The Sestak Scandalby Phil on 05/26/2010
If you haven’t heard about this story, it’s time to brush up on it, because it’s a potentially big, huge deal for the White House.
This story has to do with Pennsylvania Democratic Senatorial nominee Joe Sestak; the following video — h/t LibertarianRepublican.com — will catch you up:
If a Democratic member of Congress is to be believed, there’s someone in the Obama administration who has committed a crime – and if the president knew about it, analysts say it could be grounds for impeachment.
“This scandal could be enormous,” said Dick Morris, a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton, on the Fox News Sean Hannity show last night. “It’s Valerie Plame only 10 times bigger, because it’s illegal and Joe Sestak is either lying or the White House committed a crime.
“Obviously, the offer of a significant job in the White House could not be made unless it was by Rahm Emanuel or cleared with Rahm Emanuel,” he said. If the job offer was high enough that it also had Obama’s apppoval, “that is a high crime and misdemeanor.”
“In other words, an impeachable offense?” Hannity asked.
“Absolutely,” said Morris.
The problem with both responses, of course, is that we can’t just take the word of White House officials. Sestak says the offer was made, and the White House admits there were conversations. At least three laws might have been broken, according to Darrell Issa, the Ranking Member of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. With that many, it shouldn’t be up to one of the interested parties to decide whether any laws were broken.
Michelle Malkin covers who’s behind the White House stonewalling (hint: it includes attorney Bob Bauer — you know, the attorney at the Perkins Coie law firm, the same firm that represented the Administration through dozens of eligibility suits), and both RedState and HotAir point out that all 7 GOP Senators on the Judiciary Committee are asking Attorney General Eric Holder to investigate the job offer.
So, what laws are allegedly being broken? Prof. Jacobson has the run-down:
18 U.S.C. section 210 provides:
Whoever pays or offers or promises any money or thing of value,to any person, firm, or corporation in consideration of the use or promise to use any influence to procure any appointive office or place under the United States for any person, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
18 U.S.C. section 211 provides:
Whoever solicits or receives, either as a political contribution,or for personal emolument, any money or thing of value, inconsideration 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….
In the same posting wherein Prof. Jacobson recommends that Mr. Sestak needs to start talking, he poses some great questions:
Is Sestak refusing to talk on advice of counsel so that there is no waiver of his 5th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination? Or is Sestak refusing to talk just because Admirals don’t talk?
Legally, Sestak is right to keep quiet.
Politically, there is only one thing which can keep Sestak’s ship from sinking — loose lips.
I have been following this story off and on for a few months, with thanks to those concerned citizens who have emailed me about it from time to time. The bottom line is that the nominee’s stance has never changed; he simply refuses, to date, to go into further details about it.
Unfortunately, this is not the first time that questionable actions have occurred with this Administration. In fact, as Jim Kouri of the Law Enforcement Examiner points out, Judicial Watch claims that the White House has attempted to “bribe” Democrats with federal judgeships.
I think it’s about time for more Tea…
Email: phil [at] therightsideoflife [dot] com