attempt. more of a tragically flawed hero than a tyrant.

the rightwing republican mythology, the fdr was actually the worst president in history.

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | May 28, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Oh, the dilemma. Do I run for Senate where I'll have unbridled power or do I take an unpaid advisory position? Such a tough, agonizing decision. People who believe this crap take koolaid drinking to a new level. After 3 months, you'd think they could come up with something more credible. They should have stuck with their normal leadership position: "it's Bush's fault."

Posted by: Tostitos | May 28, 2010 12:54 PM | Report abuse

The reason they went to Clinton is that Bill and Joe are friends. Duh. Do some research before mouthing off.

Boy, if this is the best the right wing can do against Obama, he must be one GREAT President. They asked him to stay in the House and perform a major advisory role from there instead of running for Senate. OMG. File the indictments! Get the handcuffs!

Posted by: maria31 | May 28, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Slime is still slime. Throw the bums out!

Posted by: fredhenderson1 | May 28, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

Oh so sorry...this is an "unpaid" position. Silly me, of course Sestak would be offered a job which pays nothing. Why not? It all makes sense now. Hey, we should just move on. After all, this same explanation coming from the Bush administration would certainly bring an end to any controversy. Maybe I'll ask one of my co-workers if they'd like to leave their paid job for an unpaid one. Think they would jump at that chance!

Posted by: Pathfinder211 | May 28, 2010 12:58 PM | Report abuse

OT:

GOP Fights Against... Wait for it...

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE IN POLITICS!

"For years, Republicans who opposed efforts to restrict campaign spending had a sure-fire alternative they said would be more effective in fighting corruption: disclosure.

Now that the Supreme Court has dealt a serious blow to the campaign finance regulations they opposed, Republicans are fighting again, this time against what the White House and its allies argue is the best way to guard against the effects of the decision: more disclosure."

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37849.html

Heckuva job.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 28, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Whew!!! That's a weight off my mind. The most "transparent" administration in history came through for us again. There's no "there" there, depending on what "is" is. Kudos to WaPo for keeping the faith.

Posted by: djmast66 | May 28, 2010 1:02 PM | Report abuse

So, Obama relies on Bill Clinton, a certified liar and disbarred attorney for perjury? Oh, this is so delicious.

Posted by: ezgirl1 | May 28, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

OT, here's what's happening elsewhere. Looks like someone is taking this drilling mess seriously. No more complacency.

"Secretary Salazar is ordering a moratorium on drilling of new deepwater wells until the Presidential Commission investigating the BP oil spill has completed its six-month review. In addition, permitted wells currently being drilled in the deepwater (not counting the emergency relief wells being drilled) in the Gulf of Mexico will be required to halt drilling at the first safe stopping point, and then take steps to secure the well. Additional safety checks will be imposed on ongoing deepwater drilling activities as they prepare to shut down their operations. The Department of the Interior will be issuing notices to lessees and other documentation necessary to implement the moratorium."

http://www.doi.gov/news/pressreleases/Salazar-Calls-for-New-Safety-Measures-for-Offshore-Oil-and-Gas-Operations-Orders-Six-Month-Moratorium-on-Deepwater-Drilling.cfm

Posted by: lmsinca | May 28, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

unpaid position. riiiiiiight.

Posted by: JimmyCarter | May 28, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

do the people making the point that an unpaid position would be unappealing realize that sestak, y'know, did not accept it?

i'd bet the vast majority of people grasping at this story were perfectly okay with the bush/cheney admin outing plame.

and seriously, as with hatch making it rough for kirk in illinois and others with his proposal to outlaw lying about serving in combat, the law of unintended consequences is in full force here.

do they really think pols on their side don't act like pols?

Posted by: blahgblogwordpresscom | May 28, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

"""will be required to halt drilling at the first safe stopping point, and then take steps to secure the well. Additional safety checks will be imposed"""

AWESOME.

Thx lmsinca!

Enduring the teabagger flood okay? ;)

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 28, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Obviously Clinton has offered to fall on the sword for Obama and/or his staff. I guess they reason that if Clinton made the offer, then Clinton would technically be the one who broke the law. I have to ask, what was offered to Clinton in return? Must be something juicy, maybe involving Hillary?

Posted by: ent1776 | May 28, 2010 1:08 PM | Report abuse

Ethan, it's like taking a stroll along an oil soaked beach, I just keep my eyes closed.

Posted by: lmsinca | May 28, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

What ever happened to the people choosing the representative they want?

Good grief this ADMINISTRATION IS SO INVASIVE.

Posted by: dottydo | May 28, 2010 12:00 PM

.......

Tell that to those Utah Teabaggers who blocked a sitting senator from running for reelection in his own Republican Party primary.

Posted by: Liam-still | May 28, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Haha, lms.

This must be the bagger equivalent of the Junk Shot. Trying to keep those Indie voters from streaming out of the giant gaping hole in the Republican Party.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | May 28, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

I've got a question: Let's assume that the W.H. wanted to appoint someone to a cabinet position and that person was running in a contested primary. Would it be illegal to offer her the job? Would we want that to be illegal? Seems to me that turning such a situation into one where bribery can be charged isn't a move toward "good politics" but another way to make the political process more and more of a minefield where no good deed will go unpunished.

Posted by: jdnathan | May 28, 2010 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Joe Sestak weighs in:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/joe_sestaks_version.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | May 28, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

This one is so over, despite what the Ron Paul bloggers and right-wingers prayed for. Look at them struggling to keep the hate alive above. Hey! Democrat Sestak looks like a strong candidate who will whip right-winger Toomey. Good luck to him!

Posted by: dudh | May 28, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Remember when Tom Delay held the vote on the Drug Prescription bill open for more than five hours, while he browbeat that Republican Congressman, from Ohio, into switching his no vote to a yes vote.?

Remember that, all you outraged Right Wing Nut Jobs? Remember how Tom Delay threatened to defeat the Republican Congressman's son, who was running for his retiring father's seat, if his father did not switch from a no vote to a yes vote on the Pharma written Prescription Drug bill.

The congressman did switch his vote, in order to not have his son defeated by Tom Delay. Remember that? Where was you outrage at that clearly criminal, and mafia thug like act?

Tell your faux sob story walking, all you two faced Right Wing cretins.

Posted by: Liam-still | May 28, 2010 1:27 PM | Report abuse

@Liam-still

Way to go! Those tea-baggers are just ordinary dumb-assed hicks, unlike us sophisticated wagyu beef intellectuals. They should be shot! Viva Che!

Posted by: djmast66 | May 28, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

I don't care if it's paid or not; the point is they tried to get him out of the race, just like he said. They are just this side of the law. I don't care whether they are Dem or Repubs, Washington is a cesspool of corruption, lies, and thieves!

Posted by: kcook2713 | May 28, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

No "one wonder why they didn't put this to rest earlier", (except this Obama water-carrying political reporter). They didn't put this to rest earlier, cuz they just made it up this week.

Posted by: Poeticlargess | May 28, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

@jdnathan

I like the cut of your jib, dudh. Let's make everything NOT illegal. Anarchy like totally rules dudh. In the mean time, as much as I "hate" to be a "hater," I believe Obama failed to make my last mortgage payment.

Sestak failed us. He was offered nothing for something and he refused. Our collective will be forever damaged.

Posted by: djmast66 | May 28, 2010 1:47 PM | Report abuse

Now I see how Obama gets people to agree to his job-killing anti-business unConstitutional takeovers of health care, finance and energy. Obamabots will believe anything he says no matter how demonstrably false and outrageous it is! It took them 6 months and countless lawyers to engineer a lie this pitiful? I don't want to even think what they promised Sestak to go along with this nonsense.
And for those of you defending Obama's handling of the BP oil spill. Get real. He should have had qualified personnel standing beside the BP workers, so he would have known they were underestimating the damage, so he would have been notified of each development, so that it wouldn't have taken days of pleading to get video, so that he could have pressed for local officials to get needed equipment, so that cleaning operations would have been started
timely, so that the EPA would have been
analyzing the chemicals before they were used,
so that an unspeakable tragedy wouldn't become
irreparably catastrophic.

Posted by: giatny | May 28, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

This is a cover-up and we need an INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION

JAIL TERMS

IMPEACHMENT.

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | May 28, 2010 8:17 PM | Report abuse

Can anyone tell me how many presidental boards or commissions there are and where you might find more information on them or how many people serve on such boards?

Posted by: greyghost2 | May 29, 2010 12:28 PM | Report abuse

Check this out
"Sestak was ineligible for job Clinton offered"

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/sestak-was-ineligible-for-job-clinton-offered-95167459.html

How stupid do they think the american public is?

Posted by: greyghost2 | May 29, 2010 12:34 PM | Report abuse

I note that Mr. Sargent wrote he asked a Good Governmnet expert about the unpaid position offered to Mr. Sestak, one Melanie Sloan. These good government 'experts' are no more competent to decide if an illegal offer is made than a rash is. In fact they are a rash.

But Mr. Plum Line is an even bigger rash. What are yuou people doing pursuing a story that is not a story?

So what if Rahm Emmanuel talked to Joe Sestak? If Mr. Emmanuel called me up this morning to determine if I had breakfast would you plaster that all over the paper?

No!

First one of you wonderful investigative detectives would try to find out whop I am, where I live, and everything else about me. Then you would try to figure out why Mr. Emmanuel would be calling me in the first place. And of course you wouldwant to know if I am a politician, as if that makes any difference. Emmanuel talks to politicians all the time.

Suppose someone at the White House decided to offer one of the Cuyahoga County Ohio Commissioners a job at the federal level in DC. You guys would go nosing around only to discover that a dark accusation of bribery and corruption has been alleged against this official.

That would be NEWS!

Or, assume Mr. Obama asked Mr. Axelrod to call former 'Vice President' Cheney for a chat with the President.

That would be NEWS!

But the fact that Mr. Sestak and Mr. Clinton had a chat about how serious Mr. Sestak is about his senate run? That deserves a day in the sun and forget it.

If Mr. Obama asked Mr. Emmanuel to call Mr. Clinton to ask Mr. Sestak (Whew. I'm winded!) how serious he is about his Senate run, so what?

Get your priorities in order Sargent!

Posted by: agrossman1 | June 1, 2010 8:39 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company