WhiteWatergate II?
To: safetysign
I hope people will have a long enough memory about this to pick up today where it left off on Friday.
2 posted on
06/01/2010 5:45:33 AM PDT by
Genoa
(Luke 12:2)
To: safetysign
Of course they can’t. They aren’t the brightest bunch to grace the WH hallways. But nothing will come of it. Just a speed bump in the road.
4 posted on
06/01/2010 5:48:31 AM PDT by
b4its2late
(Why does a slight tax increase cost you $200 and a substantial tax cut save you 30 cents?)
To: safetysign
I would think that Blago is taking lots of notes with regard to these comments that this is “business as usual.”
5 posted on
06/01/2010 5:48:42 AM PDT by
norge
(The amiable dunce is back, wearing a skirt and high heels.)
To: safetysign; Admin Moderator
Sestak isn’t a Popular Keyword today. ???
6 posted on
06/01/2010 5:49:50 AM PDT by
Genoa
(Luke 12:2)
To: safetysign
the Media will let it drop and the Repubs will not have the b@lls to properly pursue it. Stick a fork in this one.
To: safetysign
It is ludicrous to believe that the prospect of a presidential appointment to an unpaid federal advisory panel of little stature and less consequence would persuade Sestak to give up his dream of moving up from the House to the Senate. Stupid figment to create.
Second, White House counsel Bob Bauer apparently was not consulted about this hastily stitched together cover-up
Or he wouldn't have put out in the *official statement* that Sestak had contact through June and July ... Sestak later on the Capitol steps says he had one call from Clinton -- dang, that's a long phone call!
To: safetysign
As a sitting member of Congress, Sestak was barred from serving on such a federal panel and thus would have been required not only to give up his Specter challenge but also his House seat in order to agree to the White House offer.This is one of the elephants in the room that no "reporter" has attempted to address. A simple question to Gibbs:
How many sitting Congressmen sit on such panels? Can you give us some names?
I have been waiting for weeks to hear the answer to this question.
10 posted on
06/01/2010 6:35:50 AM PDT by
maica
(Freedom consists not in doing what we like,but in having the right to do what we ought. John Paul II)
To: safetysign
I’m still convinced that this White House makes the Nixon White House look very clean indeed
11 posted on
06/01/2010 6:53:45 AM PDT by
screaming eagle2
(No matter what you call it,a pre-owned automobile is STILL A USED CAR!!!)
To: safetysign
I’m still convinced that this White House makes the Nixon White House look very clean indeed
12 posted on
06/01/2010 6:53:45 AM PDT by
screaming eagle2
(No matter what you call it,a pre-owned automobile is STILL A USED CAR!!!)
To: safetysign
It’s because Obama and his gang are pathological liars of the lowest order.
The little kenyan sh!tstain lies so much, that he would probably tell us he ate eggs for breakfast when he really ate oatmeal.
13 posted on
06/01/2010 7:06:55 AM PDT by
Prole
(Please pray for the families of Chris and Channon. May God always watch over them.)
To: safetysign
What I don’t understand - the statute is about electioneering...not bribery. Even if its a non-paid position, its still electioneering, and still illegal.
Unfortunately, its just as illegal as waving a club outside a polling station :(
15 posted on
06/01/2010 7:22:04 AM PDT by
lacrew
(Barack Obama is always the least experienced most condescending guy in the room. (Rush))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson