Northwest Indiana Discussion

Northwest Indiana's Leading Discussion Forum
It is currently Tue May 21, 2013 3:14 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2010 4:45 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:49 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Stupid Liberals!
Sestak White House scandal called 'impeachable offense'
'It's Valerie Plame, only bigger, a high crime and misdemeanor'

Posted: May 25, 2010
8:45 pm Eastern

By Drew Zahn
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

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 controversy revolves around an oft-repeated statement by Rep. Sestak, D-Pa., that he had been offered a job by the Obama administration in exchange for dropping out of the senatorial primary against Obama supporter Sen. Arlen Specter.

Sestak said he refused the offer. He continued in the Senate primary and defeated Specter for the Democratic nomination.

But Karl Rove, longtime White House adviser to President George W. Bush, said the charge is explosive because of federal law.

"This is a pretty extraordinary charge: 'They tried to bribe me out of the race by offering me a job,'" he said on Greta Van Susteran's "On the Record" program on the Fox News Channel. "Look, that's a violation of the federal code: 18 USC 600 says that a federal official cannot promise employment, a job in the federal government, in return for a political act.

"Somebody violated the law. If Sestak is telling the truth, somebody violated the law," Rove said. "Section 18 USC 211 says you cannot accept anything of value in return for hiring somebody. Well, arguably, providing a clear path to the nomination for a fellow Democrat is something of value.

He continued, citing a third law passage: "18 USC 595, which prohibits a federal official from interfering with the nomination or election for office. ... 'If you'll get out, we'll appoint you to a federal office,' – that's a violation of the law."

Staffers with Sestak's congressional office did not respond to WND requests for comment. But the congressman repeatedly confirmed that he was offered the position and refused and that any further comments would have to come from someone else.

"I've said all I'm going to say on the matter. … Others need to explain whatever their role might be," Sestak said on CNN this week. "I have a personal accountability; I should have for my role in the matter, which I talked about. Beyond that, I'll let others talk about their role."

That's not fulfilling his responsibilities, Rove said. He said Sestak needs to be forthcoming with the full story so "the American people can figure out whether or not he's participating in a criminal cover-up along with federal officials."

The Obama White House has tried to minimize the issue.

"Lawyers in the White House and others have looked into conversations that were had with Congressman Sestak, and nothing inappropriate happened," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has stated.

Gibbs told the White House press corps, "Whatever conversations have been had are not problematic."

And on CBS' "Face the Nation" he said, "I'm not going to get further into what the conversations were. People who looked into them assure me they weren't inappropriate in any way."

But the administration also is taking no chances on what might be discovered.

According to Politico, the Justice Department has rejected a request from Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., for a special counsel to investigate and reveal the truth of the controversy.

The report said Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich confirmed no special counsel would be needed. But the report said Weich also gave no indication that the Justice Department actually was looking into the claims by Sestak.

"We assure you that the Department of Justice takes very seriously allegations of criminal conduct by public officials. All such matters are reviewed carefully by career prosecutors and law enforcement agents, and appropriate action, if warranted, is taken," Weich wrote in the letter.

_________________
-=Up All Night With=-
Image
- -={ARCLIGHT}=- -
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Wed May 26, 2010 4:49 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:49 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Stupid Liberals!
All 7 Republicans on Senate Judiciary Committee Ask AG Holder to Appoint Special Prosecutor to Look Into Alleged Sestak Job Offer

May 26, 2010 1:19 PM

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder today, all seven Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee "urge the appointment of a special prosecutor to investigate Congressman Joe Sestak's claim that a White House official offered him a job to induce him to exit the Pennsylvania Senate primary race against Senator Arlen Specter."

The seven – Sens. Jeff Sessions of Alabama, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Jon Kyl or Arizona, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma – allege that the offer would appear to violate federal criminal laws, including 18 U.S.C. 600, which prohibits promising a government position “as consideration, favor, or reward for any political activity” or “in connection with any primary election or political convention or caucus held to select candidates for any political office.”

Rep. Sestak, D-Penn., who defeated Specter in the primary last week, told Comcast’s Larry Kane in February that the White House had offered him a position in exchange for not challenging Specter. White House senior adviser David Axelrod said on Monday that White House lawyers had looked into it and judged everything “perfectly appropriate.”

CNN’s John King suggested to Axelrod that such a job offer “marches up into the gray area, perhaps into the red area of a felony. It is a felony to induce somebody by offering them a job.”

“If such things happened they would constitute a serious breach of the law,” Axelrod told CNN, “and when the allegations were looked into there is no evidence of such a thing"

That was not enough for the Republican Senators, who wrote to Holder that they “do not believe the Department of Justice can properly defer to White House lawyers to investigate a matter that could involve ‘a serious breach of the law.’ The White House cannot possibly manage an internal investigation of potential criminal misconduct while simultaneously crafting a public narrative to rebut the claim that misconduct occurred.”

_________________
-=Up All Night With=-
Image
- -={ARCLIGHT}=- -
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 5:43 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
Is Sestak lying, or is there a FELON in the White House?

Don't expect the media to investigate the bribe story...

or Eric Holder for that matter.

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:04 am 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:33 pm
Posts: 1408
Duhbya was the only president since Ford to not have a special prosecutor delving into every aspect of his presidency.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 6:09 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
karent wrote:
Duhbya was the only president since Ford to not have a special prosecutor delving into every aspect of his presidency.


there was no need.

So what's your point mrs. edge?

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 4:45 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:27 pm
Posts: 1079
Give me a break... there is no reason under the sun why Obama would want Democrat in name only Arlen Sphincter to keep pushing his conservative agenda under a Democratic label.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 4:53 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
Chairman Moo wrote:
Give me a break... there is no reason under the sun why Obama would want Democrat in name only Arlen Sphincter to keep pushing his conservative agenda under a Democratic label.


Image

Quote:

Obama backs Arlen Specter at fundraiser

Five months after leaving the Republican Party, the Pennsylvania senator faces a tough primary battle for reelection as a Democrat. Obama tells the crowd, 'He's going to fight for you.'

September 16, 2009|Josh Drobnyk

PHILADELPHIA — President Obama, making an unusual foray into a Democratic primary election battle, told a paying crowd of supporters of Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Pa.) on Tuesday that the senator would fight "to help me move this country forward."

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/sep/16 ... -specter16

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 5:17 pm 
Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 6:33 pm
Posts: 1408
Moby - the only reason I'm not mad about your comment is that hubby came home last night. Nothing could ruin my mood.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Thu May 27, 2010 5:21 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
karent wrote:
Moby - the only reason I'm not mad about your comment is that hubby came home last night. Nothing could ruin my mood.


God Bless and I am very happy for you and your family.

Image

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 5:44 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
karent wrote:
Moby - the only reason I'm not mad about your comment is that hubby came home last night.


This weekend please remember the ones that didn't.

and tell your husband I said '"Welcome Home''

and thanks

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 10:45 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2008 12:00 pm
Posts: 991
The New York Times is reporting today that President Obama’s chief of staff asked former President Bill Clinton to be an intermediary to ask Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak whether he would be willing to drop out of a Senate primary in exchange for a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position.

Rahm Emanuel asked Clinton to explore the possibilities last summer, according to individuals who were briefed on the matter but insisted on anonymity, the Times reported. Sestak, who declined the offer, won last week’s Pennsylvania Democratic primary against Sen. Arlen Specter, whom the White House had supported.

The White House did not offer Sestak a full-time paid position because Emanuel wanted him to stay in the House instead of risking losing his seat, according to the Times report, which CNN reported a short time after the Times posted its story that it confirmed independently.

To read the full New York Times report — Go Here Now.

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance,
and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery."
Winston Churchill


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 10:49 am 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 4:55 am
Posts: 10483
suzyq wrote:
The New York Times is reporting today that President Obama’s chief of staff asked former President Bill Clinton to be an intermediary to ask Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak whether he would be willing to drop out of a Senate primary in exchange for a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position.

Rahm Emanuel asked Clinton to explore the possibilities last summer, according to individuals who were briefed on the matter but insisted on anonymity, the Times reported. Sestak, who declined the offer, won last week’s Pennsylvania Democratic primary against Sen. Arlen Specter, whom the White House had supported.

The White House did not offer Sestak a full-time paid position because Emanuel wanted him to stay in the House instead of risking losing his seat, according to the Times report, which CNN reported a short time after the Times posted its story that it confirmed independently.

To read the full New York Times report — Go Here Now.


A person would have to be incredibly stupid to buy that lame story.

I wonder if Joe Sestak will try to pass off the same story or is he going to be honest and tell the truth...?

_________________
"This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal" --Barack Hussein Obama
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 1:10 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 2:42 pm
Posts: 7691
suzyq wrote:
The New York Times is reporting today that President Obama’s chief of staff asked former President Bill Clinton to be an intermediary to ask Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak whether he would be willing to drop out of a Senate primary in exchange for a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position.



In other words:
BFD

_________________
"Let Detroit Go Bankrupt"- Mitt Romney, businessman extraordinaire


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 1:16 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2006 12:19 pm
Posts: 13802
edge540 wrote:
suzyq wrote:
The New York Times is reporting today that President Obama’s chief of staff asked former President Bill Clinton to be an intermediary to ask Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak whether he would be willing to drop out of a Senate primary in exchange for a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position.



In other words:
BFD



only took them a month or better to come with that bullshit....

_________________
Has Obama ever won a free and fair election based on the merits of his ideas?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: OBAMA'S IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE
PostPosted: Fri May 28, 2010 1:34 pm 
Offline
Senior Member
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 11, 2004 6:49 pm
Posts: 7968
Location: Stupid Liberals!
Moby Grape wrote:
edge540 wrote:
suzyq wrote:
The New York Times is reporting today that President Obama’s chief of staff asked former President Bill Clinton to be an intermediary to ask Pennsylvania Rep. Joe Sestak whether he would be willing to drop out of a Senate primary in exchange for a prominent, but unpaid, advisory position.



In other words:
BFD



only took them a month or better to come with that bullshit....


They had lunch together yesterday to get their story straight.

_________________
-=Up All Night With=-
Image
- -={ARCLIGHT}=- -
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 42 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group