This doesn’t look like it’s going away.

If true, this is a serious violation of the law. Politically embarrassing to the White House. Sestak looks like he is hiding the truth by bizarrely claiming that others must talk about the issue instead of him. No good resolution for the Dems.

It happens every day,no violation of any law!Looks like Toomey may be getting a little nervous.The White House commented on this already.

Gee, the White House lawyers looked at the “evidence” and don’t think there was anything wrong? OK, let’s see that evidence since it involves 3 potential felonies. Not that I don’t trust the “lawyers” who are paid, employed, and invited to every White House social event. I’m sure they’re all above board. So let’s see the supposed “evidence” and move on? What’s the problem Barrack? And, “Did I mention I was in the Navy” Sestak should fess up as well. Otherwise he’s aiding and abeting a known felony. You don’t get a free pass either Sailor Boy.

I’m not saying whether it’s legal, illegal, etc.

Even if legal, keeping it quiet violates Sestak’s own pledge of transparency, accountability and “changing how Washington works”.

Sestak’s created this whole holier-than-thou image around himself, with this military service as a prop/backdrop. Catching Sestak in a lie, cover-up or ethics violation would wipe away Sestak’s facade.

The GOP cares a lot less about Sestak than Obama. If they can exploit Sestak to attack Obama, with Sestak doing all the heavy lifting, they are going to do it.

I’m just laughing my ass off watching the show and hoping that if it does blow-up in somebody’s face, it’s someone long overdue for a comeuppance.

Three guess who (and the first two don’t count).

Inclined to agree with Toomey and Rep Weiner from NY. Details must come forward.

What evidence do you think there could possibly be? No notes no transcripts,just the recollections of the parties to the meeting. Sounds awfully thin on the evidence side,maybe dick cheney (unidicted war criminal) can try a little extraordinary interrogation techniques on them.

Although I believe that this is a tempest in a teapot, allowing it to fester will make it grow beyond its actual importance, will distract voters from the issues Sestak wants to discuss, and will create a negative initial impression among general election voters. Deal with it, take the lumps and get beyond it. Don’t allow it to linger any longer into the campaign.

Healy, nice to see the Moonbats are still calling the former administration “war criminals.” Of course, we won’t hear the same about the Dear Leader Obama and his gang even though they are following the same war policies as Bush. Heck, they even have the same Secretary of Defense.

In any event, considering that Dems called for countless investigations while Bush was president, what could possibly be wrong with now investigating these possible Obama White House felonies?

who, what job, where, who was present, who did this directive come from, who knew about it, why wasnt this reported sooner or why was it withheld (pending on the answers)

§ 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.

It’s illegal if it happened.

Read the Hatch Act.

Nope no more torture,or inhanced interrogation techniques being used any more. Take note that Cheney,Bush,Yoo,etal do not travel to foreign nations where they may be charged. They will only go to one’s where they think they will be safe from War Crimes prosecutions, like Great Britain,or Israel. They sure won’t go to Spain or any where in South America. They are international pariahs.

Well Westpadem, who solicited or recieved anything? Joe Sestak didn’t ask for anything or recieve anything,did he? Last time I looked he was still a Congressman running for the Senate,not SecNav.

Moonbat Healy, interrogations saved many lives. Only an idiot would think they are not occurring today, though it’s true the dying liberal media no longer covers it as front-page news during the Obama regime.

No they didn’t. Only an idiot would think they still continue. Torture is not an effective way of eliciting information. If you torture someone they will tell you whatever you want to hear just so long as you stop.

Toomey a fraud…always has been always will be!

Bill-
You are my new hero. It’s like someone handed you an ordinary shovel to dig Sestak deeper, and you went out and got a steam-shovel.

No notes no transcripts,just the recollections of the parties to the meeting
Holy Joe himself is one of those parties. I would admonish you for calling Joe a liar about his clear and emphatic description, but I’m too dizzy watching you try to spin this.

Maybe, they can get the story from Joe use a warrantless wiretap (he did vote for that).

Lee-
That is VERY sound advice. I hope Bill and Joe continue to ignore it.

1994 Again-
Well, Joe didn’t call for investigations into Bush (after Joe was elected that is). So, Joe’s been pretty consistent on opposing investigations, transparency, accountability in actual deeds/votes.

Bill-
First of all, Gibbs claimed their were conversations (plural). Sounds to me like there was a negotiation and Sestak couldn’t get his price. You don’t know what (if anything) Joe asked for. Joe merely claims to have turned down the last offer he got.
Second, if there was no crime, what’s Sestak got to hide?
Third, is it possible that Sestak’s information could serve as form blackmail? (not that someone as “honorable” as Joe claims to be would do something like that) Joe should probably get the full story out there before someone implies he’s trying to blackmail the White House.

WestDem-
Doesn’t this one affect every volunteer (or underpaid worker) on a campaign who gets promised a job by the candidate?

§ 599. Promise of appointment by candidate

Whoever, being a candidate, directly or indirectly promises or pledges the appointment, or the use of his influence or support for the appointment of any person to any public or private position or employment, for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both; and if the violation was willful, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

The other point as issue is:
§ 4. Misprision of felony

Whoever, having knowledge of the actual commission of a felony cognizable by a court of the United States, conceals and does not as soon as possible make known the same to some judge or other person in civil or military authority under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

Moonbat required reading: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/20/AR2009042002818.html

1994-
The author of your “required reading”…

The writer, a visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution, served in senior positions in the Pentagon and the White House from 2001 to 2009, most recently as chief speechwriter for President George W. Bush.

It would be difficult to find a less credible source than him, short of Dick Cheney himself.

Now, for an editorial article both current and on-topic:
Lack of sunlight over Mr. Sestak’s claims
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/24/AR2010052403608.html

The editors DO make the point I’ve previously made why Secretary of the Navy is not likely:

Asked whether it was the position of Navy secretary, Mr. Sestak, a retired admiral, declined to comment — though the timeline (a new Navy secretary had just been confirmed) makes that unlikely.

I suspect that actual offer might have been an ambassadorship. That’s a pretty BS job that is handed out like candy to people that want to travel (and pretend to be important), even if they’re assigned to some little island paradise without threat or conflict. You probably get a staff to order about, a nice place to live while away, and get invited to formal parties.

Thanks to David for locating these 2 statutes also. 211 may be applicable to.

I love Sestak’s reply to John King on CNN. After telling King that “he liked him” (?) he proceeded to say he “answered the question with integrity and now it’s up to the other party to answer the questions.” Wouldn’t it be nice if our criminal justice system worked like this. We could all say “I witnessed the crime, but now it’s up to the criminal to come forward and confess.” Not exactly the definition of integrity, is it Joe?

18 USC 600

Search 18 U.S.C. § 600 : US Code – Section 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity

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.

I think it will turn out in the end that Sestack heard what he thought and the speaker avoided any explicit quid pro quo. In pol-speak it is called “candidate’s ears”. Not nefarious nor unusual.
In order to be a crime, it has to be an explicit offer not vague ‘you have a lot of qualities’ or a translation or impression kind of discussion.
I do agree it is odd that the WH is keeping it alive by dancing.
Toomey is a tea bagger who will get put into the hot tub with Palin, Beck and Limbaugh as the election get more interest.

Poor Richard-
Sestak has doubled-down on a bad bet by being emphatic that there was nothing unclear about it and that he was directly offered a job to dropout of the Senate race. No nuance about it.

There are plenty of non-Teabaggers would get into a hot tub with just Palin. Mostly to do to her what Bush did to the country.

Im kicking Toomey Beck and Limbaugh out of the hot tub and off to the insane asylum. Its just me, Palin and that Haley. LMAO (reference to the Haley allegations that have unfolded… hope everyone was in the mood for a little humor j/k).

Two things. A) this is nothing new, while being a “violation of the law”, BOTH republican and democratic administrations do this.

B) “I don’t want to talk about this, but I’m going to talk about it because I’m being forced to”. Typical GOP bullshit. If you’re gonna attack somebody, at least have the balls to say you’re doing it.

I think most people suspect Sestak was lying when he said he was offered a White House gig in exchange for staying away from Specter. That seems to be the elephant in the room. Dude appears to be a bit of a liar.

Either way, Do i still get to get in the hot tub?

I want Sestak to come clean on the job that David Diano had with him!!!!!!

95 South-
I never had (nor asked for) a job with Sestak. I did however provide computer services for which I was not compensated, in violation of an agreement I had with the campaign.
I’ve long given up any hope of an honest answer from Sestak about anything.

The saccharin “we should keep it clean and have non-negative campaign lasted a nano second. Toompey os a creep.
Lets see if Toomey is on the square square and confesses that he is on the Rand Paul script.
We only empower the creepy tea bagging phonies with this BS argument side stiff ,
They are best shamed and outed by talking specifically on the economy, the wars,this hemisphere killing oil spill, Wall street and credit trusts killing jobs

the WH guys are no dummies…the so-called democrats here should shut up and stop shooting into the foxhole…Toomey the wall street enabler is the one who deserves all the negative vibe here.

sick-
Yes, not dummies. The WH picked Specter.
The problem is that Sestak is now in their fox(news)hole and pulled the pin on his own grenade (ala Wile E Coyote).

Diano:
Who would you choose- Toomey and the republican ticket or Joe and the democrat ticket. Simple question.
Please, please ,skip the rhetoric and put your personal hate pom poms down. We have heard ,ad nauseum, your over-heated rhetoric and talking points. We get thst part.
Me, even though I find faults in all and their positions and personalities find the Democrat party and its candidates in the balance, a better choice for the country and the state.

write in vote for me – Arlen Specter. Did the samefor the 12th. couldnt bring myself to vote for either one.

Delco Blue Dog – If you truly “find the Democrat (sic) Party…a better choice,” please start calling it by its correct name: the Democratic Party.

“Democrat Party” is a slur, started by Republicans and used exclusively by the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Beck and their ilk because they found it made listeners think more negatively about Democrats.

The party is the Democratic Party; its members are Democrats.

Blue Dog-
I have a third choice: neither.
I don’t believe either one of them should hold public office, so neither are worthy of my vote in the affirmative.
We don’t know if there will be a third-party candidate on the ballot or if some scandal will befall the candidates, forcing them from the ballot.
I wish there was an official “none of the above” option, that if it got the most votes, the parties would have to pick new candidates or forgo having a representative until the next election cycle.

WestDem-
We should write in Dan.
Bruce-
What do you expect from a Blue Dog?

BTW, update on the “Job Offer”..

http://law.justia.com/us/codes/title10/10usc5013.html

(2) A person may not be appointed as Secretary of the Navy within five years after relief from active duty as a commissioned officer of a
regular component of an armed force.

So, Sestak retired at the end of 2005, and couldn’t even take such a job until the end of this year. Also, Obama had just appointed a Navy Secretary in the spring of 2009 (as well as the Under Secretary).

So, this pretty much debunks Sestak being offered the job of Secretary of the Navy in June 2009 (unless the job was to start after Sestak’s 2nd term in Jan 2011).

Oh, BTW, Secretary of Defense has a 7 year moratorium after relief of active duty.