Obama using bribes to maintain Senate Majority

Forget the whole birther thing, this may be even bigger.

Some Democrats who had sought to challenge Democratic incumbents in upcoming primaries are claiming the Obama administration offered them plum political appointments if they drop their campaigns.

High Crimes: White House Accused of Using Bribery to Preserve Senate Majority


Has a bombshell just been dropped in the November elections? If a story that broke on Thursday gets enough ink, the answer may be yes.

It’s being reported that the White House has sought to entice Senate primary challengers into dropping their campaigns against incumbent Democrats with the offer of plum government appointments — a jailable offense.

Jeffrey Lord of The American Spectator reports on the story, writing:

For the second time in five months, the Obama White House is being accused — by Democrats — of offering high ranking government jobs in return for political favors. What no one is reporting is that this is a violation of federal law that can lead to prison time, a fine or both, according to Title 18, Chapter 11, Section 211 of the United States Code.

The jobs in question? Secretary of the Navy and a position within the U.S. Agency for International Development [USAID].

The newest allegation has been made by Congressman Joe Sestak (D-Pa.), who has launched a promising primary challenge against the Pennsylvania party-switcher, Arlen Specter. While being interviewed by talk-show host Larry Kane, Sestak was asked about whether he had been offered a job to exit the race and, appearing “a little surprised,” answered “yes.” Writes Kane, “I asked him if the job was Navy Secretary [Sestak is a former Navy admiral]. He said, ‘I can’t comment on that.’ In the next few seconds, he admitted that it was a ‘high up’ job, that it came from the White House, and that he didn’t accept the offering.”

Kane says that he later inquired about the matter with the White House press office but never heard back from its staff. This may indicate that the allegation is true. After all, if the Obama administration is guilty, it has a vested interested in not fielding questions about the matter. Otherwise, it places itself in the unenviable position of having to either confess malfeasance or put another lie on the record.

Read more: The New American

Unfortunately, with the Democrats in charge of everything right now, I doubt anyone will seriously look into this unless someone makes a big enough fuss about it.

With the MSM controlled by the administration, I doubt we'll even hear much about this.

I read Kane's column and he didn't even bother to mention that what the President was doing is illegal.




[edit on 23-2-2010 by FortAnthem]

Why am I not Surprised!

We can only hope that

this hits the main media.

reply to post by TwoTechnics


I've seen a few stories on this in the local news and NONE of them even mentions the fact that what Obama is trying to do is against the law.

The MSM might cover the story, but they'll never mention that the President is breaking the law. I didn't even realize it until I read this article.

ummm am not surprise either. At least most people see through his lies now, unlike when he got elected.

Even if Obama is behind this, is he not above the law, being President and all? ... As President, his job should be to act in the best interest of the country. By keeping democrats he can trust in power, it will allow the government to do its 'job' better. So he is in a way acting in the best interest in the nation. If you guys want to say that a President shouldnt be able to decide who's in power through bribes because it is illegal, than at the same times others can argue he shouldnt be in power because he is supoprting a war right now and killing people is illegal. Just saying... He IS the law.

Why is it that nothing sticks to this guy. Everyone has been hurling mud at him and it just smears right off and he still all squeaky clean. I don't get it, I just don't get it. How can he be doing so many illegal and questionable things and no one is doing anything about it.

another day, another attempt to find illegality in this man's presidency.....

--yawn--

Every president does these type of things. Its not going to go anywhere, nor is it going to be pursued.

reply to post by trueperspective


Why? Because he is the President. He is the binding force behind the nation. He is the law and has the power. He cannot do anything illegal.
Clinton had sexual relations in his office. He used an office paid by taxpayers for his own fun. Sure people smeared him but in the end, he did nothing wrong because he did it and cannot do anything wrong. He is always right. The guy's still loved by the public because you cant touch him. They have no power. They accepted in then and should do the same now.
President's can do what they want. Why don't people understand this?

reply to post by trueperspective


Who would do anything about it? The Justice Department? Considering that it falls under the executive branch and that Eric Holder is an Obama appointee, I don't think so. Congress? With both houses firmly under the control of Obama's own party, that's not going to happen, either.

As long as the people with the authority to investigate and potentially prosecute such a crime have a vested interest in keeping the Obama administration in power, it will be completely ignored.

reply to post by Erdna


Not true. The president absolutely is NOT above the law. A president does have immunity from civil lawsuits initiated based upon his official acts as president, but he certainly can be prosecuted for criminal acts committed in office.

The reason that it doesn't happen is because those with the authority to carry out such a prosecution are generally just as corrupt, not because the president is immune from it.

[edit on 23-2-2010 by vor78]

As others have stated, I am not surprised by this at all. This is the way politics are done in the BOs home town of Chicago. The Chicago way has been exported to Washington DC.

Well look at the crimes committed by Gienthner and the Fed, they have a little question and answer thing with congress and its all forgotten. They can commit high treason and crimes, and they can get away with it. Nothing is ever done to anyone associated with government, they are basically above the law.
So even if the corporate media does say something nothing will come of it and it will be all but forgotten.
Problem is the entire gov is run by criminals, so criminals protect criminals.

Originally posted by Erdna
Even if Obama is behind this, is he not above the law, being President and all? ... As President, his job should be to act in the best interest of the country. By keeping democrats he can trust in power, it will allow the government to do its 'job' better. So he is in a way acting in the best interest in the nation. If you guys want to say that a President shouldnt be able to decide who's in power through bribes because it is illegal, than at the same times others can argue he shouldnt be in power because he is supoprting a war right now and killing people is illegal. Just saying... He IS the law.

What planet are you from????? That is about the most ignorant thing I've ever heard said concerning the operating procedures of the US government. Maybe Hitler or Stalin or Chairman Mao could have done what you suggest but not the President of the United States.

BTW people, it does not matter if it was Obama personally breaking the law like this or if it was a member of his cabinet or advisers. As I seem to recall Nixon was not the one who broke into McGoverns campain offices but he was impeached none the less.

This is almost like hush money and should come as no surprise.

This is more of a reason why even Democrats should consider joining the Tea Party movement, since it is the closest thing to a third party this country may ever see.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
another day, another attempt to find illegality in this man's presidency.....

--yawn--

Every president does these type of things. Its not going to go anywhere, nor is it going to be pursued.

Exactly, he isn't the first president to do this and he won't be the last. I'd be willing to bet that every single president has done things that would be considered illegal, so why are all of you acting so shocked? Oh right, it's because there is a hate for this president like we have never seen before.

If Bush can invade a country and kill thousands without just cause, and keep his job, you bet your butt nobody is going to pursue this garbage.

18 U.S.C. § 210 : US Code - Section 210: Offer to procure appointive public office

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.

This could be a very big deal it would seem. The language is not even vague. In fact if that's true, Holder should already be filing the paperwork.

But.... and I think this is a relevant, huge "but"... Does Executive Privilege trump this? It just might and that would make it a moot point. Then only Congress could act on it through Impeachment and does anyone really think they would do that?

Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by Erdna

 

Not true. The president absolutely is NOT above the law. A president does have immunity from civil lawsuits initiated based upon his official acts as president, but he certainly can be prosecuted for criminal acts committed in office.

I'm not so sure.

Executive Privilege.

In the United States government, executive privilege is the power claimed by the President of the United States and other members of the executive branch to resist certain subpoenas and other interventions by the legislative and judicial branches of government. The concept of executive privilege is not mentioned explicitly in the United States Constitution, but the Supreme Court of the United States ruled it to be an element of the separation of powers doctrine, and/or derived from the supremacy of executive branch in its own area of Constitutional activity.[1]

The Supreme Court confirmed the legitimacy of this doctrine in United States v. Nixon, but only to the extent of confirming that there is a qualified privilege. Once invoked, a presumption of privilege is established, requiring the Prosecutor to make a "sufficient showing" that the "Presidential material" is "essential to the justice of the case."(418 U.S. at 713-14). Chief Justice Burger further stated that executive privilege would most effectively apply when the oversight of the executive would impair that branch's national security concerns.

Privilege is presumed. Only the Supreme Court could overrule, years down the road. The only way anything will happen is through an Impeachment proceeding.

"Im not a crook"
Yea You ARE.

I can tell the Obamanites are here trying to justify these illegal actions. Thats what they are ILLEGAL. No man is above the law, sorry to say.
The president may have executive powers, but that does not dismiss him from the rules of law.

How people can stand behind this man is beyond me.

Hope and change! The voters hoped things would change.

They have changed.

From the 'good old boys' network to ' good ole Chicago-style ' politics.

We're screwed either way.

Originally posted by Perplexity

Exactly, he isn't the first president to do this and he won't be the last.

He might be the last to do such things if the Congress would do the right thing and have him leave in shame.