Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sestak: WH offered job if he left race (Obama broke the law and now for the cover-up)
upi ^ | 5/23/2010 | STAFF

Posted on 05/23/2010 12:28:50 PM PDT by tobyhill

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-157 next last
To: Army Air Corps
First Blago, now Sestak.

How's that again? Not sure what you mean.

21 posted on 05/23/2010 1:19:39 PM PDT by 70times7 (Serving Free Republics' warped and obscure humor needs since 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: truthguy
The gift Obama would have received is an uncontested Senate seat with the candidate that he endorsed.
22 posted on 05/23/2010 1:21:10 PM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: 70times7

Problems related to Obama’s dealmaking and street hustling.


23 posted on 05/23/2010 1:21:35 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

If this was the Nixon administration every newspaper in the country would put 80% of their staff working on it full time.


24 posted on 05/23/2010 1:24:19 PM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Now can we forget about that old rum-runner Joe Kennedy and his progeny of philandering drunks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GrannyAnn

The other day I actually found a word I’d lost some years back - it was hiding with a single white sock.


25 posted on 05/23/2010 1:24:46 PM PDT by tweakDU
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ElkGroveDan

Imagine if the accusation was leveled at GWB.


26 posted on 05/23/2010 1:25:20 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four fried chickens and a coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

I’m going to disagree with those on the thread who say the media will cover this up or will allow the regime to cover it up. After all, why ask the question on the most prominent Sunday talk show? There was no need to ask that question because they already knew the answer. Sestak had made the claim some time ago. Obviously, someone wanted to air the claim again. No question on those shows is accidental.


27 posted on 05/23/2010 1:28:18 PM PDT by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: saganite
We will see but time and time again the MSM brings up a question every now and then but spaces it out long enough so the relevance is zero.
28 posted on 05/23/2010 1:35:08 PM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: R0CK3T

You can’t impeach over this. It’s at most a misdemeanor, and not very high at that.


29 posted on 05/23/2010 1:35:32 PM PDT by Eleutheria5 ( Two-state solution: A bad idea whose time has gone.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: saganite
I have agree with you on the point about how the media seems to be more interested in this than three months ago, now that Sestak has defeated Obama's pick for the PA senate seat. A couple of possibilities: Sestak himself wanted the question asked, as he is running against the Obama Administration, even as a liberal democRAT. Not on principle, mind you, but on the expectation that Obama's approval numbers are about to seriously tank - along with the economy. If that happens, the only way to get elected as a democrat is to be as far away from the White House as possible.

The other possibility is that the media is ever so slowly beginning to turn on The One and sense Gibby's stonewalling as blood in the water. Plus, the pRESIDENT hasn't given a press conference in almost a year.
30 posted on 05/23/2010 1:41:08 PM PDT by Apparatchik (If you find yourself in a confusing situation, simply laugh knowingly and walk away - Jim Ignatowski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
“shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not
more than one year, or both.”

Pretty serious “misdemeanor” for a year in jail.

31 posted on 05/23/2010 1:41:16 PM PDT by tobyhill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
You can’t impeach over this. It’s at most a misdemeanor, and not very high at that.

You can impeach over "high crimes and misdemeanors," in other words, over a whole range of behavior unbecoming the office.
32 posted on 05/23/2010 1:41:33 PM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime
We are overlooking a possible danger here: When the democrats control everything, being a highly paid bureaucrat will be better than being an elected official. If the party gains from their game-playing, they will reward these people with great, non-elected, permanent jobs.

That's better than have a vote in our legislature. I would much rather take my chances with the opposition party in control of the house and senate. They get all the committee chairs, set the agenda, and cut off the money flow from the Fraud in Chief.

33 posted on 05/23/2010 1:42:17 PM PDT by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5
You can’t impeach over this. It’s at most a misdemeanor, and not very high at that.

True, but the actions these bozos might take to cover it up could involve criminal activities. Let watch and see.
34 posted on 05/23/2010 1:43:12 PM PDT by Apparatchik (If you find yourself in a confusing situation, simply laugh knowingly and walk away - Jim Ignatowski)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: R0CK3T

Why not pepper these dems with questions over this matter?
Let’s “pretend” they are honest and will do the right thing.
Call them on the carpet if they don’t.
Rub their noses in it.


35 posted on 05/23/2010 1:45:11 PM PDT by IceAge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: R0CK3T

Problem is, they’d have to prosecute not only the White House, but several house and senate members, the MSM, and any liberal news outlet that co-conspires with them.


36 posted on 05/23/2010 1:46:15 PM PDT by ducttape45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sacajaweau

If Sestak wins, his first act after being sworn in should be to switch parties.


37 posted on 05/23/2010 1:46:59 PM PDT by giotto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

They also asked the same question of Gibbs who was on the show ahead of Sestak. It would seem to have been the primary issue for the panel.


38 posted on 05/23/2010 1:50:04 PM PDT by saganite (What happens to taglines? Is there a termination date?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: tobyhill

Someone here today tried to tell me Obama had broken no laws. /sarc


39 posted on 05/23/2010 1:52:01 PM PDT by freekitty (Give me back my conservative vote; then find me a real conservative to vote for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eleutheria5

It’s called bribery. It was a crime when my clearances were going through. If you succumb to bribery or incitement you are guilty of sedition. That’s why you keep your nose clean.
It is a high crime.


40 posted on 05/23/2010 1:52:48 PM PDT by eyedigress ((Old storm chaser from the west)?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-157 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson