[MozarkDawg]

The page I found doesn't include part of Judge Napolitano's point, he says that the bar, level that must be reached is that there must be the ability to make good on the offer -- obviously, the White House (not the building, we use the euphemism to denote the whole and not to specify the president himself) had the ability to make good on nominating Sestak to SecNav if he did indeed drop out of the Senate primary. I'm not a lawyer either, and I do not have the Judge's brilliant mind, but it is the quid pro quo, the offer to provide the benefit of the position if he would remove himself from a political contest in which they had an interest.

Others mentioned Specter, I hadn't been considering him at all until it was explained to me -- did he also have some deal with the White House earlier, he told them he'd switch to Dem to assure the 60-vote margin, they (not necessarily 0bama himself) told him they'd fix the primary, no challenger?? This needs to be looked into as well, why we need Sestak to tell us just who made him the offer he claims he got.

[Huck]

I guess, I can’t really sort it out for certain. It seems like that statute is designed to prohibit people from buying and selling jobs. It’s questionable to me whether the Sestak scenario fits that description. Is Sestak withdrawing from the race a “thing of value”? Not sure.