The story from the White House is that they simply sent Bill Clinton to see if Joe Sestak was serious about running for Senate.
Well, buzz about him as a possible Senate candidate had been around since the preceding November. The Los Angeles Times, November 26, 2008:
The Northeast’s dwindling cast of Senate Republicans has Democrats circling Arlen Specter’s seat in Pennsylvania, convinced the party is well-positioned to make a competitive race out of the 2010 election . . . Others considered in the mix include Rep. Joe Sestak, who is sitting on $3 million in campaign funds.
So we’re to believe that at some point, Rahm Emanuel said, “Hey, there’s a two-term Democratic congressman who’s sitting on $3 million and who has been rumored to be interested in running for Senate since last year who’s making noises about taking on a cranky 80-year-old five-term incumbent whose popularity is tanking. Hey, let’s send a former president to see if he’s bluffing.”
Way to stonewall until after the primary is over.
That obviously gave Specter a better shot last week, and meant that Clinton wasn't answering questions on the trail when he campaigned for Critz.
Very
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThese people must think we are stupid. Well, let them think that until November and then the laughs will be on them.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseLet's assume the WH memo is completely true.
For starters, that would mean Sestak lied when he said he was offered a "high level job in the federal government."
Second, if WH was just "gauging Sestak's interest", why send the biggest gun in the Dem arm-twisting arsenal, Bill Clinton? Seems like an awfully important emissary for such a small job. And why did Clinton offer an "advisory panel" position that Sestak couldn't accept as a sitting member of congress? That doesn't make much sense either.
If the WH memo is true, then Rahm is pretty clueless to waste Clinton's time with an apparently meaningless task.
(It's also "interesting" that Sestak and WH put out coordinated memos using the same language on the same day -- and conveniently the day after the once-a-year presser. So now Obama doesn't have to talk to the press until his next presser in Spring 2011 right??)
I'm thinking these statements today raise more questions than they answer . . . Here's hoping the press gives Gibbs a good grilling on these inconsistencies.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIf they are telling the truth on the Sestak affair it would appear that they threaded the legal minefield quite skillfully.
What about Romanoff in Colorado? Romanoff claims that he was offered a job at USAID by Deputy WH Chief of Staff Jim Messina to forgo his bid for Senate.
If Romaoff's claims are true the WH did break the law. I know it's a holiday weekend, but Rep. Issa cal your office.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseWe have yet to hear from Specter on this. The man is still in office and about as close to a literal loose cannon as a living man can get. Does anyone think if he had a chance to spit in Obama's soup that he wouldn't do it? Sestak is just simmering... the story not the man, this will be our Second Black President's First Special Counsel.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThere exists a Toomey video where he is asked to comment on this Sestak job offer.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAt the end of the video Toomey asserts that the RNC surely did not want him in that primary against Specter in 2004, but no one offered him anything to try to get him to stand down. That is so telling and just another reason Pennsylvanians should want Toomey to win big over Sestak.
Hm. Watching the news today, I couldn't help but wondering if Mr. Obama, sitting in the pouring rain, was thinking this might be the lowest point of his presidency yet. Things just aren't going his way right now.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseQuite an impressive job offer, give up your great opportunity to become one of 100 U.S. Senators and substantial pay and benefits for an unpaid job on a committee that no one ever heard of or knows what it does. Oh… this would be a building block for a future. What do these fruitcakes take us for?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseObama and Rahm sitting in the Oval Office……
Rahm, we can't say Sestak lied. You know Clinton. Get him to say he's the one that offered Sestak a job. Yeah, Clinton. That's the ticket. And we'll say it was a non-paying position. Yeaaahhhhh! A non-paying job. That's the ticket.
Well Mr. President, I doubt anyone will buy such a ridiculous story but if we coordinate our stories with Clinton and Sestak it will be the best we can do. Plus I know Clinton will lie if we say we're sorry for calling him a racist during the campaign.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe Obama hire of Rahm Emanuel as CoS was an early sign that his campaign plank of honest , transparent government was a sham. Rahm is a master of bully, bribery and back-room politics in the old-school Chicago/Illinois style.
We did not need to see back room, opaque dealing in the healthcare bill to know that Obama's campaign promises were false. The clues were there for anyone to see early on.
Funny how the main stream press misses something this obvious. Guess that’s what comes with having the press as junior partner to a political party.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseOne thing to add. It struck me as odd that they should specify that the post would be "uncompensated." Why would they do that? I mean, the man has to eat, right? I haven't seen any info that he is sitting on a large family fortune. He has retirement from the Navy, but certainly isn't independently wealthy. So, why would you insult someone whose only fallback is a naval pension by encouraging them to quit a senate race in exchange for a fluff UNCOMPENSATED position? Weird, right? Weird that they would offer such a thing, and even more weird that a little irrelevant detail like that was important enough to be specified by the White House. They went out of their way to mention it. Usually, the only time this gets mentioned is if it is important for the public to understand that they are doing this for the love of it, and this is mentioned to forestall any accusations that their decisions are tainted by monetary gain.
An argument could be made that since an uncompensated position does not involve money, it is thus one extra little step away from a bribe. So, the White House is careful to include this detail, which in fact was not likely part of the initial offer they made Sestak, because otherwise the offer would be insulting, and the White House would not intentionally insult someone that they theoretically are rewarding with an advance in position. Thus, the fact that they include this detail is confirmatory as to what their thought process has been since the incident was thrown into the light of day.
Fitting that Clinton would be in on this sleaze. That guy is a walking collection of moral STDs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse