• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Sestak Memo Only Raises More Questions

    Robert Bauer, the White House Counsel, has released a two-page memorandum in response to the controversy involving Rep. Joe Sestak (D-PA) and the promise by President Obama at his news conference yesterday that there would be “an official response shortly” from the White House. The administration has been stalling for months about giving a full explanation of what happened and who was involved in potentially violating federal law ever since Sestak first claimed he had been offered a position in the administration in exchange for withdrawing his primary challenge to Senator Arlen Specter. The facts recited in the memorandum do not let the White House off the hook, even if the White House claims otherwise,

    Bauer’s memorandum denies that Sestak was offered a position as Secretary of the Navy. What supposedly was offered was “service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, which would avoid a divisive Senate primary, allow him to retain his seat in the House, and provide him with an opportunity for additional service to the public in a high-level advisory capacity.” (Sestak originally said he was offered a “job,” not an advisory position).

    Bauer titles this particular paragraph as “Uncompensated Advisory Board Options.” Bauer denies that White House staff directly discussed these offers with Sestak; instead, Rahm Emanuel, the Chief of Staff, enlisted former President Bill Clinton to “raise” these options with Sestak. Sestak “declined the suggested alternatives, remaining committed to his Senate candidacy.”

    Bauer asserts, without providing any examples, that there “have been numerous, reported instances in the past when prior Administrations…discussed alternative paths to service for qualified individuals also considering campaigns for public office.” He then concludes that “[s]uch discussions are fully consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements.”

    Why would it take months for the White House to offer this explanation if the offer were legal and ethical? The likely reason is that it is, in fact, not legal. Bauer seems to be basing his claim that there was no violation of federal law on the assertions that 1) the positions offered to Sestak were “uncompensated” and 2) the offer(s) were not made directly by the Chief of Staff, but by Bill Clinton. However, 18 U.S.C. § 600 makes it a crime for:

    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…

    Bauer admits that Rahm Emanuel asked Bill Clinton to offer Sestak an appointment to a “Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board,” and that the appointment would be attractive, i.e., a benefit. The statute does not absolve you of liability if you are offering someone an uncompensated appointment. It also specifies that you are guilty of a violation if you make such an offer “directly or indirectly.” Moreover, since the executive branch may not spend money that is not appropriated by Congress, any such board would be authorized by or at least paid for by an “Act of Congress.”

    Bill Clinton is potentially guilty of a direct violation of this statute since it applies to anyone whether they are in the executive branch or simply conspiring with members of the executive branch. This is certainly a new wrinkle to this scandal, but there is no question, based on Bauer’s own admissions in the memorandum, that Rahm Emanuel indirectly promised an appointment to Sestak as a “reward” for political activity “in connection with a primary election.”

    Of course, what is not answered in this memorandum are the exact details of when this occurred, what exactly was said in the conversations between Emanuel and Clinton, and Clinton and Sestak, or most importantly, whether or not President Obama had any knowledge of what Emanuel was proposing either before or after it occurred. We also have no indication of who exactly investigated this matter and whether Emanuel was questioned under oath, whether there are any phone, email or other written records to support the conclusions in the memorandum, or whether any information has been forwarded to the Justice Department (which is responsible for investigating and enforcing the federal laws that may have been broken).

    This memorandum also does not mention a similar incident that has also not been investigated. In September of last year, The Denver Post reported that top Colorado Democrats told the newspaper that Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff, offered a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, to Colorado legislator Andrew Romanoff. This after news leaked that Romanoff was “determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet.” While White House spokesman Adam Abrams was quoted as saying that Romanoff was never offered a position in the administration, the exact nature and content of the conversation(s) that Messina had with Romanoff have never been disclosed. Was this incident actually investigated by the White House Counsel’s Office? By the Justice Department? If not, why not? Was Messina interviewed under oath? Was this another case of Chicago-style, hardball politics being applied in Colorado as well as Pennsylvania?

    The Justice Department has a duty to investigate such possible violations of federal law. So far, however, the Attorney General has shown no inclination to fulfill his obligations and uphold his oath to faithfully and impartially enforce the laws of the United States. That is especially important now when, according to the information contained in White House Counsel Robert Bauer’s own memorandum, the elements of a federal crime were apparently committed by the White House Chief of Staff and even more surprisingly, a former president of the United States.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to Sestak Memo Only Raises More Questions

    1. Georgtown says:

      Just Like Nixen I bet there are tapes, now everyone involved in this foiled scheme will be marked…. Get ready for a Checker's speech or in this case a Bo's speech.

    2. Bob McKenna, Florida says:

      What the White House says, and what Sestak says just might be true – but it also might be incomplete. Someone has to ask Sestak if the "informal" contact with Clinton was the ONLY one regarding the JOB he has said more than once was offered him by the WHITE HOUSE. This Clinton contact was purportedly made before Sestak entered the primary, but isn't it possible that when polls started to show he might actually have a chance against Specter that the offer changed from a position on an advisory board to a real JOB in the administration? Wouldn't surprise me, but somebody has to ask the question.

    3. Chrisann, Heber UT says:

      I'm not surprised at this information at all. But since it happened so long ago, you can pretty sure bet that all documentation has been shredded and burned so there is no link to anyone in the WH. If the AG won't do his job, than he needs to be terminated. If you break the law you pay the penalty. Why is this so hard for the WH to understand. They are not above the law, they should be the model of upholding the law, not trying to find the loophole to get out of it. What a disgrace our government has become. This gives more liberties to people that break the law to continue to do so, if no penalty is given. Uphold the law or get out of office, we don't want you to represent us anymore!

    4. Pat Brackett, Jackso says:

      I know where there are several Hgh Dry swamp lots only uhder water 49% of the time, During Spring summer and fall and 100% in the winter. These would be for anyone who beleives the cockamamie story of Sestak, Obama, Clinton, Emamuel, Gibbs, or Axelrod on what offers were made to protect Specter,s political position. I hope and pray that one good thing will materialize from the mess and that is a decent honest patriotic conservative will ultimately replace Specter.

    5. Vicki Black, Missour says:

      I hate the idea of all of the backroom deals which I think are permeating our political arena. I wonder why Sen. Sestak spoke of the deal in the first place. That seemed odd to me. I doubt that anything will come of this. So many have been caught with their hand in the cookie jar and suffered no consequences. I really don't have faith in any of the leaders today. The day (if it ever was) is gone when a politican actually works for the people and not for himself or the power and control he wields.

    6. Susan, Herndon says:

      Well, let us see how many Congressman are intimidated to not follow through with this. Republicans, can you just fake that you care about our country and constitution for once?

    7. Nancy Murphrey says:

      I think it is past time that the Republications start being agressive on the corruption going on in this administration. The media should open their eyes also.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×