A promise for an answer “shortly”. That means the WH isn’t sure yet, how to lie and spin the story.

But Promises Answer “Shortly”

Or “short answers?”

Hey, thy have had since Feb. to make up their lies.

He said that we should trust him… and why wouldn’t we?

Anyone who doesn’t agree, and thinks that this is yet another example of the non-transparency of the most transparent administration ev-ah… is a teabagging racist. Oh, and FOX News only reaches a small percent of the population.

There, we got all the loony left comments out of the way.

Well, I see that we have all of the traditional rightist talking points, otherwise known as Obama Bashathon 2010, out of the way.

The Real Royal King says:
May 27, 2010 at 3:25 pm

I ring the waaa-bulance for you. “Stop saying bad things about Obama! Talk about Bush or FOX! I don’t like this. Hmph.”

As I pointed out elsewhere:

“The practice that Issa objects to is common and not unusual.

Now, trading an administration job — a thing of value — for a political favor might well constitute bribery. It is also very common. A Nexus search turns up numerous examples. In 1981, President Reagan offered S.I. Hayakawa, then California’s senior senator, a job if he declined to run for reelection. We know this because Reagan’s chief political adviser admitted as much on the record.

(Remember when William Weld was nominated to ambassador to Mexico? Same reason, same motivation. Jesse Helms scuttled this, but for reasons having nothing to do with presidential political interference.)

More recently, after Rep. Ben Gilman found his congressional district eliminated by redistricting in 2002, the White House tried to persuade him from challenging another Republican congressman in another district by considering him for an administration position. Karl Rove repeatedly intervened in Republican primaries. And Tim Pawlenty is not a senator because Rove urged him to run for governor instead.”

So are we mad about anyone from either party doing this? Or are we only mad when the other side does it?

paulmdoro says:
May 27, 2010 at 3:46 pm

Charles Krauthammer has been very dismissive of the attention paid to this as just politics as usual on both sides. It is almost inconceivable that whatever offer was made was made right inside the boundary lines.

Personally, I think BHO should get out in front of it asap. They should have done so long ago.

You’re right Grammie. Krauthammer, not exactly an Obama fan, says it’s just politics as usual.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,593521,00.html

They’ll release their story at 11:30 p.m. Friday , just before the holiday weekend . I bet they would prefer to put their boot on Sestak’s neck . Barry will be in Chicago , mowing his lawn and picking up his mail .

“Shortly” means they are still trying to figure which lie will be most palatable to the leftards…and at the same time least laughable to the right.

It’s a tricky calibration.

He has so much disregard for his base anymore that he doesn’t even feign transparency any longer

@Grammie & @paulmdoro: That’s why I haven’t worried about it.
I’m pretty sure it was even a plot line from an early West Wing.

…or maybe it’s just that Tinkerbell Emanuel is still consulting with his lawyers to see how much jail time he’s going to get

Jail time? Oy. See comments above regarding Krauthammer and this being politics as usual.

do you people really give a crap about this??? you all need to get a life.

I wonder if Rahm was butt-naked in the gym showers ,when he offered Sestak the job?

They’ve been busy:

A Democrat candidate running against a Senate incumbent is offered a job by the White House as an incentive to drop out of the primary race. Sounds like the Joe Sestak scandal in which he alleged that someone in the White House offered him a job in order to drop out of the race against the incumbent senator from Pennsylvania, Arlen Specter. Right? Well, yes. However, this also perfectly describes another similar scandal in which it is alleged that the White House offered a job to Andrew Romanoff (photo) in order to drop out of the primary race for the senate from Colorado against incumbent Michael Bennet. And the amazing thing about this scandal is that the newspaper that broke it has since remained completely silent on any further reporting.

First the scandal details as reported by Michael Riley for the Denver Post in this September 27, 2009 article:

WASHINGTON — Not long after news leaked last month that Andrew Romanoff was determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet, Romanoff received an unexpected communication from one of the most powerful men in Washington.

Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post.

Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said.

Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/p-j-gladnick/2010/05/27/denver-post-goes-silent-senate-candidate-job-offer-scandal#ixzz0pAKPENQC

TROLLING4LIBS says:
May 27, 2010 at 4:55 pm
I wonder if Rahm was butt-naked in the gym showers ,when he offered Sestak the job?

Thanks, it took weeks for me to get that image out of my head and now it’s back!

Yea sorry quite the disturbing image Michelle.. Regardless if this was a crime or not , the campaign promise , of no more business as usual, no more back room deals, transparency, were all a lie.

Based on the law, I think they are in trouble.

The actual 18 USC 600 statute states:

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 not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

Sestak is on tape saying he was offered a job to get out of the race. I almost feel bad for him, because I don’t think he realized at the time, he was admitting someone committed a crime. He’s probably regretting saying anything now.

Its Bush’s fault. And anyone who disagrees is a racist.

Thank God for Fox News. Obama would have rather been hit in the face with a 2×4 than call on Major Garret, today. Kudos to Major!

“Sestak is on tape saying he was offered a job to get out of the race.”

Please provide a link that shows him saying the job depended on him getting out of the race.

From: http://mediamatters.org/research/201005260026:

“Legal experts reject Fox’s allegation that Sestak was “bribed”
May 26, 2010 12:15 pm ET

Fox News has seized on false allegations that the White House “bribed” Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) with an administration job in exchange for staying out of a Senate race and claimed it would amount to an “illegal” and possibly “an impeachable offense.” In fact, legal experts have rejected the claims that such offers are a bribe or illegal.”

The article goes on to include statements from experts of all political persuasions.

“Its Bush’s fault. And anyone who disagrees is a racist.”

Bush’s faults and his CRIMES are two distinct matters. Nevertheless, the Media Matters article includes details on past Republican administrations engaging in similar activities – in addition to master manipulator Karl Rove’s dubious doings, as noted by paulmdoro, above.

I’m sure you were outraged about THAT, too.

Via the politico
Rep. Joe Sestak, winner of the Pennsylvania Democratic Senate primary, is refusing to provide more information on what job he was offered by a White House official to drop of that race, although he confirmed again that the incident occurred.

The White House was backing incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) in the primary. Sestak acknowledged in an interview in February that he was offered a position by an unnamed White House official – a potential violation of federal law – but has not offered any specifics on conversation. Republicans are trying to use the issue against Sestak in the November Senate race.

“It’s interesting. I was asked a question about something that happened months earlier, and I felt that I should answer it honestly, and that’s all I had to say about it.” Sestak said Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Anybody else has to decide on what they will say upon their role. That’s their responsibility.”

Yet Sestak confirmed to NBC’s David Gregory that the incident did take place.

“I was offered a job, and I answered that,” Sestak said. “Anything that goes beyond that is for others to talk about.”

Posted by John Bresnahan 11:11 AM
comments (380) post a comment permalink post a comment
Name: Comments: Post Comment

Back to top Share this Article
Digg Delicious Reddit Yahoo Facebook Google Technorati

Media-Matters , the liberal kick-stand ..

paulmdoro says:
May 27, 2010 at 4:09 pm
You’re right Grammie. Krauthammer, not exactly an Obama fan, says it’s just politics as usual.

Totally irrelevant what he believes. It’s what a prosecutor would think and the fact that they have to put out a formal written responece instead of BHO just answering the question shows there is a problem.

Please provide a link that shows him saying the job depended on him getting out of the race.

From: http://mediamatters.org/research/201005260026:

LOL

That’s funny- MM

You have love Media Matters(when-we-say-so)

They either cherry-pick a word, distort context, or make irrelevant comparisons , in order to try to debunk issues.- Jokers-

JohnSimpson says:
May 27, 2010 at 7:34 pm

I also took it to be based on jaded cynicism and pragmatism on CK’s part.

paulmdoro says:
May 27, 2010 at 3:46 pm
As I pointed out elsewhere:

“The practice that Issa objects to is common and not unusual.

So are we mad about anyone from either party doing this? Or are we only mad when the other side does it?”

Do you make this kind of defense when anyone does it or only when the other side does it?

For me the sides are this, 1. The Citizens; 2. the elected officials. Our side has to constantly watch the other side to keep up from robbing us blind. If someone robbed you would you say, well there are lots of robberies, I’ll just let it go!

Hey, remember the lefty outrage when Palin wrote a couple of words on her hand? Is it possible Obama was reading off of an IPAD during the press conference? View the pic and judge for yourself!

http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20100527/i/r3751760405.jpg

I have watched Sestak over and over saying I was offered a position for getting out of the race. It seems all over the internet that it was Secretary of the Navy -seems right since he is an admiral. Seems logical that OBAMA would have to be involved for ANYONE to offer that. All the dancing around the issue reminds me of Watergate.
Once again FOX news is the ONLY reporter that asked what is clearly becoming a very important news story. Obama says I can assure you that nothing improper happened. Well, in my book this sounds like the same thing as Nixon “I am not a crook” line and Clinton’s depends what the definition of “is” is. After those two I never accept what the President will say until it is either proven or disproven. Quite possibly we will have another sad resignation scene with Obama departing the Whitehouse for Chicago. OOPSS that means we will be left with BIDEN OMG what a nightmare. OH GOD and that means that complete nut case Pelosi would be In line for the Presidency. Now I hope this blows over

On Morning Joe today, Joe Scarborough broke off a colorful metaphor to describe the liberal media’s see-no-evil approach to the subject, saying the MSM wouldn’t cover the story “if Rahm Emanuel announced it in the middle of Pennsylvania Avenue wearing nothing but a Speedo.”

Reading through this just proves the selective, partisan outrage. It’s only bad if the other side does it.

MichelleF says:
May 27, 2010 at 9:05 pm
Hey, remember the lefty outrage when Palin wrote a couple of words on her hand? Is it possible Obama was reading off of an IPAD during the press conference? View the pic and judge for yourself!

Are you just upset that Palin is probably too dumb to us an IPAD?. To me michelle that is just more Conservative bias towards a very smart and articulate president.

To me michelle that is just more Conservative bias towards a very smart and articulate president.”

Spoken like a partisan hack- that articulate president took 9 minutes to answer the first simple question.

Oh the spin doctors are hard at work. I hear something like, “It was only a misunderstanding, we were talking in general terms, ahhem, and he took us literally. Ah hem. “

“that articulate president took 9 minutes to answer the first simple question.”

Some questions require complex answers. Simple people don’t know that.

When the best of all possible lies has been contrived, when all who may be asked to repeat or authenticate it can recite all possible aspects by rote, and when all the supporting documentation has been back dated, the occupant of the WH will be sufficiently prepared and inclined to speak of it…not take any questions, mind you, but to ‘splain it all.