In summary, the scandal ignited after an interview 3 1/2 months ago when Congressman Joe Sestak explicitly reaffirmed he was offered a “high ranking position” by “someone in the White House” if he would drop out of the primary race against Arlen Specter, the former-Republican Senator whose switch in party affiliation last year presented Democrats with a 60-vote majority and the power to advance the Obama administration’s agenda undeterred.
After Specter’s conversion his popularity among constituents ”nose-dived,” endangering both his seat and the Obama administration’s filibuster-proof majority. Without the guarantee of a Senate majority after the November elections, the Obama administration faces Congressional gridlock and an inability to continue their ”fundamental transformation” of America. As a result, the White House conspired to ensure Specter retained his seat by offering Congressman Joe Sestak an offer they assumed he couldn’t/wouldn’t refuse. Using the Chicago pay-for-play tactics they attempted to bribe Sestack to drop his bid for the Senate seat in Pennsylvania so Specter would, by default, be the Democrat candidate on the ticket.
After multiple denials of a job offer(s) to Sestak, the Obama administration released a public response to the scandal over Memorial Day weekend in an effort to obfusacte the truth. In their rush they overlooked a mountain of inconsistencies and their legal ramifications, throwing sunlight onto the seamy underbelly of Chicago-style politics and opening the door to calls for a Special Prosecutor.
Click here for print and video support of the summary.
The Obama administration is adamant that “White House staff did not discuss these options with Congressman Sestak.” Really? Sestak claims the offer originated from “someone in the White House,” but former President Bill Clinton is not part of the Obama White House. And Sestak has repeated this claim on numerous occasions. (Hattip: The NRSC)
On March 10, 2010, Fox News’ Bret Baier pointedly asked Sestak: “Did the White House offer you a job to not get in the primary?” Sestak answered: “And I answered that yes, and I answered it honestly.”
Again, on March 20, 2010 to Fox News’ Neil Cavuto.
“In order to get you out of the Senate race the White House offered you a job. Is that true?” Sestak responded: “I got asked that question as you know a few weeks ago, of something that happened last summer, a direct question. I answered it honestly, and I said yes.
And, again, on April 22, 2010, to NBC’s Savannah Guthrie,
“Were you offered a job in the administration not to run?” Sestak responded: “The answer, as I was asked this for the first time a month ago even though it happened last July, and I never brought it forward. I answered it honestly, and I’ll do it again. Yes.”
And again, May 23, 2010 on Meet The Press.
“I was asked a question about something that happened months earlier and I felt I should answer it honestly. And that’s all I had to say about it. I was offered a job, and I answered that.” You said, ‘No you won’t take the job.’ Sestack responded, “By then I also said, Look I’m getting into this….” Was it the Secretary of the Navy job?Sestak replied, “Anything that goes beyond that is for others to talk about.”
And again, on May 24, 2010 to CNN’s John King.
“You said some time ago that when Arlen Specter was still in the race, early in the primary somebody at the White House came to you and said I will offer you a job, will give you some kind of a job if you would get out.” Sestak responded: “Well I was actually asked by a reporter something that a few months ago that had happened almost eight months earlier… And I answered it honestly… I said – and I did answer it honestly and said yes…”
The White House admits multiple “efforts” were made in “June and July” for “options for Executive Branch service.” When asked how many times the offer was discussed, Sestack claims one 60-second conversation occurred in July.
“No, no just that one phone call.”
So who is telling the truth? How many job offers were made? And how frequently did the Obama administration attempt to subvert a primary election constitutionally determined by the People’s vote and not the Executive branch?
The White House denies the offer was for the position of Secretary Of Navy, attesting that the offer was for an “uncompensated position.” This doesn’t pass the smell test. An unpaid advisory position would not be a “high ranking federal job.” Sestak’s statement does not exclude the possibility that someone in the White House subsequently sweetened the deal with either the Secretary of the Navy job offer. What was the “high ranking federal job” and who would have the power to offer it?
But the White House’s position is, again, in direct conflict with Sestak who, when queried about the Secretary of Navy position on MSNBC’s Morning Joe show, responded thus.
The White House claims the offer was as a seat on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, which would “allow him to retain his seat in the House,” yet Byron York reported Friday,
Sestak was not eligible for a place on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, the job he was reportedly offered by former President Bill Clinton. And indeed a look at the Board’s website reveals this restriction:
“The Board consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government. Members are distinguished citizens selected from the national security, political, academic, and private sectors.”
As a sitting member of Congress, Sestak was not eligible for the job. And since the White House intended for Sestak to remain in his House seat, he would not have been eligible for the board after this November’s elections, provided he was re-elected to the House.
So let’s get this straight…Sestak was being asked to give up his $217,000 per year job, to serve on a board whose members are unpaid and on which he could not legally serve, in order to drop his primary bid against the incumbent Senator who switched parties to deliver Obama passage of his health care legislation and a filibuster-proof majority? It sounds like pay for play, the Chicago Way.
How far will Obama and the Chicago Machine at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue go to maintain complete power? Have they committed high crimes and misdemeanors? Part 3 extensively covers the list of potential crimes commited by the Obama administration that establish their pattern of bribery, corruption, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to corrupt the American electoral process while reigning at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.