Colorado Dem: Actually, the White House offered me three jobs to quit the primary

posted at 9:34 pm on June 2, 2010 by Allahpundit

Not only does he name names — as the Denver Post originally reported, it was indeed deputy chief of staff Jim Messina who contacted him about dropping out — but he’s actually released Messina’s e-mail from last year describing the jobs they had in mind for him. The one key omission? Any acknowledgment by Romanoff that he himself lied to the Post when initially asked whether anyone had offered him a position.

U.S. Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff acknowledged tonight that he discussed three possible jobs with the deputy chief of staff of the Obama administration — all contingent upon a decision by Romanoff not to challenge U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet.

Romanoff said none of the jobs was formally offered, but said the only reason they were discussed with Deputy Chief of Staff Jim Messina was if Romanoff stayed out of the Senate race.

“Mr. Messina also suggested three positions that might be available to me were I not pursuing the Senate race,” Romanoff wrote in a statement. “He added that he could not guarantee my appointment to any of these positions. At no time was I promised a job, nor did I request Mr. Messina’s assistance in obtaining one.”

Here’s the full text of Romanoff’s statement, together with the description of the available jobs. Is Messina guilty of a crime for having made this kinda sorta offer, even without any formal “promise”? Let’s see:

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 we can get this one to the jury! Seriously, though, I don’t want Messina charged, partly because he was obviously acting at Rahm Emanuel’s behest (no deputy COS would be authorized to bribe a senate candidate on his own initiative, I assume) and partly because I’m sure this really is D.C. business as usual for both parties. The point of bringing up the statute again and again is simply to remind people that it’s the same sort of unrealistic “good government” aspiration that Captain Hopenchange used to such cynical effect during the campaign and which he’s now happily willing to violate in the most flagrant ways. Remember when he promised to put Congress’s health-care deliberations on C-SPAN? That was pure garbage aimed at idealistic young voters, which he duly abandoned as soon as he was elected save for that “health-care summit” dog-and-pony show earlier this year. Frankly, I’m surprised he didn’t include this angle in his campaign platform: “We won’t deny primary voters a choice with dirty deals!” sounds like precisely the sort of pap he was pushing at his nomination speech in front of the Temple of Zeus or whatever. Although, to be completely fair, I wonder in hindsight how many lefties really bought it or even cared whether he’d keep his “Change” promises or not. The point was to win an election and that mission was accomplished. Who cares if he’s turned out to be every inch the Chicago politician that he is?

As for the politics of Romanoff putting out this statement, I agree with Ben Smith: This sure looks like a middle finger towards the White House, aimed at casting his primary opponent, Michael Bennet, as the puppet of a very cynical political machine. No wonder Joe Sestak’s suddenly ducking joint appearances with The One.


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

Jenfidel on June 2, 2010 at 9:50 PM

I tend to agree here. Dems would have cried it from the rooftops. Either Reps weren’t this corrupt, or both sides are equally so, and the corruptocrats have never been so worried about their jobs as to speak of it. Trying to distance themselves from Obummer in a last ditch attempt to save their butts?

riverrat10k on June 2, 2010 at 11:24 PM

This is a felony.

Missy on June 2, 2010 at 10:20 PM

Indeed, and impeachable offenses.

But Allah says everyone does it (without a shred of evidence pointing to republicans), so that makes it OK.

Rebar on June 2, 2010 at 11:28 PM

Looks like this may not be too far off the mark:
Is The Obama Presidency Doomed?

mrt721 on June 2, 2010 at 11:32 PM

It sure would be nice if someone would stand up and started enforcing our laws…

… or would that be racist?

Seven Percent Solution on June 2, 2010 at 11:33 PM

Here’s a link to the email Messina sent to Romanoff describing the positions offered.

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2010/0602/20100602_064718_Messina-Romanoff_Email.pdf

the_stoics on June 2, 2010 at 11:38 PM

Still looking for the Republican example, AP.

riverrat10k on June 2, 2010 at 11:41 PM

Crr the next time I get a traffic ticket I am going to bring in a tape of all the people who were speeding when I was. I am going to tell the judge that the esteemed legal mind known as Crrap said that if some get a way with breaking a law then all people should. Cool.

CWforFreedom on June 2, 2010 at 11:46 PM

Jobgate? Jobaquiddick? We need a new suffix.

Laura Curtis on June 2, 2010 at 9:46 PM

Blow … oh wait that’s a prefix.

Dasher on June 2, 2010 at 11:52 PM

I have no doubt deals like that have been struck in the past by both parties. What’s odd about the two current cases is that the offerees were willing to admit it.

Allahpundit on June 2, 2010 at 9:40 PM

I seem to recall that being said about Nixon and Clinton too (or at least similar sentiments).

Fighton03 on June 3, 2010 at 12:04 AM

Jobgate? Jobaquiddick? We need a new suffix.

Laura Curtis on June 2, 2010 at 9:46 PM
Blow … oh wait that’s a prefix.

Dasher on June 2, 2010 at 11:52 PM

Squid Pro Quo

ted c on June 3, 2010 at 12:08 AM

I have no doubt deals like that have been struck in the past by both parties. What’s odd about the two current cases is that the offerees were willing to admit it.

Allahpundit on June 2, 2010 at 9:40 PM

true, but also that CPT Hopenchange was supposed to “change” the tone in DC as well. The left is trying to defend this as business-as-usual stuff in DC, a fact which is likely true, however, that doesn’t change the other facts that it is both illegal and antithetical to Obama’s rhetoric. Both of those things are blowing against him big time. He put this baby into context in 2008 with his sky high promises.

ted c on June 3, 2010 at 12:10 AM

Oh. So that’s what Obama meant when he said he would “pivot to jobs in January”. MILLIONS unemployed. Obama administration focused on two or three jobs that will advance the Democrats in Washington.

TN Mom on June 3, 2010 at 12:22 AM

I think you are all missing the black jesus’ concept of change.

Rather than cover up and hide the criminality of the political class in D.C. This clown and his magic unicorn parage are going to behave like criminals out in the open.

exsanguine on June 3, 2010 at 12:22 AM

Looks like this may not be too far off the mark:
Is The Obama Presidency Doomed?

mrt721 on June 2, 2010 at 11:32 PM

That’s the plan!

/Bill and Hillary Clinton

NoLeftTurn on June 3, 2010 at 12:40 AM

As to the charge that this goes on on both sides: I’m not sure it is all that common b/c, as others have duly noted, we surely would have heard about it by now from our oh-so-fair and impartial press. If it does, it should be condemned regardless of who is engaged in it. It doesn’t say much for us if we overlook this instance simply because one of our guys could be in the crosshairs someday. If they break the law, they should be.

NoLeftTurn on June 3, 2010 at 12:51 AM

So you can take the boys out of Chicago, but you can’ts take the Chicago outta the boys.

somewhatconcerned on June 3, 2010 at 1:00 AM

I really think it would only be fair for AP and/or those who agree with him to come up with some concrete examples of Republicans “pulling this same crap.”
I refuse to accept the premise that “this really is D.C. business as usual for both parties.”
Tu quoque much, AP?

Jenfidel on June 2, 2010 at 10:21 PM

Lets ask Toomey if Bush offered him a job to get out of the primary against Spectacle… If Bush had done this trust me we would have found out with all the hatred directed at Bush by the Hatefilled Let

CCRWM on June 3, 2010 at 1:09 AM

But Allah says everyone does it (without a shred of evidence pointing to republicans), so that makes it OK.

Rebar on June 2, 2010 at 11:28 PM

With kindest regard for Allahpundit, I was surprised by the slur, and I would have preferred some evidence to go along with it, also.

Kralizec on June 3, 2010 at 1:48 AM

The GOP has a history of offering government jobs to potential candidates if they won’t oppose the party favorite?

I have no doubt deals like that have been struck in the past by both parties. What’s odd about the two current cases is that the offerees were willing to admit it.

Allahpundit on June 2, 2010 at 9:40 PM

If people always dismiss it as, “Both sides do it,” then it will always be done.

Here’s a crazy thought: treat it like the crime it is and let the chips fall where they may. If the Republicans actually do this, they can be outed and impeached too. We already know Blago tried to sell Obama’s Senate seat, and it’s looking like the only reason he was refused is because he wasn’t discreet enough.

I have a feeling that if we put teeth into the law and started treating these things as crimes, we’d find out the Republicans aren’t doing it after all, or only in rare instances, while the Dems have been doing it all along.

The fact that the Dems seem to love hearing that both sides do it strongly implies they really want to just wink at the practice rather than live up to the law.

There Goes The Neighborhood on June 3, 2010 at 1:53 AM

You know what I am sick and tired of people like Guv Rendell(PA) and a variety of hacks saying “so what? It happens all the time, everyone….”, Rendell’s candid amition should be directly followed up with charges. If they all do it, they all should go to jail. When I’m flying down Laks Shore Drive at 75-80 I am merely keeping up with traffic (posted limit is 45) but when I get pulled over do I get away with “But, but officer everyone else is…”?

Until this culture of entitlement, entitlement to break the law no less, is driven from politics, we are going to continue down the road of one step forward, two steps back.
It’s just gotta stop!

Archimedes on June 3, 2010 at 2:04 AM

It just occurred to me that Obama is just returning to one of his old strategies with a new twist, i.e., they can’t win if they’re not on the ballot. Not to suggest that it isn’t a time-honored political strategy, just that he has been known to use this one before, albeit in a slightly different form.

Back in the old Chicago days Obama got his most worrisome opponents off the ballot by challenging them on technicalities. But as everyone is Chicago knows, once you are in power you have more resources and tactics available to get the same job done.

novaculus on June 3, 2010 at 2:13 AM

Sounds to me like Allah really doesn’t think much of the law in the first place.

leftnomore on June 3, 2010 at 2:20 AM

Hayakawa Spurns Job Offer

This article from 1981 has been making the rounds of lefty sites to prove the “other side does it too” argument. I don’t see a tremendous amount of difference between what the Reagan administration tried to do and what happened here. It looks like it’s politics as usual.

melchitt on June 3, 2010 at 2:58 AM

So if I understand this right, we have three federal laws on the books. But everyone ignores them so it is all right. And, certainly, the current DoJ will simply refuse to investigate and the Democrat Congress will refuse to hold hearings.

Yet James O’Keefe gets a 3 year probation for being in a Federal building without permission. Even though there may be many people who do the same thing.

Is this how a country becomes corrupt? Laws for thee, but not laws for me?

iconoclast on June 3, 2010 at 3:45 AM

Obama = Nixon.

tetriskid on June 2, 2010 at 10:07 PM

I say the algebraic expression should be:

(Nixon + Carter) x LBJ = Obama

radioboyatl on June 3, 2010 at 4:36 AM

if this was W, there would be 24/7 outrage ala scooty libby on the msm…

what’s good for the goose….

cmsinaz on June 3, 2010 at 6:05 AM

Whats amazing is that that Democrats, who are having their free choices derailed by a corrupt political machine are pretending like this is no biggie.

rob verdi on June 3, 2010 at 6:24 AM

rob verdi on June 3, 2010 at 6:24 AM

That is the kind of country they are trying to make.

Slowburn on June 3, 2010 at 6:52 AM

The difference between Hiyakwa and this set of offers?

Done in the open and immediately refused by the candidate who denied any contact with the WH.

We aren’t getting the contact denial part from these candidates, quite the opposite. The WH is changing its story multiple times, unlike the Hiyakawa incident. There is no set of leads beyond the individual spokesmen going deeper into the WH in the Hiyakawa incident, unlike this one.

If someone on the Left can gin up proof via the records that Hiyakawa said anything otherwise, that later leaks by the Reagan WH showed deeper contact, that this was anything other then a single advisor talking off the top of his head on a talk show – then please do so. Dig and dig hard as that story isn’t going to get traction without backing.

And if this is the SOP for DC, then why don’t we hear lots more about this once Administrations leave office? Both Bushes, Clinton, Reagan, Carter, Ford, Nixon, LBJ, JFK, Eisenhower, Truman…. some of those have had a fine-tooth comb go over their records and we have? Or are all of these Administrations in violation of the law for destroying public records en mass? Because that is what is being inferred: that all WH Administrations willingly violate the public records laws multiple times over, indeed CONTINUOUSLY.

If this is SOP for DC, then I want them ALL thrown out: any single Congresscritter or WH Official involved in this sort of things need to go as it is blatant disregard for the law and a violation of their Oath of Office. So if it does happen ‘all the time’ then get the evidence up and out so that we know who really, and for true, needs to go on both sides of the aisle, in both Houses of Congress, and in the Administration… including appointed Judges who need to be impeached.

In case its been missed the passing it off as SOP is now getting to be vitriolically hated by the public as it has put us into a state of near insolvency. And supporting that way of things is not going to look good on anyone’s record in the near future. So yes, please, evidence and point out the wrongdoing up and down the line, without exception to party or ideology. More of it, not less. These bozos need to go because they are unable to keep their word on anything or uphold the law of the land.

Proof.

Evidence.

Records.

Dig hard and deep.

And that will show you really do want ‘hope and change’ even if this Administration is all about more corruption and more of the same. I want them all gone from DC so this isn’t SOP… and I strongly doubt I am alone in that anymore.

ajacksonian on June 3, 2010 at 6:57 AM

because I’m sure this really is D.C. business as usual for both parties.

Please give specific instances and names. The members of the regime who do not hesitate to make baseless accusations and point fingers to take the focus off thier corruption and incompetence have not named names of other administrations who did this. They make false statements on a daily basis and disparage anyone who they perceive as opposition. That little statement is just the typical liberal response when they have nothing left to say, “Oh both sides do it.” Well, BS. The democrat party is by definition a dishonest and corrupt organization. They cannot state thier goals and policies openly and honestly because even the idiots in thier base would not vote for them if they did. I’m not making an absolute statement about character and parties but while there are bad people everywhere corruption is an institution in the democrat party. The democrat party does not like our history, our form of government or our economic system. The democrat party is by definition an unAmerican, corrupt organization. Only limited liberals with no where else to go use the statement, “Both sides do it.”

peacenprosperity on June 3, 2010 at 7:53 AM

peacenprosperity on June 3, 2010 at 7:53 AM

great points. +3

ted c on June 3, 2010 at 7:56 AM

How funny that only the trolls thphilli and crr6 agree with AP.

Allahpundit uses a classic logical flaw in his post:

Argument to Moderation.

fossten on June 3, 2010 at 8:38 AM

“Mister Ness! I do not approve of your methods!”

“You’re not from Chicago.”

Movie The Untouchables with Kevin Cosner and Sean Connery

Khun Joe on June 3, 2010 at 8:45 AM

because I’m sure this really is D.C. business as usual for both parties.

This is the REAL problem. We constantly excuse unlawful behavior because “both parties do it”. President, ICE refuse to enforce immigration laws because it’s racist etc. Well my conscience forbids me to take part and pay taxes because they are “unjust”. What happens to me?—-you got it! My a$$ is thrown in jail never to see the light of day. We are a nation of laws and we die when we lose that. Politicians have begun our dieing process because of their disregard for the law and our citizens who so are so sophisticated they write as in the quote above.

Herb on June 3, 2010 at 8:47 AM

Start the frog march music.

Kissmygrits on June 3, 2010 at 8:50 AM

Hayakawa Spurns Job Offer

This article from 1981 has been making the rounds of lefty sites to prove the “other side does it too” argument. I don’t see a tremendous amount of difference between what the Reagan administration tried to do and what happened here. It looks like it’s politics as usual.

melchitt on June 3, 2010 at 2:58 AM

The fact that Reagan may have done something similar once 30 years ago (and as ajacksonian points out above, it’s not all that similar) does not make it “politics as usual” and certainly doesn’t make it right. If Bush had been caught doing something like this, I can assure you the Democrats would not be shrugging their shoulders and saying, Oh well, politics as usual. The Obama administration blatently violated federal law, and they should be called on it.

mbs on June 3, 2010 at 9:49 AM

I seriously cannot believe that a co-contributor to HA is suggesting that it’s a legal stance or defense argument to say everyone does something illegal therefore it cannot be prosecuted. I bet you say that everytime to roll a joint and smoke it but even with all the people who are willi g to puff along with you at the local hemp shop, if you get caught you’re going to jail. Even more disturbing is the number of commenters willing to concede his point or argue its merits as if there are any. There aren’t. The law is the law. Tell SCOTUS that Congress, the WH, & even SCOTUS itself that because THEY ARE THE GOVERNMENT they determine what laws on the books get enforcing while the average citizen must sit around wondering what really IS or IS NOTa truly enforceable law. Right! Good luck with that.

I keep hearing this thing about Clinton too. The idea wasn’t that LYING is done all the time, it was that it was about ADULTERY. It was that people lie about adultery all the time and that it’s not illegal or if it is those laws are so old they should be off the books. The problem was that the adultery was with Monica NOT Paula that’s how the media got away with painting it that way. They ALWAYS CONVENIENTLY forget to add that the lying was in conjunction with a sexual harrassment lawsuit. As for the LAW regarding THAT!?! The judge fined him $90,000.00 and he “willng” accepted a plea agreement and was disbarred. That’s NOT getting away with “something everyone does all the time anyway”. He DID NOT get away with it when it comes to the trial. Impeachment is a whole other issue and does NOT require a felony or our President to be a criminal. The bar for that is much LOWER. Ethics violations or immoral conduct is sufficient to warrant an impeachment. For more on that you should read Ann Coulter’s ‘High Crimes & Misdemeanors’. If you know anything about her books you know she LOVES to add lots & lots of footnotes. That for those who want to say she doesn’t know what she’s talking about.

NOTE: If you disagree with me then I ask, “What ‘crime’ did Nixon ACTUALLY commit that Congress would draw up Articles of Impeachment over. Did he LIE UNDER OATH? What FELONY did he commit?

Sultry Beauty on June 3, 2010 at 9:56 AM

And as for this thing about Reagan? It’s quite convenient to use a story where the person is unable to defend themselves. Besides, the REAL issue isn’t whether or not what Messina or anyone else, including the President has done is ILLEGAL, we all know it is. The ISSUE is whether or not any prosecutor can come up with enough EVIDENCE to PROSECUTE!! That’s the nuts and bolts.

The way I see it is that the crowd under Pres. Obama’s Bus is getting so big it’s getting ready to overturn. When it does Pres. Obama is going to find himself under his own dang bus.

Sultry Beauty on June 3, 2010 at 10:13 AM

Here’s a link to the email Messina sent to Romanoff describing the positions offered.

http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2010/0602/20100602_064718_Messina-Romanoff_Email.pdf

the_stoics on June 2, 2010 at 11:38 PM

All three of these positions are high-level, two of them are Director of an agency, one requires Senate confirmation. Not exactly the unpaid advisory role that was supposedly offered to Sestak via Bill Clinton.

The ISSUE is whether or not any prosecutor can come up with enough EVIDENCE to PROSECUTE!! That’s the nuts and bolts.

This E-mail is probably enough evidence to prosecute–against Messina. Either Messina decides to take the fall, or else he could make a deal with the prosecutor to squeal on someone else higher up.

There’s a horrible pattern here of “stacking the Senate”, akin to FDR’s attempt to “stack the Supreme Court”. Obama and Biden were both Senators, and had to find replacements for themselves in the Senate, and Blagojevich might still sing like a canary about Obama’s Senate seat. Obama then appointed Senators Clinton (D-NY) and Salazar(D-CO) to his Cabinet, and tried to lure Romanoff from a primary challenge against Salazar’s replacement. Since someone in the White House offered Sestak a “job” in exchange for not challenging Specter in a primary, could there have been a deal made to get Specter to switch parties, promising Specter that he would be the Dem nominee?

There are now 4 appointed Senators who owe their jobs to Obama, plus one who switched parties, perhaps at Obama’s request. Whatever happened to the Senate as an independent part of the Legislative branch of government, elected by the people of the States?

Steve Z on June 3, 2010 at 12:01 PM

Comment pages: 1 2