The Silence of the Sestak: The Big Me involved?; Update: WH memo released; Update: Sestak corroborates

posted at 11:36 am on May 28, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

With the political world holding its breath for the Friday-afternoon document dump containing the Obama White House response to the Joe Sestak scandal, Greg Sargent gets a sneak peek at the possible defense.  The Obama administration will say that it asked Bill Clinton to conduct “informal” talks with Sestak to determine his political ambitions, which Sestak then mischaracterized afterward:

Senior White House advisers asked former President Bill Clinton to talk to Joe Sestak about whether he was serious about running for Senate, and to feel out whether he’d be open to other alternatives, according to sources familiar with the situation.

But the White House maintains that the Clinton-Sestak discussions were informal, according to the sources. The White House, under pressure to divulge the specifics of its interactions with Sestak, will release a formal statement later today outlining their version of events, including Clinton’s involvement.

According to the sources, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel asked Clinton and his longtime adviser, lawyer Doug Band, to talk to Sestak about the race. It’s unclear right now whether the White House will say that Clinton was asked to suggest specific administration positions for Sestak, whether Clinton floated positions on his own, whether Clinton discussed other options not related to the adminstration [sic], or whether employment even came up at all in the talks.

But the news that Clinton is at the center of this whole story is noteworthy on its own because of the former president’s stature, and underscores how heavily invested the White House was in dissuading Sestak from running. The White House sent Clinton to talk to Sestak because Arlen Specter, constituting the 60th Dem vote in the Senate, was viewed as key to enacting Obama’s agenda.

Having someone outside of the administration as a buffer would be very convenient for Obama at this juncture.  It allows Obama to offload the blame to someone other than a staffer.  And like all buffers, it provides the President with plausible deniability for any legal problems that might ensue.

That doesn’t mean that it’s also not true.  After all, the idea of plausible deniability has a long, if inglorious, history in American politics.  The film The Godfather, Part II has one character, Joe Cicci, laughing while he tells a Congressional committee that the Corleone family had “lots of buffers.”  Buffers exist because they’re practical and they work, especially in politics.  Even if no criminal intent existed, a buffer for this kind of mission would be essential.  It would be hard to imagine either Barack Obama or Rahm Emanuel tasking themselves with the job of pushing Sestak out of the Pennsylvania primary.

Assuming that Sargent’s sources are correct, we can pretty much predict what the document dump will say.  “We asked President Clinton to see what Rep. Sestak’s intentions were, and how we could help” would cover all the bases — and leave Bill Clinton holding the bag if anything untoward happened.  That, however, seems highly unlikely for a man so slippery that he could parse the meaning of the word “is” under oath.  An accidental crossing of the line would be much more likely with an inexperienced staffer than with Clinton, who would have been on his guard.  This makes it much more likely that Sestak blew it out of proportion in order to score a few political points against Arlen Specter and Obama.

Here’s a question, though.  Who was the buffer in Colorado?

Update: The New York Times has the same leak, but even more information about the job offer, emphasis mine:

Mr. Obama promised on Thursday to release an account of the matter, which White House lawyers have been drafting in recent days in consultation with Mr. Sestak’s brother, Richard, who runs his campaign. The White House plans to release its statement later on Friday. Until now, the White House has said publicly only that whatever conversations took place with Mr. Sestak were not inappropriate.

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 may get around the letter of the law, but certainly not the spirit, and it clears up another point that had puzzled me.  Obama yesterday claimed that the repor would exonerate him; if so, why hold it until Friday afternoon?  That would limit the media coverage of the exoneration.  The answer appears to be that the report may exonerate Obama and his staff from violations of the law — but that it clearly shows Obama attempting to manipulate an election in Pennsylvania for his own political purposes.  That may be legal, but it’s certainly not indicative of the “most transparent/ethical administration ever,” as Obama promised to provide.

Update II: What kind of unpaid position would be attractive enough to get Sestak out of the Senate primary?  That’s a darned good question, and I’ll bet the Obama White House is scrambling to make up find an answer.  If Sestak challenges this spin, though, I’d be very surprised.  I think he’s looking for an exit from this scandal at least as hard as Obama and his staff.

Update III: Marc Ambinder has the White House memo.  Shouldn’t this have been released at 5 pm or so?  And the memo itself seems to be evidence of potential wrongdoing, rather than an exoneration:

Uncompensated Advisory Board Options. 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.

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?

I’m guessing this adds gasoline rather than water to the fire.

Update IV: Via the Boss Emeritus on Twitter, Sestak wastes no time in corroborating the White House account:

Last summer, I received a phone call from President Clinton. During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background. He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a Presidential Board while remaining in the House of Representatives. I said no. I told President Clinton that my only consideration in getting into the Senate race or not was whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families and not any offer. The former President said he knew I’d say that, and the conversation moved on to other subjects.

There are many important challenges facing Pennsylvania and the rest of the country. I intend to remain focused on those issues and continue my fight on behalf of working families.

Excuse me, but a position on a Presidential Board is not a “job” in any sense of the word.  Sestak has repeatedly insisted that the White House offered him a job to get him to withdraw from the race.  Now we’re at the who’s-lying stage, and it may well be everyone.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4

So much for the Clinton Machine being dead

blatantblue on May 28, 2010 at 11:38 AM

Technical term: cutout.

RBMN on May 28, 2010 at 11:39 AM

because the position being offered was unpaid

O’Rly? Folks, they looked at was conservatives were saying and now they’re pushing out this message… it’s retarded to think he would take anything that was “unpaid”… what unpaid positions are out there that would be worthy?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Keep pushing… their story is insane…

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:39 AM

Bill Clinton: “Just when I thought I was out,……They pull me back in.”

portlandon on May 28, 2010 at 11:40 AM

I’ve said it once and I’ll say it again…Richard Nixon was an amateur compared to these lying, crooked ba$tards….

BigWyo on May 28, 2010 at 11:40 AM

“IS” a bunch of crooked BS

bbz123 on May 28, 2010 at 11:40 AM

was

eh, “what”…

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:40 AM

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”

Logic on May 28, 2010 at 11:40 AM

BTW, I find it hilarious that this “leaked” to the same guy who told Sestake to “clean up his mess” either yesterday or the time before…

What is with the “we’ll get back to you later” crap from Obama?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

I wonder if Bill Clinton agreed to this cover up, in exchange for a future Supreme Court Seat?

portlandon on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

I wonder if Bill Clinton agreed to this cover up, in exchange for a future Supreme Court Seat?

He’s too old…

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

This reeks.

forest on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Nothing to see here, move along. People apparently don’t care about a candidate for Senate claiming he fought in Vietnam, so why would this bother anyone? Plausible deniability…this WH has shown from Day One that they won’t be held responsible for jack squat, unless it’s something positive of course.

changer1701 on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

I did not have employment relations with that man, Mr Sestak.

MassVictim on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

BTW, who contacted Sestak’s brother?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

What does Bubba get in exchange for being thrown under the bus?

publiuspen on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

This story gets more and more interesting. Pass the popcorn.

packsoldier on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Considering Clinton held a position of power over Sestak in the past, (if I’m not mistaken, Clinton appointed him to a position during his presidency) then this is more than just a “buffer”. They (Obama administration) strategically chose someone who would give the impression of an official offer without being directly tied to the administration.

Who better than someone who gave the man a job in the past?

But why have a lawyer present in the meeting between Clinton and Sestak if they knew they weren’t skirting dangerously close to breaking the law?

ButterflyDragon on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

It doesn’t matter if it was paid or not.

He was offered compensation to not run. That’s a bribe by the legal definition.

Honestly, if Peyton Manning was offered an unpaid position in the government if he threw a game that wouldn’t be a bribe?

RLY?!

Skywise on May 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Oh to be a fly on the wall. “if you do this for us, then_________” and “your wife will be able to_________” and “if you don’t then________”.

I suppose we’ll never know until Hillary decides she’s had enough and gets another hefty book deal.

sherry on May 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Why do AP and Ed seem to take their story at face value?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

a future Supreme Court Seat?

portlandon on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Isn’t that the same court that disbarred him from arguing before it? Man, that’d be too rich.

MassVictim on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

What does Bubba get in exchange for being thrown under the bus?

publiuspen on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

I’d guess a higher foreign policy profile for Hillary, since she’s lost a lot of authority to Obama’s “sepcial envoys.” They get the headlines, and she gets to tour southern Africa.

Wethal on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

The Obama Administration would like to thank the MSM for giving them several months to get all their stories straight.

Exurban Jon on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Non-employee made the offer, and the job was unpaid.

Hey, that’s perfect, so now I need to wonder why it took so long for the Regime to announce this. I mean, this story is perfect. Why take so long with it?

forest on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

That’s their story, and they’re sticking to it.

RBMN on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Obama->Clinton->Sestak requires a “suspension of disbelief.”

Connie on May 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM

That may get around the letter of the law, but certainly not the spirit, and it clears up another point that had puzzled me.

This isn’t really true. It doesn’t equate that simply because a job is unpaid that it has no value.

Rocks on May 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM

I did not have employment relations with that man, Mr Sestak.

MassVictim on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Now that’s funny right there!

search4truth on May 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Billy Jeff — Now there is a credible witness. I am completely convinced nothing illegal went on now.

GnuBreed on May 28, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Having someone outside of the administration as a buffer would be very convenient for Obama at this juncture.

It also shows they knew they were walking a fine line here.

the position being offered was unpaid

As I posted in the headline thread, even a DailyKos poster questioned this: who in their right mind would think an unpaid advisory position would be enough to entice a candidate out of a Senate race? That’s either a lie or just dumb on the part of Clinton/the WH.

LastRick on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

What kind of unpaid positions are there, exactly?

Abby Adams on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

Now they just have to hope Slick Willie and Sestak stick to the story.

forest on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

This country is being run by nothing less than a bunch of sleazeballs. They are a disgrace and on top of that, they are stupid as well. I’ve had enough of the scumbag Clinton for a lifetime. He injects (ha ha) himself into everything one way or another. And I love Hillary saying that rich people don’t pay enough taxes…this while her husband pulls in a fortune for speaking engagements, etc. If she feels that way she should get on television with one of those giant checks and announce that she is voluntarily paying MORE taxes on the income. Fat chance you’ll see that. It is only important if it is OTHER people’s money.

NJ Red on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

Slick cut-out.

Game over.

percysunshine on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

Exurban Jon on May 28, 2010 at 11:44 AM

Bingo.

Thanks, media!

Abby Adams on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

NavyGate Bribe Co-Conspirators Meet, Compare Stories: “It’s not broken; it’s fixed!”

The “unpaid” job-cover story means that the lawyers told G. Rahm Emmanuel and the Big Pardon-Seller that offering Admiral Sestak a paid job [i.e., SecNav] was a felony–adjust your stories accordingly!

“If the president does it, that means it’s not illegal.”–Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton and Barack Obama

Noel on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

What is with the “we’ll get back to you later” crap from Obama?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

Rewriting history takes time, my friend.

LastRick on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

Quid pro Quo: Hillary gets the VP nod in 2012.

aquaviva on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

Obama is practicing Chicago politics, graft, bribery corruption, it’s what he knows.

doriangrey on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

If The One trusted Slick Willie he’s dummer than a dum.

Knife, meet back.

Pass the popcorn.

Bruno Strozek on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

What unpaid position are they talking about? It’s worth a special investigator just to hear what they come up with…

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

obama v clintons round 2 coming up.

booter on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

I don’t buy Bauer’s argument that “It was an unpaid position, so it was legal.” Who the hell believes that a congressman would voluntarily give up a senate race in exchange for an unpaid advisory position. Would it have been an advisory position if Sestak stayed in the congress? If so, he is receiving something of value (i.e., government perks) in his congressional position and that would have spilled over into the adivsory position as well since all travel and incidental expenses would have been paid for by the American people. Those advisory expenses would have been in addition to his congressional perks.

No, this reeks of corruption and the White House will not be able to spin it away.

KickandSwimMom on May 28, 2010 at 11:47 AM

The Obama administration will say that it asked Bill Clinton to conduct “informal” talks with Sestak to determine his political ambitions, which Sestak then mischaracterized afterward.

Depends on what the meaning of the word “asked” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “conduct” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “informal” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “determine” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “ambitions” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “mischaracterized” is.
Depends on what the meaning of the word “afterwards” is.

Bill would never lie tell an untruth, would he?

fogw on May 28, 2010 at 11:48 AM

What kind of unpaid positions are there, exactly?

Abby Adams on May 28, 2010 at 11:46 AM

Monica Lewinsky was in one. No, two.

MassVictim on May 28, 2010 at 11:48 AM

Why do AP and Ed seem to take their story at face value?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

I think they’re being cautious as site hosts. We, as commenters, get a little more leeway in our speculations.

LastRick on May 28, 2010 at 11:48 AM

Ed, I don’t get it.

If a position of power has value worthy to sway one’s decision, then how can it be outside the letter of the law?

This was a bribe, using the executive power of the White House, to control the outcome of an election.

This is the essence of political corruption and precisely the type that the law considers high crime.

Saltysam on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Rush was right about Clinton..He will never go away. He is such a whor@.

Dire Straits on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Liars. I don’t believe this happened one bit. Clinton would not offer Sestak a job the WH didn’t clear him to offer. At the least, Rahm Emmanuel should be investigated.

They know how to play this game. Why of all times is Emmanuel in Israel? Coincidence or Tactical? Emmanuel was a part of the Clinton WH.

What is Clinton getting out of the deal? He’s shrewd and will not do this for nothing. SCOTUS anyone?

conservative pilgrim on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

All they need so say is “Holder wont touch it , we won”.

the_nile on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Now wait a sec. If Clinton was only putting out “feelers” to Sestak then specifics such as “non-paying” jobs wouldn’t have come up. Also Clinton makes sense as a middle man. Remember this bit from the book, The thumpin’: how Rahm Emanuel and the Democrats learned to be ruthless… (read the first paragraph)

Weight of Glory on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Yes, I’m sure the most brilliant administration in history would offer an unpaid job in exchange for dropping a US Senate bid.

And Barack Obama had executive experience and a record of accomplishment prior to running for president.

NoDonkey on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Sleezy politics as usual.

scalleywag on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

That may get around the letter of the law

It doesn’t have to be paid. It has to be a position.

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.

amerpundit on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

What does Bubba get in exchange for being thrown under the bus?

publiuspen on May 28, 2010 at 11:42 AM

Hillary gets to keep her job…

doriangrey on May 28, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Slee-Zeee. I hope the voters in Pennslyvania are disgusted by all of this.

RobCon on May 28, 2010 at 11:50 AM

Ed, I don’t get it.

If a position of power has value worthy to sway one’s decision, then how can it be outside the letter of the law?

This was a bribe, using the executive power of the White House, to control the outcome of an election.

This is the essence of political corruption and precisely the type that the law considers high crime.

Saltysam on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Yes.

the_nile on May 28, 2010 at 11:50 AM

This is crazy. the White House memo specifically says the White House Chief of Staff “enlisted the support” of Clinton.
It doesn’t matter that Clinton is not a paid staff member of the Administration. He is still acting as it’s agent. The same way informants are agents of the police when they wear a wire. Rahm is dead meat. Perhaps he and Blago can share cells.

Rocks on May 28, 2010 at 11:50 AM

I wonder what favors Bill and Hill be expecting in return for this favor?

RobCon on May 28, 2010 at 11:51 AM

conservative pilgrim on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

His son’s bar mitzvah, and that has caused some anger in Israel, given the White House attitude towards Israel.

Wethal on May 28, 2010 at 11:51 AM

Though, I can’t wait to see how Clinton responds under oath after Republicans take back the house and have him in hearings to explain his role in this matter.

Break out your dictionaries. It’s going to be a lexicographer’s nightmare.

ButterflyDragon on May 28, 2010 at 11:51 AM

All they need so say is “Holder wont touch it , we won”.

the_nile on May 28, 2010 at 11:49 AM

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? —Juvenal

MassVictim on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

The WH counsel said no wrongdoing? Nope – independent counsel required IMO.

Oink on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

It all seems so familiar…ah, yes–now I remember:

August 29, 1972: ‘Internal Investigations Have Found No Wrongdoing in White House’

Nixon Speaks:

“…[W]ithin our own staff, under my direction, Counsel to the President, Mr. Dean, has conducted a complete investigation of all leads which might involve any present members of the White House Staff or anybody in the Government. I can say categorically that his investigation indicates that no one in the White House Staff, no one in this Administration, presently employed, was involved in this very bizarre incident. …

Before Mr. Mitchell left as campaign chairman he had employed a very good law firm with investigatory experience to look into the matter. Mr. MacGregor has continued that investigation and is continuing it now. …

What really hurts in matters of this sort is not the fact that they occur, because overzealous people in campaigns do things that are wrong. What really hurts is if you try to cover it up.”

Noel on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

I wonder if Bill Clinton agreed to this cover up, in exchange for a future Supreme Court Seat?

portlandon on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM

The exchange was Hillery replacing Biden in 2012, increasing her chances in 2016.

AaronGuzman on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

If the position was unpaid, why wouldn’t Sestak freely admit it?

notagool on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Gee, the Chicago Pol played it straight. And I’ve got some oceanfront in Louisiana if anyone’s interested.

BKeyser on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Obama must be very nervous relying on Bill Clinton to backup his cover story. This may be the time he choose to bare his fangs….

TheBigOldDog on May 28, 2010 at 11:53 AM

Pass the popcorn.
These people are exceedingly stupid. When the going gets tough the tough go to Slick Willy?

Now there’s a smart game plan/sarc

ORconservative on May 28, 2010 at 11:53 AM

Though, I can’t wait to see how Clinton responds under oath after Republicans take back the house and have him in hearings to explain his role in this matter.

Break out your dictionaries. It’s going to be a lexicographer’s nightmare.

ButterflyDragon on May 28, 2010 at 11:51 AM

He’ll respond exactly the same way he has done in the past, he’ll tell lies that will make Lucifer, the father of all lies, turn green with envy…

doriangrey on May 28, 2010 at 11:54 AM

Slee-Zeee. I hope the voters in Pennslyvania are disgusted by all of this.

RobCon on May 28, 2010 at 11:50 AM

There are a great many voters there who thought Ed Rendell would make a good Governor, nuff said.

NoDonkey on May 28, 2010 at 11:54 AM

And, the WH is talking to Sestak’s lawyer-brother, looks like to keep the story straight:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/27/AR2010052705245_pf.html

cs89 on May 28, 2010 at 11:54 AM

Wow.. Poor Obama. He has had to deal with 2 slicks in 2 days. One made of oil, the other made of Bill.

Key West Reader on May 28, 2010 at 11:55 AM

I wonder if Bill Clinton agreed to this cover up, in exchange for a future Supreme Court Seat?

portlandon on May 28, 2010 at 11:41 AM
The exchange was Hillery replacing Biden in 2012, increasing her chances in 2016.

AaronGuzman on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Exactly. Something’s up. Talk about quid pro quo!

Oink on May 28, 2010 at 11:55 AM

If the position was unpaid, why wouldn’t Sestak freely admit it?

notagool on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

Because retired Vice Admirals wouldn’t for a moment think about accepting some scut unpaid position, especially ones who could be a Senator instead?

This stinks to high heaven and anyone stupid enough to believe Obama or Clinton on this is a complete idiot.

NoDonkey on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Remember that Obama met with Clinton just before his press conference yesterday. Had to get the stories straight.

Pardon Clinton and Emanuel NOW.
/s

Just wanted to say if first.

barnone on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Why do AP and Ed seem to take their story at face value?

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:43 AM

Ed does seem overly accepting in this post of their version of the story.

conservative pilgrim on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

And I’ve got some oceanfront in Louisiana if anyone’s interested.

BKeyser on May 28, 2010 at 11:52 AM

I’ve got some oceanfront property in Arizona…

publiuspen on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

This is for wifey,HilRod to get the SCJOTUSA!!

canopfor on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

It’s the Chicago Way.

WisCon on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Unpaid? Oh Please……come up with another lie!

BigMike252 on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Wasn’t it Clinton who told Uncle Teddy that “A few years ago this guy would be getting us coffee”.

Dire Straits on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

I believe two things about the White House explanations are guaranteed:

1. They will be lies

2. They will get away with it

Sorry to be so cynical, but so far…

Daggett on May 28, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Keep an eye on Obama in fundraisers for Hillary to retire her campaign debt. I think the One promised to help before, and didn’t, so watch for a new effort.

Wethal on May 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Proven liar and impeached president Clinton?

jukin on May 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Just keep talking about this. Never let it die. Bill Clinton, the preprobate, is involved. This is just plain laughable. You can just see these stupid people in the Clinton and Obama administration plotting and schemeing to advance their adgenda hoping that they have enough lawbreakers in place. Nothing the Clinton administration did or said was true and now this administration is the same.
The one good thing is that they are at least trying to cover their tracks and pretend they are all legal. All hope is not lost yet.

BetseyRoss on May 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM

Sestak said it was an important position in the White House. Who would give up a Senate seat,probably for life, for an “un-paid” position. This smells like last weeks fish.

sandee on May 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM

He’s slick and impeached. The first instrument for the most corrupt president in US history, and unplugging toilets.

Hening on May 28, 2010 at 11:57 AM

I’m sure even if it’s an unpaid position that it’s still illegal under Scottish law…

ninjapirate on May 28, 2010 at 11:58 AM

His son’s bar mitzvah, and that has caused some anger in Israel, given the White House attitude towards Israel.

Wethal on May 28, 2010 at 11:51 AM

He needs to have the Bar Mitzvah in Israel? He could’ve had it at the WH or flew back to Chicago or wherever. Israel??? Still seems coordinated to me.

conservative pilgrim on May 28, 2010 at 11:58 AM

What kind of unpaid position would be attractive enough to get Sestak out of the Senate primary? That’s a darned good question, and I’ll bet the Obama White House is scrambling to make up find an answer.

Head of the Naval division of ORGANIZING FOR AMERICA (OFA)?

Rocks on May 28, 2010 at 11:59 AM

So let me get this straight,the “Sexual Predator” Bill
Clinton who was frequently getting an oil change by Monica
the Mechanics,just so happened to have the job of Secretary
of State handy at his disposal and authority to do so!!

Me thinks NOT!!!!!!

canopfor on May 28, 2010 at 12:00 PM

Maybe Bill should just throw these guys under the bus and clear the way for Hillary 2012.

forest on May 28, 2010 at 12:00 PM

Sadly I agree they will probably get away with this. The blogs and alternate media will keep on it, but the MSM will let it die. Unfortunately an awful lot of our citizenry rely on the dinosaur media.

sandee on May 28, 2010 at 12:00 PM

He needs to have the Bar Mitzvah in Israel? He could’ve had it at the WH or flew back to Chicago or wherever. Israel??? Still seems coordinated to me.

conservative pilgrim on May 28, 2010 at 11:58 AM

I think there is a certain prestige to doing it there. I know Emanuel is in Israel now, according to the Jerusalem Post. Assume it’s about the bar mitzvah.

Wethal on May 28, 2010 at 12:00 PM

Oopps,fact screw-up,sorry,thats Secretary of the Navy!!!

canopfor on May 28, 2010 at 12:01 PM

This is brilliant – the MSM won’t touch Bubba.

jake-the-goose on May 28, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4