Justice Dept. And FBI Reluctant To Investigate Obama Despite Strong Evidence Of Malfeasance [Reader Post]

Loading

Former President Clinton, by his own admission, appears to have committed another felony, by violating a crime he signed into law.  Formerly convicted of perjury, President Clinton’s assertions of integrity and honesty are going to be dubious and circumspect; however, according to 18 USC 600, if a ‘job’ or ‘position’ is offered to entice a candidate to drop out of a race you have committed a crime and an impeachable offence.

President Obama’s White House is agreeing with Clinton’s implausible story of offering Congressman Sestak a ‘nonpaying position’ for dropping out of the Senate seat primary race against Arlen Specter, at least that is the story for the time being.  The Obama White House has a tendency to alter a story for political advantage; however, the stakes are much higher, this time Obama is scrambling for political survival rather than advantage.

The Democrats have offered a weak defense by arguing that it is done all the time; yet if it is done all the time and is an accepted practice, why was there a law passed to prevent the practice?

Congressman Issa R CA, ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, is calling for an investigation by either the FBI or the Justice Department.  Since Attorney General Holder functions more as a political hack instead of an Attorney General, Issa’s request to the Justice Department is rhetorical and only serves to illustrate the corruption among some of the nation’s highest office holders.

Congressman Issa:

If they offered a job, it’s a crime, it’s clearly a crime. What the White House is now saying happened, falls under the statute.

President Obama issued a two page report on Friday, after calls from Republicans and Democrats for an explanation concerning Sestak’s allegation that he was offered a job to pull out of the race and allow Arlen Specter to have the Democratic nomination.  The report conceded the fact that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel

enlisted the support

of Former President Clinton,  who acted as a go between with Sestak, on Thursday President Obama curiously opined that there was

nothing improper

concerning his personal conduct in the issue.

White House lawyer Robert F. Bauer, wrote in the report that the job offered was a nonpaying, advisory board position in the executive branch and that accusations of improper conduct by the administration

rest on factual error and lack a basis in the law

The ambiguity of this phrase as a response implies more guilt than it relieves.  The report stresses the fact that the White House had no direct contact with Congressman Sestak, as if this fact was relevant for absolving guilt.

Congressman Sestak maintains that he had only one phone call from Clinton lasting over a period of two months, one of the longest phone conversations on record.  In a written record by Sestak, a former Rear Admiral and unfortunately for whom honesty is supposed to be foremost and above all else in the code for an officer and a gentleman, relates his story of the job offer.

During the course of the conversation, he expressed concern over my prospects if I were to enter the Democratic primary for U.S. Senate and the value of having me stay in the House of Representatives because of my military background,  He said that White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel had spoken with him about my being on a presidential board while remaining in the House.

Mr. Sestak wrote that he was unsure,

whether it was the right thing to do for Pennsylvania working families.

Trying to be a down home politician without the talent and intellect is proving to be the undoing of Sestak and of the White House; during a Capitol Hill press conference, Sestak admitted he thought the offer was illegal.

The question is whether Obama has consolidated his authoritarian control over the FBI and the Justice Department well enough to prevent the commission of an investigation and  justice.  The next few weeks will enable the American people to see how much power and control Obama has usurped and whether America still functions under the rule of law.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
35 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

As long as the Democrats control both the House and the Senate, Obama will not be investigated. The DOJ is now just a legal cover for any criminal enterprise Obama and Holder want to protect. The FBI will not go up against the entire legislative and executive branches of government.

This is the first time I’ve seen the question, “if this is done all the time, why is there a law against it?” I’d love to see the media ask this one simple question, above. What could possibly be the answer? Politicians who claim everybody does it, are dishonest and childish.

The battlecry needs to be about the “selective enforcment of law”.

The true threat that Obama et al brings against the Republic is their assault on the idea that we are a country of laws… that everyone must follow. They continuously use selective enforcment of the law to undermine our trust in the system… they continue to rule by fiat, and regulation, vice law… once again destroying the foundations of the Republic.

This is the true existencial threat we face.

Yeah, and my governor has admitted that he’s done it as well. Guess that makes it ok. He sounded almost proud of the fact! Can’t wait until Fast Eddie Rendell is out!

Finally, after all of the so called birther’s complaints and unsuccessful attempts to out the “president” because he is NOT a natural born citizen, Obama is coming down hard because of his felonious Chicago-style tactics; and due also to Obama’s infamous heavy-handed no-holds-barred campaigning for his health care plan.

OBAMA FINALLY GOT HIS TIT IN THE RINGER.

Several months ago, Obama was facing certain embarrassment if his health-care plan had failed. Obama therefore campaigned hard to get every Senate vote that he could — promising ANYTHING to ANYONE that would help him. Double-crossing dirt-bag Arlen Specter crossed his own morals, his reputation, and his party to help Obama. Anything to get re-elected. So he dealt with the Devil (Obama) and it seems that the deal included the Devil trying to help get Specter re-elected at any cost.

For Obama that meant, when the time came, he would make Sestak an offer he might accept in exchange for dropping out of the primary against Specter. Note that Bill Clinton, White House Councel, Obama, and others in this fiasco are attorneys. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Talk is that patsy Bill Clinton was the one who approached Sestak to try and talk him out of running against Obama’s darling, Arlen Specter, in exchange for a high-ranking job in the White House.

What makes it patently clear that Obama and Bauer are dishonest in their reply is that Bill Clinton is NOT, as Sestak has claimed, a White House official able to fit the description given of who contacted Sestak, according to Sestak. Furthermore, you have to be an idiot to believe that the “job offer” to Sestak was simply a non-paying adviser job???? This instead of becoming a Senator with Senator’s pay and prestige? Me thinks the offer from Obama was one of a “higher” kind of job inside the White House. Can you spell f-e-l-o-n-y? Can you spell j-a-i-l t-i-m-e for Obama.

Consider that Bill Clinton is NOT a White House official. “Sestak told a Philadelphia television anchor Larry Kane he had received a job offer from the White House…” – rightpundits.com: http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=5926.

Is the Obama Administration lying? The Philadelphia Journal reported on Feb. 19, 2010, “A White House spokesman this morning strongly denied Sestak had been offered (a job) yesterday. Before the spokesman issued the denial a senior Pennsylvania Democrat yesterday said White House officials there were angered by Sestak’s account.

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/home_top_stories/20100219_Sestak_says_federal_job_was_offered_to_quit_race.html#axzz0pH303t4O.

Today, May 28th, 2010, Obama admits there was an (illegal and felonious) offer of a high-position job made to Sestak to encourage him to leave the race (is this election tampering, too). Actions taken by Obama are illegal and punishable by impeachment for high crimes and misdemeanors.

Although I believe that Obama is NOT the legitimate president, Congress may not need to impeach him, just merely walk his butt over to the nearest jail house.

Contradictions between the White House and Sestak accounts
The following contradictions exist between the official White House account and the original Sestak interview:

• White House: “White House staff did not discuss these options with Congressman Sestak.”
•: Sestak: Replied “Yes” to the question “you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”

• White House: “It has been suggested that discussions of alternatives to the Senate campaign were improperly raised with the Congressman. There was no such impropriety. ”
• Sestak: Replied “Yes” to the question “Were you ever offered a job to get out of this race?

• White House: “It has been suggested that the Administration may have offered Congressman Sestak the position of Secretary of the Navy in the hope that he would accept the offer and abandon a Senate candidacy. This is false.”
• Sestak: Replied “No comment” to the question “Was it Navy Secretary?”, when a simple “No” would have sufficed. In a separate interview, MSNBC says that Sestak did confirm the offer of the Secretary of the Navy position.

“If proven, the reported actions of the Obama administration are clear violations of three federal laws. The impact and fallout from documented violations, as well as the refusal of the Holder Justice Department to appoint a Special Counsel to investigate this matter, have the potential to eclipse the Watergate scandal of the early 1970’s – it is that serious.”

From: Timeline: The Sestak Bribe and the White House Coverup

http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2010/05/timeline-sestak-bribe-and-white-house.html

The law regarding election bribery is very specific. Obama made the offer of a job to encourage Sestak to quit his primary opposition to Specter. It was Obama who owed Specter due to Specter’s voter for Obama’s health care bill. And, in return, Obama would give Sestak a job only Obama is qualified to offer. THE LAW AGAINST THIS TYPE OF BRIBERY WAS WRITTEN FOR THIS TYPE OF BEHAVIOR. It is a felony. It is worth an investigation. And, it should definitively lead to Obama’s impeachment and removal.

Those individuals, senators and congressmen who do not agree that this should be investigated are co-conspirators in this felony. It’s a shame that Obama’s Chicago-style politics tries to muck-up what should be free and fair elections; elections decided by voters and NOT by crooked politicians — the law is very clear on this point.

Consider before Obama was even actually elected the Black Panther clear violation of law and the absolute refusal to prosecute even in a liberal bastion of PA where libs were complaining.

We may have reached an edge that is so steep and dangerous that any more straws on this camels back means a very bloody end.

I hope and pray not but I feel the people in the majority would turn to bloodshed to keep their hold on power.

Does anyone really doubt this?

Considering Congressman Issa’s first hand experience with auto thefts, insurance fraud, handgun violations, and the felony indictment process, I suppose he knows a crime when he sees one.

How does a guy with three felony arrests and a misdemeanor conviction wind up on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee?

I’m still waiting to read where President Clinton said, “yes, I did make that offer” or even “yes, I heard about it. Could you please cite that reference? Thanks. So far I’ve only heard the WH and Sestak say-so.

Not sure, but president of the US of quite a step up from representative, is it not?

And isn’t a felony in the office of the POTUS a little more disconcerting to you Greg or are you that much of a political hack that you care not that your leaders are dirty and corrupt through and through apparently to a man/woman?

@Patter

The Sestak say-so is this:

Asked if someone in the WH made the offer of a job, Sestak Replied “Yes” to the question “you were offered a job by someone in the White House?”

You may never get to hear or read about Bill Clinton saying or admitting that it was he who made the offer to Sestak. Read carefully, Sestak said that someone IN THE WHITE HOUSE offer him a job — NOT someone OUTSIDE of the White House. Slick Willie is a has-been. Barack H. Obama is the only one with the keys to the “Job Locker” at the WH. Obama is guilty of a felony, admitted by his WH attorney, Bauer — along with an assortment of co-conspirators. All that remains is to escort Obamafool to the nearest jailhouse. Now.

“And isn’t a felony in the office of the POTUS a little more disconcerting to you Greg or are you that much of a political hack that you care not that your leaders are dirty and corrupt through and through apparently to a man/woman?”

I don’t see any indication of a felony, other than in the hopeful and overheated imaginatings of Obama’s political enemies. They’ve been beating the bushes trying to scare something up to take down Obama since he announced his candidacy for President, and have never been the least bit particular about the truth of anything they’ve used. The problem with that sort of prolonged, random attack is that it can eventually erode the credibility of the attacker.

Issa need not worry, of course, since he had little credibility to begin with. I haven’t liked him since his groundless claim that Valerie Plame had committed purgery, his pinheaded dismissal of 9/11 first responder requests for health compensation with the assertion that it was “just a plane crash”, and his attack on the testimony of Blackwater families. He’s worse than a political hack, in my humble opinion. He’s a smarmy political hatchet man.

@AdrianS

The OP here above said,

Former President Clinton, by his own admission, appears to have committed another felony,

I’m saying, where is that admission he made? As you point out, so far it is say-so. I would like to point out that this seems to be an urban myth in the making. The WH said (and mentioned Clinton). Sestak said (and mentioned Clinton). Everyone reading this, including the aces here apparently, concludes that because the WH and Sestak said so, that Clinton not only did it, but admitted it. Where?

Don’t buy into memes! This is what leads to Hope and Change, when you start believing You Are the Ones, etc. You are being bamboozled by a technique called Appeal to Authority, namely, “it was reported in the news.” After all the lying and twisting we’ve seen in the media, they shouldn’t be a reliable Authority now, but this shows you what years of being told that the news is an Authority will do.

Even the news has not, to my knowledge, come up with an example of Clinton affirming or denying this story, only evading it. It’s an interesting twist, the use of Clinton as a go-between in a story that relies on Authority for credibility. He is the very icon of lying now. He may not actually lie as much as people think, but since he was caught in perjury his word is suspect to say the least. Why pick the person people would be most likely to think of as a liar, to back up your story? Think about that, for a loong while.

Patter you have caught me in error, unintentional, but an error none the less. Clinton has not issued a statement; however, with both the White House and Sestak claiming that he was the intermediary, even Slick Willie will have a hard time getting out of this one. That is not an excuse for my error, Thank you for the correction.

Skookum, these guys are all wolverines. 🙂 they’re just wearing suits. I do think Clinton can’t get out of this well because–if he could he would. Wouldn’t you? Clinton, because of his reputation as a liar, can’t deny it, people will say he is lying as usual, ignore him and lean on the Authority of the WH/Sestak. If he agrees, he’s contributing to a felony and he knows it, and he knows enough people would go after him legally, so I don’t believe we are going to hear him affirm it.

I’ve thought since late in the campaign there was some sudden sea change that led to the Clintons being hostage, in some fashion, to Obama. What, I can’t imagine. It seemed obvious then even that 0 was taunting them, Bill was itching to take him on, Hillary could have whistled while inflicting old Apache tortures on him–Clintons lost two friends suddenly in suspicious circumstances, but there must be more. All of a sudden they are all supportive and BFF. Not buying it. And speculating about what would be big and bad enough to shut up the Clintons makes my head hurt.

@greg

It is OK to be a fool. You can even be a blind-fool. It’s a free country. But a felony is a felony and when the law is broken, even by a president, there is law enforcement.

Keep your fingers crossed you don’t have to eat crow soon. But keep you condiments handy.

@Patter

The Obama response, although months in the making is good, but not that good. And, as far as “using” Clinton as a go-between — it matters not. The crime is admitted to by the WH though Bauer. Suffice it that Bauer says, in his words, that the crime was committed. Clever, maybe. But I’ve seen more clever.

The statement that Obama makes though Bauer admits that he used Clinton to offer Sestak a job in exchange for Sestak’s exiting the race — exactly what Federal Laws prohibits! Close your eyes and ears if YOU want; everyone else can see and smell the rat — an admission of guilt to felonious behavior in an attempt to afterward say that “nothing happened”. It’s like catching the bank robber on his way out of the bank; he says he didn’t get a chance to grab the money and, “nothing happened.” Should the FBI let the bank robber go because “nothing happened”? No. I think not. And, most Americans would agree — Obama committed a felony and had accomplices. Like any crook with bad habits — Obama’s nasty political bad habits are impossible for him to break.

Remember, we’re not looking to find that Clinton is a liar or not. The proof of the crime is in the Bauer admission to the felony. The best place to hide something is in plain sight — sometimes.

Jail time. Obama is toast.

“It is OK to be a fool.”

If I’m being a fool, I’m in some unusual company. Even conservative George Will has gone on record saying that the attempt to make this into a legal issue is preposterous:

“Politics is a transactional business. Candidates go to voters and say ‘you vote for me, I’ll do this for you’ that’s what we do in this business and there’s nothing wrong with it. It’s called democracy and free government. Obama was seriously trying to act as the leader of his party to get what he thought — he was wrong — to get the strongest candidate in the race in Pennsylvania. Nothing the matter with this. And for Republicans of all people to try to resuscitate that Frankenstein monster the independent council is preposterous.”

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/george-will-gop-reaction-to-sestak-job-offer-preposterous/

If the statues were interpreted as literally and strictlly as Issa wants, they would make it illegal for any elected official to offer an appointment to another elected official who’s presently considering running for a new elected position or for reelection. The Hatch Act makes it illegal to hold both jobs at once; thus, any such offer could be construed as an illegal inducement–as a bribe–intended to interfere with the process.

and of course, Greg… we shouldn’t be interpreting statutes “literally and strictly”, but allow for politics as usual. pffft…. Gee, if that statute should be flexible, how about this one over here? Get my drift?

It’s not okay for this POTUS, or any politician to take liberty with statutes… regardless of political stripe. And perhaps hauling a few thru the court system would be a healthy and overdue slap in the face. That you prefer to side with corruption over the citizens, regardless of their political beliefs, is unconscionable, Greg. You might want to wipe off your nose. Looking pretty darned brown there.

I’m not arguing at all that a crime took place. I’ve been waiting since 2008 for any of the crimes 0 and the rest of them had already committed to be prosecuted, and the pile has only increased.

I’m pointing out that careless rhetoric and lack of proper resourcing leads to erroneous beliefs, which is the last thing we need when there is already an effort to suppress the facts by the media. If you were to conduct a poll today, I bet that already it is a “known fact” that Clinton did indeed do this. This shows how easy it is to mislead people. Believe me, it takes constant work not to be a sheeple.

However Clinton may have sinned himself, trapping him in a fall guy role like this is the work of a cold mind that likes to torment people. It’s disturbing, whoever cooked this up is running the country.

“It’s disturbing, whoever cooked this up is running the country.”

Not really. If you’re referring to Obama. His approval rating is more slippery than a greased poll. Obama can no longer get any traction on anything. Perhaps history will treat Obama the same as it did Nixon.

@Greg

Perhaps you should read my posting #17 above, second paragraph. And, as far as the George Will’s comment is concerned, I can only say that it is preposterous that Obama would be so bold as to make the illegal, felonious offer to Sestak in “broad daylight”. Realize that Obama does not deny it.

You seem to want to suggest that because crooks do crooked things, when you catch one his excuse could be that “everyone steals, embezzles, kills, or offers candidates jobs to get them out of an election.” Ever watch when a police officer pulls over three cars at a time for speeding and tickets them all. Those are the ones that he caught.

Obama has essentially been caught. No excuse. No rational explanation as to why he broke the law. Just a fast one to try and pull the wool over the public’s eyes. But forget not that Obama is NOT slick-Willie.

No one cares to answer the question, “if it is okay, why is there a law against it”? A law that was signed into being by Slick Willy.

How many other laws is Obama ignoring to ‘run’ the country?

Does breaking a law over and over make it okay?

If Obama has control over the House, Senate, Attorney General, and the FBI is he immune to prosecution? Does he feel he can break the law without consequence because of his unique situation.

Can he break any law with impunity or just laws that are an impediment to his mission?

Does the White House believe that if you direct a third party to commit a felony on your behalf, that they are absolved of guilt? This is all bizarre logic for men who try to convince us of their superior intellect.

Nixon didn’t actually commit burglary, he just asked his men to commit a felony.

“Nixon didn’t actually commit burglary, he just asked his men to commit a felony.”

When you take into account that Obama is the ONLY person who could possibly make the offer of a job (assuming they anticipated that Sestak would take it), then Obama committed the crime.

Furthermore, when you consider the motivation — it was Obama who owed Specter for voting for his health care program and not Emmanuel and certainly not Clinton — then you realize the motivation to commit the felony.

Obama is a liar. It seems to me that he feels that he can lie to people and then not worry about consequences. Obama has made many, many promises, which he has not kept. You could say that he is shrewd.

Obama has now graduated, without the need for affirmative action, to felonious activities.

I don’t know if I’ll be posting here any more. My serious posts are being censored.

[Mata note: you aren’t being censored. Like all of us, you occasionally get caught in the pesky spam filter, and it takes one of us authors to bail you out when we’re logged in… consider your two comments “bailed”…]

I don’t need bailing, the post I submitted does.

@Greg

Perhaps you should read my posting #17 above, second paragraph. And, as far as the George Will’s comment is concerned,
I can only say that it is preposterous that Obama would be so bold as to make the illegal, felonious offer to Sestak in “broad
daylight”. Realize that Obama does not deny it.

You seem to want to suggest that because crooks do crooked things, when you catch one his excuse could be that
everyone steals, embezzles, kills, or offers candidates jobs to get them out of an election.” Ever watch
when a police officer pulls over three cars at a time for speeding and tickets them all. Those are the ones that he caught.

Obama has essentially been caught. No excuse. No rational explanation as to why he broke the law. Just a fast one to
try and pull the wool over the public’s eyes. But forget not that Obama is NOT slick-Willie.

In 2002 the G. W. Bush White House offered New York Rep. Ben Gilman an Executive Branch job as an inducement not to run in another district after his own House district was eliminated. In 1981 the Reagan White House offered Senator S. I. Hayakawa an ambassadorship if he’d drop out of the California Republican Primary. Ambassador appointments have been routinely made as a reward for political activity for as long as we’ve had ambassadors. I guess every former president still living will have to go to jail?

Adrian, I sometimes have my harmless comments caught in the cyber snare. Don’t sweat it, there is an ‘e-mail me’ below the comment box, just send the message and if one of the big cheese’s is logged on, they will fix the problem. I like your commentary and hope you stick around. Skook.

Thanks.

@Greg

Again, you miss the point. Obama got caught. And, as for dates; it’s my understanding that it was former President Slick-Willie that signed the current law into being during his term.

As for a statute of limitations on the crime; I, like many, would have to say that Obama can be prosecuted NOW for the felony he has committed. In addition, malfeasance comes to mind. High crimes and misdemeanors. Obama is toast.

In an ideal world every crime would be punished and every good deed rewarded. But since we have to live here, we can only choose whether to work for the ideal or slip into the Slough of Despond (thanks John Bunyan). Somehow the cardinal sin of Sloth has been reinvented as laziness, but it was more like the loss of will to keep fighting the good fight: deciding instead to go along to get along.
We can’t go back and prosecute things that slipped by, we can only use the knowledge to prevent further occurrences. Every time I hear “But so-and-so did it” it makes me think of the Mom song
“I don’t CARE who started it, you’re ALL grounded until you are 36.” Geez. “He did it too” is the defense of 5 year olds.
@Adrian S
Really? This is Bill’s law? Then it’s a double taunt to him. That’s how I see Clinton’s “involvement”; some malicious mind, whether 0, Rahm, Soros–finding another way to stick it to Clinton. Similar to the twisting of saying 0’s Iraq policy is a fairy tale into being a racist. Now, who could have become so resentful over that law, he would wait years to hurt someone? Maybe history has more clues.

Skookum, around here the smallest spark is dangerous in the summer because of the dryness and because many of our trees are damaged by bark beetles. But I think our inevitable summer forest fires are nothing to what will happen in Washington one of these days. I hope. Blago’s trial starts tomorrow. And yes, I do seriously think there is a strong undercurrent of vindictiveness toward Clinton coming from the Obamini. I cannot shake that impression, that there is a petty spite to many things that were said and done in the last two years, which goes far beyond normal political BS sniping. Who is behind it, I don’t know. Remember Michelle saying she’d like to scratch his eyes out? WTH. What did he do to her?

Also, Obama and his minions are lying.

If it were true that they wanted to avoid a costly primary election, WHY DID THEY NOT MAKE THE SAME OFFER TO MICHAEL BENNET?

Did they also ask Bennet to take a job and leave the race because of the expensive primary? NO.

So the idea that Obama offered Romanoff a job to get out because of the costly primary is bunk. Obama openly and feloniously violated federal law.

Obama should be impeached, tried and removed. If jail time is called for: Obama should go to jail for violations of federal law.