Sestak Scandal = Obama Impeachment!!!

[Crossroads Inc.]

In the latest evidently manufactured scandal coming out of the right wing blogs, is the assertion that Obama, during the last set of primary elections, Offered Sestak, and many other Dems Challenging incumbent Dems, high ranking positions in the White house IF they would drop out of said primaries. Evidently this basically amounts to Bribery and if convicted, could be considered an Impeachable offense for a sitting president!

Or.. So says the Looney Right.

I have first saw this story in right wing blog posts where it currently DOMINATES their blog-o-sphere. Ever Right wing columnist and blogger right now is going on about how this is Obamas Whitewater, his waterloo, this is his monica-gate! That it is now only a matter of time before he is investigated and kicked out of office!

Extensive google searched DID pick up a story about the White house and the reported incident, the only one I've fund from a 'reputable' news source was the following from CNN:
CNN Story Link

As for impeachment? Not a blip, I guess the Evil Liberal Media is just covering it up!
To give an idea of just how saturated this is in the Right Wing Universe, I found the following at "NewsHounds" a site dedicated to analyzing FoxNews:

LINK

Sean Hannity has been full of bullyboy glee at what he thinks is President Obama’s Watergate, the supposed offer by the White House of a job to Rep. Joe Sestak in return for his dropping out of the Pennsylvania Senate primary race. Media Matters has an extensive roundup of experts, including the former chief ethics lawyer for the Bush administration, who believe there is no there there. But in Sean Hannity’s mind, this is the impeachable moment he has been waiting for! “What did the president know and when did he know it?” Hannity crowed more than asked. Hannity also happily imagined that Rahm Emanuel might wind up in jail.

Hannity got right down to brass tacks by announcing that a crime had been committed, even though, as Hannity later admitted, nobody really knows what happened. “A senior administration official and maybe even the president himself is guilty of a crime." His guests, two conservative attorneys, Victoria Toensing and Jay Sekulow,, were there to "explain… how likely it is that any administration officials could end up behind bars."

A true Great American would probably have been somber if not saddened by the specter of a presidential impeachment. But Hannity was in high spirits at the thought. He asked buoyantly, “High crimes and misdemeanors, Jay?”

Sekulow agreed – in advance of an official inquiry, not to mention a trial – that laws had been broken. “(This) is undercutting democracy… It’s not just one or two sections of federal law that’s been violated here… There could be four or even five sections of the federal criminal code that was violated.”

Hannity sounded hopeful as he cited the now-famous Watergate question, “Are we gonna get to the point, ‘What did the president know and when did he know it?’”

“Oh, I think so,” Sekulow said. “…At the end of the day, Sean, and I really believe this, if the White House does not come clean and come clean very quickly here, I think this tempest in a teapot is going to blow… I think it could go back on the president of the United States very significantly and certainly senior administration officials. Whether someone’s gonna take the fall for this or not, that we’ll see what Washington politics do.”

“Sestak or a grand jury subpoena could clear this up in about 30 seconds,” Toensing said suggestively. She went on to say that she thought it more likely an administration official would “fall on his or her sword” than it was that Obama would be implicated.

Hannity still sounded hopeful as he asked, “Hypothetically, if it was Rahm Emanuel, does he risk potential criminal charges?”

“Absolutely. Absolutely,” Sekulow answered and Toensing agreed.

“So Rahm Emanuel would risk going to jail to fall on the sword for the president?” Hannity continued.

“We could find that out pretty soon, Sean, because the reality is that statutes have been violated… It’s a one year sentence for each charge… This is really serious,” Sekulow said.

Hannity said at the end of the segment, “We will stay on this story here at Hannity because I think the public deserves an answer.” Sure he does. Just so long as it’s the answer he wants to hear.
[youtube] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8pHwG4kosk&hl=en&fs [/youtube]

[GrandMasterTerwynn]

As I understand it, Sestak was offered a position on a Presidential advisory board. An unpaid position that wouldn't involve him giving up his job as a Congress-critter. The White House had Bill Clinton approach him. The conversation lasted maybe 30 to 60 seconds and ended with Sestak brushing it off. It's hardly a scandal, and the White House hasn't done anything illegal. Unless, of course, you live in fantasyRepublican-land.

[irishmick79]

Yeah, this angle is all over the place with the right wingers, and relies on some utterly retarded interpretations of the law to come to their conclusions. Mostly (at least from the right wingers I've seen) it comes from a misinterpretation of 18 USC 210 of the US code -

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.

First off, they assume that Obama offered Sestak a formal paid position in the White House, or some other appointed position. If Sestak was offered an unpaid advisory role which would keep him in congress, like most media outlets suggest, then there's really nothing here. Secondly, the statute would really apply to Sestak if his withdrawal from the race would be legally considered a "thing of value" paid to the white house, and he definitely made that decision due to the promise of influence to get an appointive office.

[Ziggy Stardust]

If Sestak was offered an unpaid advisory role which would keep him in congress, like most media outlets suggest, then there's really nothing here. Secondly, the statute would really apply to Sestak if his withdrawal from the race would be legally considered a "thing of value" paid to the white house, and he definitely made that decision due to the promise of influence to get an appointive office.

I was listening to NPR the other day, and one of their commentators did say that, though the Republicans are blowing it our of proportion, this situation is definitely in a legal grey area. He said it was against the spirit of the law, but not technically the letter of the law, and that it is something that Obama could conceivably get into trouble for.

[General Zod]

If Sestak was offered an unpaid advisory role which would keep him in congress, like most media outlets suggest, then there's really nothing here. Secondly, the statute would really apply to Sestak if his withdrawal from the race would be legally considered a "thing of value" paid to the white house, and he definitely made that decision due to the promise of influence to get an appointive office.

I was listening to NPR the other day, and one of their commentators did say that, though the Republicans are blowing it our of proportion, this situation is definitely in a legal grey area. He said it was against the spirit of the law, but not technically the letter of the law, and that it is something that Obama could conceivably get into trouble for.

Without a more detailed explanation, the whole "spirit of the law" argument sounds like mealy mouthed bullshit. Either he's violating it or he's not.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Without a more detailed explanation, the whole "spirit of the law" argument sounds like mealy mouthed bullshit. Either he's violating it or he's not.

You really don't understand the concept of loopholes in the legal system?

[Rye]

Without a more detailed explanation, the whole "spirit of the law" argument sounds like mealy mouthed bullshit. Either he's violating it or he's not.

It's not bullshit at all. Giving some dude some degree of influence and power to buy him off from a democratic challenge is against the spirit of that law, obviously.

[irishmick79]

If Sestak was offered an unpaid advisory role which would keep him in congress, like most media outlets suggest, then there's really nothing here. Secondly, the statute would really apply to Sestak if his withdrawal from the race would be legally considered a "thing of value" paid to the white house, and he definitely made that decision due to the promise of influence to get an appointive office.

I was listening to NPR the other day, and one of their commentators did say that, though the Republicans are blowing it our of proportion, this situation is definitely in a legal grey area. He said it was against the spirit of the law, but not technically the letter of the law, and that it is something that Obama could conceivably get into trouble for.

You'd have to really twist the definition of a bribe to put it in a legal grey area. In the spirit of the law, the bribe generally needs to involve something of monetary value. It's hard to see how dropping out of a senatorial race is a 'thing of value' which carries monetary value, and it's hard to see how an unpaid advisory position in the WH carries monetary value. If he's getting a paid position, then it's a different picture.

[General Zod]

Without a more detailed explanation, the whole "spirit of the law" argument sounds like mealy mouthed bullshit. Either he's violating it or he's not.

You really don't understand the concept of loopholes in the legal system?

Assuming it's an actual loophole and not just someone misinterpreting the existing laws to suit their own agenda.

[wautd]

In the latest evidently manufactured scandal coming out of the right wing blogs, is the assertion that Obama, during the last set of primary elections, Offered Sestak, and many other Dems Challenging incumbent Dems, high ranking positions in the White house IF they would drop out of said primaries. Evidently this basically amounts to Bribery and if convicted, could be considered an Impeachable offense for a sitting president!

Nah, don't worry. If lying to start an illegal war causing hundreds of thousands of deaths doesn't gets you impeached then I don't know what will (well, except having sex with your secretary but that's taking things to the extreme).

[SirNitram]

So very predictable, though. Obama attempts to engage in some horse-trading that's been done for decades(Probably through the whole history of US politics), and the GOP flips out to begin any excuse for an impeachment.

This is but a preview of what will come if the GOP takes over. 'Gridlock'? No, shame investigations, endlessly.

[D.Turtle]

Were there any calls for Reagan's impeachment or resignation in the face of him offering an actually paid administration/government job if he dropped out?

[Crossroads Inc.]

What gets to me about this is that this happens ALL the time. I follow right wing blogs often and it seems every other week they are in a frenzy about the latest "Scandal" that is sure to bring down Obama or some random democrat in office. The fact that we virtually never hear about these things, outside of Faux-News, naturally just reinforces the idea that it is a Vast Liberal Conspiracy.

As many of us know the "Media" is anything but Biased and is really only interested in sensationalism. If this story had an ounce of "Real" danger to it, I have no doubt that the major news outlets would be running with it.

It reminds me of when the Health care debate was still going on and the GOP were screaming bloody murder at how the Dems were going to pass it, and naturally we find out they used the exact same methods way WAY more in the past to pass items in Congress.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I think if they get really, REALLY fired up Obama might get censured by congress. Which means fuckall to the ral world.