Part 3 of this series serves up the extensive list of potential crimes commited by the Obama administration that establish their pattern of bribery, corruption, obstruction of justice, and conspiracy to corrupt the American electoral process while reigning from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
In Part 1 I discussed the administration’s latest scandal, Sestak-gate, a classic quid pro quo for political advantage and its subsequent cover-up. Part 2 covers the inconsistencies created by the White Houses’s “coordinated” effort to obfuscate the truth and maintain hold on their reins of power.
The question is whether the offer by the White House violated federal bribery and extortion laws, among others, in the Joe Sestak matter. The administration declared they have investigated themselves and found no wrong doing. Reps. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., and Lamar Smith, R-Texas, in a letter to FBI Director Robert Mueller summed up the issue,
“Assurances by the Obama White House that no laws were broken are like the Nixon White House promising it did nothing illegal in connection with Watergate.”
Given this administration’s penchant for prevarication, this scandal may be an impeachable offense in the making. Bribing a candidate may be politics as usual in Chicago, but it’s still a crime. The list of federal violations requiring investigation in this scandal grows as additional details are released, but for now I find six intriguing possiblities:
18 U.S.C. § 4: Misprision of felony;
18 U.S.C. § 210: Offer to procure appointive public office;
18 U.S.C. § 211: Acceptance of solicitation to obtain appointive public office;
18 U.S.C. § 595: Interference by administrative employees by Federal, State or Territorial Governments;
18 U.S.C. § 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity; and
U.S. Constitution, Article 1 Section 6: “…No Person holding any Office under the United States, shall be a Member of either House during his Continuance in Office.”
A former Hardvard Law grad and Constitutional attorney should be aware of the last violation listed, yet the White House admits in their Friday memorandum this is precisely their offer. But Obama administration officals have been implicated in at least five other known bribery allegations, and Obama is on record stating money, votes and power influence political decisions despite Constitutional law.
“I think that oftentimes ordinary citizens are taught that decisions are made based on the public interest or grand principles, when, in fact, what really moves things is money and votes and power.”
Most notable among the Obama administration scandals is Rahm Emanuel’s involvement in the sale of Obama’s former Illinois U.S. Senate seat by Rod Blagojevich. Obama wanted Blagojevich to appoint Valerie Jarrett to Obama’s open U.S. Senate seat. Discover The Networks notes,
When that failed to materialize, Marilyn Katz (according to Rod Blagojevich), contacted the governor and told him that if he were to appoint Jarrett to the U.S. Senate, Obama’s people would help him raise money from their network of contributors across the United States. Federal investigators alleged that an unnamed individual suggested a three-way deal for Blagojevich to appoint Jarrett to the seat, take a position with the SEIU-affiliated “Change to Win” labor coalition, and then have President Obama bolster the organization.
In an interview with Greta Van Sustern, Blagojevich stated,
“I wanted Rahm and sought Rahm out to be the middleman to make the deal happen. I would appoint her [Lisa Madigan, attorney general of Illinois] senator in exchange for the jobs bill, health care expansion, and written promise not to raise taxes on people. Rahm was prepared to do it and then everything changed when I was arrested 6:00 in the morning.
The second “pay-to-play” investigation goes to Barack Obama’s choice for Commerce Secretary, New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who was forced to withdraw his nomination due to pressure from a federal investigation into how his “political donors landed lucrative transportation contracts.” Richardson’s scandal was well-known at the time of his nomination.
Last March, shortly before Senator Jim Matheson switched his health care vote from Nay to Yea, the Weekly Standard reported Obama was selling judgeships for healthcare votes,
“Tonight, Barack Obama will host ten House Democrats who voted against the health care bill in November at the White House; he’s obviously trying to persuade them to switch their votes to yes. One of the ten is Jim Matheson of Utah. The White House just sent out a press release announcing that today President Obama nominated Matheson’s brother Scott M. Matheson, Jr. to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.”
Sept. 27, 2009, the Denver Post reported that Obama offered Colorado Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff a position if he canceled plans to run for the Democratic nomination against incumbent Sen. Michael Bennet. The offer, which specified particular jobs, reportedly was delivered by Jim Messina, Obama’s deputy chief of staff. Elaborating on the Chicago-style politics of the Obama administration, the Post continued,
“It is the kind of hardball tactics that have come to mark the White House’s willingness to shape key races across the country, in this case trying to remove a threat to a vulnerable senator by presenting his opponent a choice of silver or lead.”
Then there’s the report that President Obama tried to push disgruntled White House Counsel Greg Craig out of the White House by offering a federal judgeship on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
The Chicago Machine is alive and thriving at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. The Obama administration is trying to thread the needle through these scandals hoping to maintain the reins of political power but the pattern of bribery, obstruction of justice, conspiracy and corruption reeks from bottom to top. Despite claims of being above the ideological fray, Obama is an Alinskyite community organizer whose job is to sow discontent, promise answers, and move down the road before anyone realizes he neither cares nor knows how to fix their problems. Definitely not “change we can believe in,” just the same old hardball politics, only more corrupt.
Rounds of obfuscation and circular answers will continue until after the November elections unless the public demands a full investigation, including evidence gathering, to answer the questions:
What did Obama know and when did he know it?
Was an offer made to Specter to get Sestak out of the primary in order to bribe Specter into flipping his vote on healthcare? If so, by whom, when and where?
Why did the White House deny the allegations for three months before producing a statement validating Sestak’s charge?
What was the “high ranking job” offered to Sestak? And who had the power to offer it?
What is the precise timeline of Clinton’s offer?
Who are the “White House officals” who were “angry” when Sestak’s story broke?
Was Sestak contacted after his February 18th interview with a demand for silence?
What happened in the “private meeting” with President Clinton?