U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-03-2010, 09:33 AM
 
28,778 posts, read 11,249,273 times
Reputation: 7575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
18 U.S.C. § 600 and the Hatch Act do not even address "bribes".

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.

See the word "bribe" in there any where?
It doesn't have to include the word "bribe".

It does contain words that have separate meanings legally from common usage meanings. Legally, you would have to prove that the non-compensated positions offered were offered as a "consideration, favor or reward" for dropping out of the race. And Legally, the proffer would have to be pretty baldly stated to meet the legal requirements. This was a new administration with literally thousands of positions to fill. And yet unpaid government positions were offered? How much value would those positions have? Because if they don't have any value, it would be difficult in a court of law to establish such a position as a "consideration, favor or reward." If the candidates were qualified, and the positions suited their particular interest, then the administration is free to offer them such positions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-03-2010, 10:16 AM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
17,541 posts, read 7,457,177 times
Reputation: 5149
I know something sounds too fishy for my taste! Something not seems to be adding up with the stories i am hearing. In my opinion only, in these cases it does seem as bribery was being used, how else can you explain it. 2+2=5 something just is not adding up here. It is just the manner in which this administration seems to conduct business! and the explaination they seem to come up with that does not seem to add up.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 10:20 AM
 
Location: Aloha, Oregon
1,089 posts, read 154,756 times
Reputation: 208
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
18 U.S.C. § 600 and the Hatch Act do not even address "bribes".

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.

See the word "bribe" in there any where?
Melanie Sloan is a lawyer, are you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 11:33 AM
 
206 posts, read 96,840 times
Reputation: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by california-jewel View Post
I know something sounds too fishy for my taste! Something not seems to be adding up with the stories i am hearing. In my opinion only, in these cases it does seem as bribery was being used, how else can you explain it. 2+2=5 something just is not adding up here. It is just the manner in which this administration seems to conduct business! and the explaination they seem to come up with that does not seem to add up.
Their story is a cooked up crooked lie. Sestak could not serve on any presidential board. For as smart as these poeple think they are and as smart as everyone says they are they are pretty stupid to cook up a lie that couldn't even possibly happen..

"But as a House member, Sestak could not serve on an Executive Branch board. As the White House Web site says, the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board “consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government.”(emphasis added)"

"CNSNews.com also asked Gibbs about the Presidential Intelligence Advisory Board. If Sestak were to serve on such a board, he could not simultaneously serve in Congress.

“That’s how I understood it,” Gibbs replied."

As White House Memo on Sestak Raises More Questions, WH Refers to That Same Memo for Answers
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:12 PM
 
Location: South Fla
9,646 posts, read 5,225,843 times
Reputation: 1938
Anybody left who hasn't been offered a payoff job by the Obama White House, please put out your hand

Anybody left who <em>hasn't</em> been offered a payoff job by the Obama White House, please put out your hand | Top of the Ticket | Los Angeles Times
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:19 PM
 
1,503 posts, read 279,236 times
Reputation: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
The so what, is the federal government should not be interfering in state elections, we have laws preventing them from doing that.
No we don't. You wish you had some Obama scandal. You're in the middle of a RW wet dream. File charges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:19 PM
 
Location: Long Island (chief in S Farmingdale)
14,051 posts, read 7,433,348 times
Reputation: 2463
Its not illegal to offer someone a job in your administration as an alternative to them from running for something else. What Obama did with Sestak and Romanoff is not illegal and what Reagan did with Hayakawa was not illegal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:23 PM
 
1,503 posts, read 279,236 times
Reputation: 321
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wapasha View Post
You want me to file a civil suit against the federal government? I have no standing to do so.

The government can be as corrupt as it wants to, it can violate as many laws as they see fit, they can round up every Japanese-American in the country and toss them into prison camps, and I cannot sue them over it in a court of law.

This may be funny to you, but if we allow our government to flaunt more of our laws, then one day, they may violate one you really care about, and when the Kool-aid drinkers are laughing their ass off about it, you may wish we did not allow our government to embolden itself to the point where laws no longer matter to them, and their interests override ours.
Oh damn, now you've made me cry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:54 PM
 
3,536 posts, read 2,523,061 times
Reputation: 1820
It definitely bothers me.

Why try to keep people out of primaries? It doesn't divide the party unless it results in a Joe Lieberman/Charlie Crist situation, and that is VERY rare. Primaries produce better candidates.

The actions of the Obama administration getting involved in elections definitely bothered me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-03-2010, 01:59 PM
 
2,527 posts, read 2,371,319 times
Reputation: 969
He's the next "jimmy carter..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top