• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

The Nixon Administration, Part 2

Texan

Well-known member
So...the Obama White House Chief-of-Staff gets Bill Clinton to offer Sestak a job to drop out of the primary. And that's assuming that we can believe the statements of those involved - in other words, the best-case-scenario. Which is a story that sounds pretty damn fishy.

This - after months of stonewalling - from the Administration that was going to be transparent and that was going to restore integrity to the White House?

Any of you Obama supporters care to try to defend this?
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
They offered him a job with no pay, and that he was not eligible to take. Sure they did. :lol:

In a little-noticed passage Friday, the New York Times reported that Rep. Joe Sestak was not eligible for a place on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, the job he was reportedly offered by former President Bill Clinton. And indeed a look at the Board’s website reveals this restriction:

The Board consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government. Members are distinguished citizens selected from the national security, political, academic, and private sectors.
 

Texan

Well-known member
Where did the Obama voters go?

Is this type of unethical behavior alright with you since it's your man doing it?

Is this an example of the transparency and ethics that you voted for?

Isn't it obvious to you now that your President lied to you just to get your vote?

How long will you hide from this and pretend that you don't see it?

Don't any of you have the integrity to speak out against this?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Texan said:
Where did the Obama voters go?

Is this type of unethical behavior alright with you since it's your man doing it?

Is this an example of the transparency and ethics that you voted for?

Isn't it obvious to you now that your President lied to you just to get your vote?

How long will you hide from this and pretend that you don't see it?

Don't any of you have the integrity to speak out against this?

They showed their lack of entegrity when they campaigned for him and voted for him. :cry: :roll:
 

redrobin

Well-known member
Texan said:
Where did the Obama voters go?
To the local black, gay, abortion clinic where there's a meeting on how to save the earth, punish Israel and get Rush Limbaugh off the air. They'll be back by tomorrow. Their checks come on the 3rd of the month.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
I don't know whats getting your pampers all so wet-- this has been happening- with both cults- for years....Insider deals cut in cult conventions and back rooms to pick and choose who should be their candidate- which often was accompanied by alternative offers....

Probably the best known in history is Ike and Earl Warren...Warren (Gov of California) was the 1948 candidate for VP with Dewey- who lost to Truman- but was the favorite for President in 52 coming into the conventions..... To get Warrens support- and keep him from siderailing the convention (and Ikes nomination) with his hatred of Nixon--Eisenhower offered, and Warren accepted, the post of solicitor general, with the promise of the next seat on theSupreme Court. He never took the solicitor general job as when Chief Justice Fred Vinson unexpectedly died in September 1953- Ike kept his promise and appointed Warren to replace him as Chief Justice of the United States...
 

Steve

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
I don't know whats getting your pampers all so wet-- this has been happening- with both cults- for years....Insider deals cut in cult conventions and back rooms to pick and choose who should be their candidate- which often was accompanied by alternative offers....

Probably the best known in history is Ike and Earl Warren...Warren (Gov of California) was the 1948 candidate for VP with Dewey- who lost to Truman- but was the favorite for President in 52 coming into the conventions..... To get Warrens support- and keep him from siderailing the convention (and Ikes nomination) with his hatred of Nixon--Eisenhower offered, and Warren accepted, the post of solicitor general, with the promise of the next seat on theSupreme Court. He never took the solicitor general job as when Chief Justice Fred Vinson unexpectedly died in September 1953- Ike kept his promise and appointed Warren to replace him as Chief Justice of the United States...

been done along time??? everyone knows about it occurring,.. ... so has prostitution, drug dealing, murder, and many other crimes, they have been done since the beginning of time, and everyone knows it happens all the time.. but they are still illegal and still wrong..
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
OT, what was the law in 1948, we know what it is at present?

18 U.S.C. § 600 : US Code - Section 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/29/600
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
OT, what was the law in 1948, we know what it is at present?

18 U.S.C. § 600 : US Code - Section 600: Promise of employment or other benefit for political activity

Whoever, directly or indirectly, promises any employment,
position, compensation, contract, appointment, or other benefit,
provided for or made possible in whole or in part by any Act of
Congress, or any special consideration in obtaining any such
benefit, to any person as consideration, favor, or reward for any
political activity or for the support of or opposition to any
candidate or any political party in connection with any general or
special election to any political office, or in connection with any
primary election or political convention or caucus held to select
candidates for any political office, shall be fined under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/29/600

Neither was many drugs usuage or the marketing of- or prostitution in many parts of the country in 1948... And just like back room political deals --passage of laws outlawing them didn't stop any of them.....

And if you don't think both cults are as quilty as the other- you're spending too much time with your head in the sand...The stories of what you must do to get Mitch McConnells' (known as the Kingmaker in Kentucky) nod for a position on the Kentucky Republican ticket are legendary....
Thats why many that follow politics are wondering how old Mitch will bring the downfall of Rand Paul-- who didn't play his game :???:
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Who said I didn't think both "cults" are as guilty as the other?

And when a Republican President is in the WH, and the issue comes up, I'll mention it then too.

So what do you think of the current President breaking the law?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
hypocritexposer said:
Who said I didn't think both "cults" are as guilty as the other? And when a Republican President is in the WH, and the issue comes up, I'll mention it then too. So what do you think of the current President breaking the law?

I'm not sure he did- sounds like Bill Clinton made the offer... I haven't heard all the other side- nor how the law has been interpreted by thecourts.... If he is proven to have broke the law- then that is what he did.....But it would seem very hypocritical to start enforcing it against one- and not the others...The reason I think you will see both cults wanting to run from this and let it die because it is everyday happening in political conventions....

Kind of like many in Congress said when GW usurped the administrative branchs Constitutional authority so many times- taking on new powers- and thereby sitting precedents...."Once you put the tool in the carpenters toolkit- its almost impossible to get it back"....Its hard to not think the next one following them won't do the same..

And this law was first enacted in 1940-- so Ike ( and probably every President/Party Leader since him) were lawbreakers...
 

hypocritexposer

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
hypocritexposer said:
Who said I didn't think both "cults" are as guilty as the other? And when a Republican President is in the WH, and the issue comes up, I'll mention it then too. So what do you think of the current President breaking the law?

I'm not sure he did- sounds like Bill Clinton made the offer... I haven't heard all the other side- nor how the law has been interpreted by thecourts.... If he is proven to have broke the law- then that is what he did.....But it would seem very hypocritical to start enforcing it against one- and not the others...The reason I think you will see both cults wanting to run from this and let it die because it is everyday happening in political conventions....

Kind of like many in Congress said when GW usurped the administrative branchs Constitutional authority so many times- taking on new powers- and thereby sitting precedents...."Once you put the tool in the carpenters toolkit- its almost impossible to get it back"....Its hard to not think the next one following them won't do the same..

And this law was first enacted in 1940-- so Ike ( and probably every President/Party Leader since him) were lawbreakers...

So your argument is that he didn't break the law, it was Clinton that did?

The law says Directly or Indirectly. Would having Clinton make the offer be Directly or Indirectly?

And the offer made to Sestak was on a Advisory board that the President is responsible for appointing people to.

Of course it was Clinton, that was responsible.


:lol: :lol:
 

Texan

Well-known member
Texan said:
Don't any of you have the integrity to speak out against this?
And apparently, the answer is 'No.'

No surprise, I suppose. Integrity and ethical standards no longer seem important to some people - as long as their guy is in office.
 

Steve

Well-known member
OldTimer said:
.But it would seem very hypocritical to start enforcing it against one- and not the others.

so if I got away with speeding (which I did).. you would let all those who got caught slide?
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Steve said:
OldTimer said:
.But it would seem very hypocritical to start enforcing it against one- and not the others.

so if I got away with speeding (which I did).. you would let all those who got caught slide?

Nope- but Jaywalking is a crime in most books-- never enforced locally- and everyone (including myself) does it....So do you single out one person that you have biases against- and charge them when they do it?
 

hopalong

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
OldTimer said:
.But it would seem very hypocritical to start enforcing it against one- and not the others.

so if I got away with speeding (which I did).. you would let all those who got caught slide?

Nope- but Jaywalking is a crime in most books-- never enforced locally- and everyone (including myself) does it....So do you single out one person that you have biases against- and charge them when they do it?

Of course YOU would :wink: :wink: :wink:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
hopalong said:
Oldtimer said:
Steve said:
so if I got away with speeding (which I did).. you would let all those who got caught slide?

Nope- but Jaywalking is a crime in most books-- never enforced locally- and everyone (including myself) does it....So do you single out one person that you have biases against- and charge them when they do it?

Of course YOU would :wink: :wink: :wink:

Especially if it was George W. Bush!!! :wink: :wink:

How can AT twist this so it is Bush's fault? We all know he's the one to blame for this!
 
Top