Culture of Corruption Obama and Michelle Malkin

[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Summers responded by calling on the industry to cease running ads against the bill and to stop its lobbyists from trying to insert loopholes in the legislation, the person said.”19 Business as usual? Veteran political observer Michael Barone didn’t think so: “The White House officials are making clear the character of the new regime they’re trying to impose.We’re doing you favors, so shut up and take whatever medicine we prescribe without protest.”20Put another way: It’s political free speech and participation in the legislative process for all—except when subject to approval by Obama overlords.Minnesota GOP Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, borrowing a phrase from Barone,21 called Obama’s speech-squelching racket exactly what it was: “Gangster government.” For this, she was chastised by former president Bill Clinton, who likened Bachmann and the limited-government activists of the Tea Party movement to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh.Rebuking Bachmann’s “hatred and “paranoia,” Clinton defended his friends in the White House and ruling majority.“They are not gangsters,” Clinton told the New York Times before the nationwide Tax Day Tea Party protests.“They were elected.They are not doing anything they were not elected to do.”22Some elected officials might beg to differ.And not just ones with an “R” by their names.In February 2010, Democrat Congressman Joe Sestak in Pennsylvania admitted to veteran Philly newsman Larry Kane that Team Obama had dangled a “high-ranking” position in the administration if he dropped out of the Senate race and left incumbent Republican-turned Democrat Senator Arlen Specter alone.Kane reported on the exchange and the White House wall of silence he encountered:It was just something I’d been hearing about from a variety of sources.Was it true? I didn’t know, but I decided to pop the question.During the taping of my Comcast Network Voice of Reason show, which airs Sunday night at 9:30, I asked Congressman Joe Sestak: “Is it true that you were offered a high ranking job in the administration in a bid to get you to drop out of the primary against Arlen Specter?”Sestak looked a little surprised by the question.He said, “Yes.”I asked him if the job was Navy Secretary.He said, “I can’t comment on that.” In the next few seconds, he admitted that it was a “high up” job, that it came from the White House, and that he didn’t accept the offering.He proceeded to say that nothing will stop him from completing the race against Specter for the Democratic nomination.Was I surprised? A little.After all, I was just probing.Two hours later, I called the White House press office.I played the tape, and asked for a reaction.They never called back.That didn’t surprise me.If it did happen, and if they did try to get Sestak out of the race, how could they deny it?23The “mainstream” press ignored the story for weeks.When White House press spokesman Robert Gibbs addressed the controversy on March 16, 2010, the strategy was clear: Dodge, baby, dodge.After first denying any contact with Sestak took place, Gibbs changed course and admitted a conversation had occurred.Then he urged the reporters to move on.From the White House press briefing transcript:Question: Robert, perhaps a sore point, but Congressman Darrell Issa has accused you, Robert Gibbs, of being part of a cover-up because you will not say whether the White House offered Joe Sestak a job for not running against Arlen Specter.Guilty or not guilty?Mr.Gibbs: Look, I’ve talked to several people in the White House; I’ve talked to people that have talked to others in the White House.I’m told that whatever conversations have been had are not problematic.I think Congressman Sestak has discussed that this is—whatever happened is in the past, and he’s focused on his primary election.24No doubt Gibbs had been well-advised by the lawyers at the White House to choose his words carefully about the ethically and legally suspect deal.Unlike Gibbs, the U.S.code governing bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest is straightforward: “Whoever solicits or receives.any.thing of value, in consideration of the promise of support or use of influence in obtaining for any person any appointive office or place under the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.”25Amid calls from House Republicans for an investigation and special prosecutor, Congressman Sestak refused to give further details—even as he pointed to the episode on the campaign trail to tout his independence [ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]

Pokrewne