Pennsylvania governor– Ed Rendell– has now confirmed that he had conversations with Rahm Emanuel about trying to persuade Joe Sestak to give up his primary challenge to Arlen Specter.
First we had the Obama regime denying that there was any contact made with Joe Sestak, but under increasing pressure from Darrell Issa the regime was finally forced to admit that Rahm Emanuel sent former President Clinton to offer Joe Sestak a job in return for his promise to drop out of the race. The Obama regime then claimed that this was not a quid pro quo offer because the job was unpaid. Further inquiries revealed that the job that was offered to Joe Sestak would have forced him to drop out of the senate race by law; while the Obama regime technically wouldn’t have asked Joe Sestak to drop his primary bid, he would have lawfully had to give up his senate bid. The end result would have been exactly what the White House wanted– an unopposed primary bid for Republican turncoat Arlen Specter. This offer still would have affected the outcome of a state election, whether the job was paid or unpaid.
This lame excuse did not hold water and today Ed Rendell came out in full spin mode with another angle designed to deflect any possible criminal activity from being laid at the feet of the Obama regime.
Ed Rendell admitted that he was in contact with Rahm Emanuel about Joe Sestak, but he is claiming that the Obama regime only wanted Sestak to drop out of the senate race because he would have easily won re-election to his House seat and they didn’t want to have to fight for a seat that Joe Sestak would have won without much of a fight.
I know about this. Number one, Rahm Emanuel and I had discussions about this. We very much wanted to persuade Congressman Sestak to stay in the House and run for his seat, ’cause he would have won his seat easily and now that’s a seat that’s up for grabs. So I know that the administration did not want to offer him a job that would have meant he would have to leave Congress
So the new spin is; the Obama regime didn’t want Joe Sestak to leave congress, they just didn’t want him to challenge Arlen Specter, therefor a federal crime was not committed. This new excuse still doesn’t hold water because this is another confirmation that the Obama administration was trying to affect the result of an election.
It doesn’t matter what the reason was that the regime wanted Joe Sestak to leave the race, and it doesn’t matter if they offered Joe Sestak an unpaid position; all that matters here is that the federal government illegally tried to affect the result of a state election and that is a federal crime.
Last Friday the Obama regime released a memo that confirmed they sent Bill Clinton to talk to Joe Sestak about a job; this was an attempt to downplay the growing controversy, but it backfired because in essence the Obama regime admitted to committing a federal crime. So today the regime sends out Ed Rendell to try to smooth this over with yet another lame excuse.
But all that this has done was confirm yet again that a federal crime was committed. The more that the Obama regime tries to dig themselves out of this hole, the deeper it gets.
Keep digging!
Mexico to open an office in the United States to help illegal aliens get identification
The Mexican government is opening an office on Catalina Island in the United States that will help illegal aliens get the documentation they need in order to obtain services from the country (the United States) they are now living in.
These “matricular cards” are issued by the Mexican government to Mexicans who are not living in Mexico, regardless of their immigration status. This means that illegal immigrants in America will now be able to go to a Mexican office in the United States and get identification that could help them to take jobs away from Americans or to collect welfare and live in public housing at the expense of tax paying Americans.
This is what it has come down to in America under the Obama regime. If you enact a law to protect your borders as well as your citizens– who are dying every day as a result of drug violence committed by illegal immigrants– you are nothing more than a misguided racist. Meanwhile the government of the people who are committing this violence in our country are allowed to open up an office that will provide them with the identification they need to fraudulently live off of the hard labor of taxpaying Americans.
Something is seriously wrong in this country when it is unacceptable to enforce immigration laws, yet it is perfectly acceptable for a foreign government to set up shop in America with the sole purpose of providing illegal immigrants documentation that can be used to skirt the legal system. And dare I say– vote?!
When Democrats gained control of congress in 2006 they pushed for an investigation into President Bush’s travel expenses, claiming that he used the Office of Political Affairs to “elect Republican candidates to Congress,” this was considered a “gross abuse of the public trust” according to Henry Waxman.
its deep and systematic reach into the federal agencies are unprecedented.” In the runup to the 2006 midterm election, the office sent cabinet secretaries to campaign for vulnerable Republican candidates, targeted grant announcements to key districts and provided political briefings for agency heads, the report found.
“Under the Bush administration, the Office of Political Affairs ran a full-fledged political operation that enlisted agency heads across government in a coordinated effort to elect Republican candidates to Congress,” the report stated. “Officials were directed to make hundreds of trips — most at taxpayer expense — for the purpose of increasing the electability of Republicans. This is a gross abuse of the public trust.”
Many people– who actually believed that Barack Obama would end “politics as usual”– were disappointed to learn that Barack Obama was going to keep the Office of Political Affairs open.
With the election and inauguration of Barack Obama suddenly people like Henry Waxman have grown silent on this issue, making it seem as if it wasn’t how the Bush administration was using the office, but rather who was using this office. There is the very real chance that Barack Obama is using the Office of Political Affairs in the same manner that President Bush was– with the only difference being that Barack Obama is using it to help elect Democrats. We need to know how Barack Obama is using this office, yet people like Henry Waxman don’t seem to have a problem with how the office is being used any more.
Darrell Issa has noticed the difference, and is asking the Obama regime to disclose their activities within the Office of Political Affairs; basically claiming that it doesn’t matter who the president is if this office is being abused.
President Obama’s campaign promise to change politics as usual in Washington has been undermined by the continuing political campaign this White House has run through the White House Office of Political Affairs,” Issa said in a statement to POLITICO. “During the previous administration, there was plenty of bipartisan criticism about the Office of Political Affairs as an institution, but many leading Democratic critics in Congress immediately went silent after the 2008 election
The change of administrations certainly hasn’t resolved concerns that this office is being used by the Obama administration to improperly coordinate with and help political campaigns rather than advancing specific policy initiatives being pushed by the president
He has hit the nail on the head. If the Bush administration was using this office as an extension to help Republican candidates win re-election, and the office is being used in the same manner by the Obama regime, shouldn’t those people like– Henry Waxman– who had issues with the Bush administration have those very same issues with the Obama regime? Why then have they suddenly gone silent on this issue?
When the White House was asked about Darrell Issa’s request that the documents related to the Office of Political Affairs under the Obama regime be released, this is what the White House had to say:
Nothing!
All we are asking for is a little consistency here. Barack Obama promised to end “politics as usual,” he ran as the Washington outsider who would bring change to Washington, but it is becoming more clear every day that Washington has changed Barack Obama. (Or maybe he wasn’t the outsider that he claimed to be in the first place.)
Darrell Issa is right; if the left contends that President Bush was misusing the Office of Political Affairs, the investigation should not be stalled simply because Barack Obama is now in charge of that organization. Barack Obama should not be allowed free reign to use this office in the same manner as did President Bush– if indeed he is doing so– just because people like Henry Waxman may like the outcome with Barack Obama as president.
All that Darrell Issa is asking for is a continuation of the investigation that the left wanted to persue on President Bush, and that seems to make perfect sense to me. Democrats opened this can of worms when it was politically expedient for them to do so, they cannot simply put the lid back on the can and expect the American people to think that this can does not stink just because there is a nice, new, shiny label on the can.
Andrew Romanoff admits the White House offered him three jobs to drop out of the Colorado primary
Earlier this evening I wrote this post about the report that someone in the Obama regime offered Andrew Romanoff a job in return for him dropping out of the Colorado primary race. Just a few short hours later comes the admission from Andrew Romanoff that he was actually offered three potential jobs to choose from if he agreed to drop out of the race.
Mr. Messina also suggested three positions that might be available to me were I not pursuing the Senate race. He added that he could not guarantee my appointment to any of these positions. At no time was I promised a job, nor did I request Mr. Messina’s assistance in obtaining one
The White House has admitted to offering Joe Sestak a position in the regime that would have legally required Sestak to drop out of the primary race against Arlen Specter, but the White House is fraudulently claiming that no federal law was violated because the position was unpaid. Even if the White House’s claim were true that the law wasn’t broken because the position offered to Joe Sestak was unpaid, that is not the case with the positions offered to Andrew Romanoff, the three positions that he was told would be available to him were all paid positions. So what will the spin be from the White House?
Barack Obama is going to use the fact that none of these job offers were guaranteed as his defense. But that does not hold water because if Andrew Romanoff agreed to drop his challenge to Michael Bennet based on the fact that he would be considered for one of these jobs Barack Obama would have achieved his goal. Therefor, in my opinion, the offer to be considered for a job is just as criminal as if Andrew Romanoff was guaranteed a job. If Romanoff had agreed to the terms– guaranteed or not– the outcome of the election would have been affected– and that is a federal crime.
There no longer can be any ignoring or denying what is going on here. First there was Joe Sestak claiming that the Obama regime tried to bribe him and now there is the admission by Andrew Romanoff that the Obama regime tried to bribe him as well. These accusations can no longer go uninvestigated!
Eric Holder, DO YOUR JOB!
Darrell Issa– joined by Lamar Smith– has written another letter to the president, this time giving him until June 9th to release more information on the Joe Sestak scandal including legal records, memos to the press office, and e-mails and phone records.
The American people elected a president who promised to change the status quo and business-as-usual practices of Washington. Has this White House become a part of the establishment they once opposed?” the Republicans wrote in the letter. “The Sestak matter represents a chance for this White House to live up to the high standard of transparency and accountability they set for themselves
But Issa and Smith don’t stop there:
accuse the White House of violating the criminal code, “tampering of evidence, witness tampering and evasion of the legal process” for dispatching Clinton to offer Sestak a spot on a presidential intelligence advisory board
The White House tried to be cute by releasing a memo on a Friday afternoon before a holiday, hoping the lame excuse that no federal law was violated because the offer to Joe Sestak was for an unpaid job– and that it was offered by former President Clinton, who isn’t a member of the Obama regime– would be enough to silence the critics.
This has backfired because everyone has seen through this as a transparent (a first for the Obama regime) attempt to assuage the critics, while in reality they admitted to feeling out Joe Sestak for a job which they knew he legally couldn’t accept unless he dropped out of his race against Arlen Specter.
The memo that the White House released last Friday has only opened the door to more questions, it didn’t resolve anything. With the admission that President Clinton was sent by Rahm Emanuel to offer Joe Sestak a job it was confirmed that the accusations against the Obama White House were true. Now it must be up to a special prosecutor to decide whether there was criminal activity involved. I think the answer is obvious.
It looks as if this story isn’t going to go away and we have Darrell Issa and Lamar Smith to thank for that. It is good to know that at least these two Republicans are not going to let this scandal die out the way that Barack Obama had hoped that it would. The American people need to know if Barack Obama and/or Rahm Emanuel were engaged in a federal crime. The American people deserve to know.
It is time for Eric Holder to do what is right and appoint a special investigator to look into this issue. I am not holding my breath, but if the regime was as blameless as they claim to be, wouldn’t they welcome the special investigator as a means to clear their names? If they resist the special investigator, that alone will tell us all we need to know about what happened.
I have written extensively about the illegal job offer that the Obama regime made to Joe Sestak in order to persuade him to drop his primary bid against Arlen Specter in the Pennsylvania primary, but now it has been learned that Joe Sestak might not have been the only potential candidate to receive a bribe offer from the Obama regime. It is now being reported that last year someone in the Obama regime offered Andrew Romanoff a job in the regime hoping that he would drop his primary bid against entrenched Colorado Democrat Michael Bennet.
The White House is now claiming that this job offer was not an attempt to persuade Andrew Romanoff to drop out of the race and are insisting that no formal offer was made to Romanoff. Sound familiar? It should, this is exactly what the regime was saying before they finally admitted that they did send President Clinton to feel out Joe Sestak about a possible job in the regime that legally would have prevented him from running against Arlen Specter.
Republicans are not satisfied with the Obama defense:
Romanoff would be well-served to explain all of the details surrounding his discussions with the White House, the positions they proposed and the individuals who contacted him immediately,” said Amber Marchand, a spokeswoman for the Republicans’ Senate campaign committee
And they shouldn’t be because it is now becoming evident to everyone that the regime was involved in criminal activity and whether they knew that this type of offer was illegal or not just doesn’t matter. The first illegal job offer could be a mistake, but the second job offer is a trend. How many other illegal job offers did the White House make?
Ignorance of the law is now excuse from it. This is a case of politics as usual and Barack Obama ran on the promise to end politics as usual. This type of quid pro quo might be acceptable in Chicago politics, but when you are president of the United States, and you promised to end this type of behavior while running an open, transparent, and honest administration, this type of illegal backroom dealing seems even more insidious.
If there was any doubt before that an investigation into this regime should be forthcoming all doubt has been erased. It is time to find out exactly what this administration has been up to behind closed doors.
The latest New Hampshire poll is out and it shows us that, for the fourth time in a row, Governor John Lynch is under 50% in his re-election bid against likely Republican nominee John Stephen.
He still leads John Stephen by a margin of 47%-35% but the fact that the once very popular governor still is not able to get back over the 50% mark in his re-election bid has to be concerning to his campaign. After all– as the article I linked to states– this is the same scenario that Craig Benson found himself in back in 2004 when John Lynch was eventually able to beat him in a very close race.
Governor Lynch’s approval rating continues to slide as well; back in May he still enjoyed an approval rating of 56%– down from an approval rating of nearly 70% just two years ago– but his approval rating has fallen again just one short month later, he now has an approval rating of 51%. This is barely respectable under normal circumstances, but considering the popularity that the governor once enjoyed, this is a precipitous drop. John Lynch’s dramatic drop in the polls continues.
While the governor will probably publically point to the fact that he still enjoys a double digit lead in all of the matchups with his potential opponents in November as a sign that he still has support among the voters of New Hampshire, privately he has to understand that he could be in trouble in November.
It is true that he still leads his most likely opponent by 12 points, but the fact remains that not enough people know enough about John Stephen yet to commit a vote for him. That will likely change once the primary is over and the general election campaign season begins.
Once the Republicans have their nominee and the general election debates begin, and once people get to see what are surely to be the stark differences between the candidates, I expect these numbers to get much closer.
This is the year that Governor Lynch could be in trouble, and I think that while he will never acknowledge it publically, he has to be worried. This is shaping up to be an anti-incumbant year and with any luck one of the victims will be John Lynch.
The campaign hasn’t started yet, but it is shaping up to be very interesting indeed!
Today was the first time that the press had a chance to question White House press secretary Robert Gibbs on the Joe Sestak scandal since the Obama regime admitted last Friday that a job offer was indeed tended to Joe Sestak by President Clinton on behalf of the Obama regime in an apparent attempt to get him to withdraw his primary bid against Republican turncoat Arlen Specter. And question him they did.
Robert Gibbs was less than forthcoming with his answers, repeatedly stating that he would “refer you to the memo” instead of answering the questions. In other words, he was pleading the fifth.
When specifically asked if the White House saw a difference in the fact that the job offer to Joe Sestak was for an unpaid position rather than for a paid position, Robert Gibbs answered, “I’m not going to get into hypotheticals,” but there is one problem with that answer; this was not a hypothetical question. The Obama regime admitted in the memo that a job offer was floated in front of Joe Sestak by President Clinton, and the regime has tried to downplay the offer by using the defense that because the offer was for an unpaid job that it couldn’t constitute bribery. This reporter was simply following up on what the regime has already stated, not introducing a hypothetical question into the mix.
This same reporter– not satisfied with Robert Gibbs’s non-answer– then followed up by stating that the position which was offered to Joe Sestak would prohibit him from being a member of the House, to which Robert Gibbs admitted, “correct.” The reporter followed up one last time by asking Robert Gibbs why Joe Sestak was offered the job. Robert Gibbs once again refered him to the memo.
What did we learn from this exchange? Two things in my opinion. First; while the Obama regime is claiming that because this job offer was for an unpaid job there could have been no attempt at bribery, that is not quite true, because if Joe Sestak had accepted the job he would have had to have dropped out of the race. While technically the job offer wouldn’t have been in return for a promise by Joe Sestak to drop out of the race, the result would have been assured. The Obama regime didn’t have to expressly ask Joe Sestak to drop out of the race, but that would have been the result, and that is what the Obama regime wanted.
The second thing that we have learned is that the White House is now in full cover up mode. Robert Gibbs is basically pleading the fifth and I believe it is because the regime fears that if a full investigation is ever conducted criminal activity will be uncovered. The Obama regime had hoped that by releasing the memo last Friday it would help to diffuse the growing scandal, but it has not done so. It has only led to more questions, and these are questions that must be answered.
Memorial Day 2010
Today is Memorial Day; a day in which we honor those that have paid the ultimate price so that you and I may go about our daily lives as free men and women. So often I think that people take our freedom for granted and just assume because we are free, we will always remain free, forgetting what it actually takes to ensure that we remain free.
There is one reason and one reason alone that I am able to sit here day after day and write about what is happening in our government and give my opinions on what is happening in our government using my right to free speech, and that reason is because brave men and women have died for my right to do so. There is not a single day that goes by that I do not think about the sacrifice that these people have made, but today is the day that we must all remember to step back and say thank you.
So while you are at your cookout with your families and your friends; while you are cooking on the grill, drinking a few beers, and laughing with the people that you most cherish, please take just a little time out to remember those that have died to make this day possible.
Let us also never forget those that are wearing the uniform today, sacrificing a part of their life so that we may live ours. All of those that have ever worn the uniform of the United States are heroes and we must never forget what they have done and what they are still doing.
Here is a poem written by Michelle Keim:
As we stand here looking
At the flags upon these graves
Know these flags represent
A few of the true American brave
They fought for their Country
As man has through all of time
Except that these soldiers lying here
Fought for your country and mine
As we all are gathered here
To pay them our respect
Let’s pass this word to others
It’s what they would expect
I’m sure that they would do it
If it were me or you
To show we did not die in vein
But for the red, white and blue.
Let’s pass on to our children
And to those who never knew
What these soldiers died for
It’s the least we can do
Let’s not forget their families
Great pain they had to bear
Losing a son, father or husband
They need to know we still care
No matter which war was fought
On the day that they died
I stand here looking at these flags
Filled with American pride.
So as the bugler plays out Taps
With its sweet and eerie sound
Pray for these soldiers lying here
In this sacred, hallowed ground.
Take home with you a sense of pride
You were here Memorial Day.
Celebrating the way Americans should
On this solemnest of days.
Thank you!
The Department of Justice has asked the Supreme Court to strike down Arizona’s immigration law. No, not Arizona’s new controversial immigration law that has received so much attention lately, but an immigration law that was signed in 2007 by then governor Janet Napolitano.
The suit is being brought up on the grounds that it is unconstitutional because it forces private businesses to check the immigration status of potential employees using e-verify. This suit is being brought forward not by businesses that do not want to verify the immigration status of potential employees, but by those potential employees who do not want their immigration status verified.
Let me state up front that I support Arizona’s new immigration law as well as the law in question here– I do not have a problem with companies being told they must use the e-verify system before hiring an employee. If a company is going to be punished for hiring illegal immigrants shouldn’t they have the proper tools in place to make sure that the people they are hiring are in the country legally?
But what I do have a problem with is the duplicity– or should I say hypocrisy– of people like Janet Napolitano, who have come out against the new Arizona law when she signed a law that could lead to the same type of racial profiling that she is supposedly against.
I know that critics will claim there is a difference between an employer using e-verify before hiring a person and law enforcement asking for a person to verify his or her immigration status, but racial profiling is racial profiling– is it not? Are there different degrees of racial profiling? Are some forms of racial profiling acceptable? It would certainly seem that this is the case in Janet Napolitano’s mind. She signed a bill that would allow racial profiling on one level, while coming out against a bill– that she admitted she hasn’t bothered to read– because it supposedly would allow racial profiling on another level.
You can’t have it both ways Janet Napolitano.
In a perfect world, businesses wouldn’t have to worry about whether a person is here legally or not because they would be able to trust the government to enforce immigration laws, but sadly that is not the case and so Arizona has taken matters into its own hands with their new immigration law. This has drawn the fury of the left; including people like Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and Janet Napolitano.
When Janet Napolitano was governor of Arizona and still had her state’s best interests at heart she signed a bill that had a form of racial profiling in it. But now that she has left the state and is a big shot in the Obama regime, she has forgotten the troubles that her state has with violence and drugs at the hands of illegal immigrants at the border, and so she has condemned an attempt by the current governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer, to protect her citizens’ best interests because it is falsely rumored to contain some of the same racial profiling that she signed into law as governor.
America's Watchtower 