[KarlInOhio]

Unless the White House put the bribe on paper or Sestak recorded the call, Axelrod is probably right that there is no evidence. If the White House recorded the call, that 18 1/2 minutes of tape is certainly long gone.

[MrB]

For what reason would Sestak lie about this?

No reason.

So, there is no reason to believe Sestak is lying - back atcha, Axelrod.

[Lee'sGhost]

SO.... this begs the question, Is Sestek

a) stupid for not simply saying he simply misspoke...that he was offered a job but no one said it was in exchange for not running, or

b) he is a moral man and won’t use the above lie, or

c) there is a record somewhere and he knows it could be found and he would then be found out to be a liar?

[verity]

"Axelrod is probably right that there is no evidence."

I agree that this precludes a "kill shot." IMO, however, it does provide an opportunity for conservatives to inflict some pain.

[Eroteme]

Unless the White House put the bribe on paper or Sestak recorded the call, Axelrod is probably right that there is no evidence.

Yep. If there was nothing to this, they would have said, "This did not happen. Period."

So how does the WH now campaign for the guy they just called a big fat liar? A guy who accused their messiah of criminal conspiracy? What about the DSCC and the DNC? Are they going to bankroll a guy who makes up stories from whole cloth that charges their sitting president with criminal acts?

Toomey can (and must!)be all over this. Anyone who endorses Sestak, holds a fundraiser for him, or donates money should be nailed on it.

[reagandemocrat]

Axelrod is plain wrong: Sestak’s statement is evidence in and of itself. Maybe not conclusive, but it IS evidence.

[MozarkDawg]

Unless the White House put the bribe on paper or Sestak recorded the call, Axelrod is probably right that there is no evidence.

Axelrod say WH lawyers looked into it, which means they had to make records of their own investigation, names, conversations, who said what to whom when, why -- all of this is "evidence" regardless they claim it to be exculpatory. This is the kind of thing an IC would have access to in his investigation.