1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

WaPo: WH asked Clinton to intercede with Sestak

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, May 28, 2010.

  1. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    Nobody is disputing that politicians will offer politicians jobs for political reasons. However, this is not an "official act."
     
  2. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    And now Romanoff .... the situation is crying out for a special investigator who will look at the facts fairly and en toto, regardless of whether they exonerate or indict.
     
  3. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    And Romanoff wasn't asked to perform an official act either. Since half of the requirement for a crime doesn't exist, a special investigator would be nothing more than a partisan witch hunt, but that is exactly what you want.
     
  4. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    You claim I want a witch hunt, but, no, I want truth and justice to prevail. You want to sweep it under the rug and pretend it didn't happen because it doesn't suit your politics.
     
  5. BigBenito

    BigBenito Member

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2002
    Messages:
    7,355
    Likes Received:
    175
    Well, we can agree that SOMEONE is pretending to suit their politics.
     
  6. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    It has nothing to do with my politics, it has to do with the wording of the law, which requires an official act and something of value offered for it.

    No official act = no bribery, it doesn't take a special investigator to figure that out, it takes the ability to read and interpret facts.

    I don't want to ignore that it happened, I would shout it from the mountaintop because the facts do not add up to bribery.
     
  7. Rashmon

    Rashmon Member

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2000
    Messages:
    19,750
    Likes Received:
    15,294
    I bet you were just apopleptic due to presidential malfeasance from 2000 to 2008.

    How did you survive?
     
  8. vlaurelio

    vlaurelio Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2005
    Messages:
    21,310
    Likes Received:
    11,755
    thumbs, do you consider withdrawing candidacy an official act?
     
  9. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    I consider attempted bribery with regard to elections as a crime because that is what the law says. Whether this happened needs to be investigated in the clear light of day with the participants either exonerated or indicted by a fair, impartial special investigator who will consider all the facts of the matter.
     
  10. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    There were times I was unhappy with Bush, and there were times when I felt we needed a special prosecutor (Halliburton case), but, just as I do now, I do not assign guilt or innocence because there was no investigation. Had there been, as I would be now, I would have been content with either verdict, knowing that justice had been served.
     
  11. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    Just because a spouse hires a hitman to murder his or her spouse but the attempt fails, there is no crime. That is akin to your continuing faulty logic.
     
  12. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,446
    Likes Received:
    15,886
    Though it's been explained to you numerous times, you continue to miss the point. The "official act" thing has nothing to do with the fact that Sestak didn't take the job. Even if he had taken the job, it would not be illegal. Numerous prosecutors, ethic lawyers, good government watchdog groups, and others have all weighed in on the matter, and the idea that it's illegal - or even unethical - has been completely dismissed. The only people pursuing your line of thinking are people who have made it their mission to destroy Obama. Think about that and think about what it means for your position when good government ethics groups - who's entire mission is this type of thing and that have railed on Obama for all sorts of transparency issues - laugh at this as complete nonsense.

    Simply put, you don't understand the law. From your responses here, it also seems to you don't have any interest in understanding it, given the volume of people who've tried to explain it and pointed to officials who have explained it.
     
  13. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    There are as many legal experts who believe the law was broken as there are legal experts who believe no law was broken. The only way to prove who is correct is through a fair, impartial investigation. What is so wrong with proving whether there was a breach of the law -- or whether there was no breach? It seems to be that those who fear the facts want to squelch an investigation.
     
  14. Refman

    Refman Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    Really? Cite a few, because I haven't seen any that believe there was wrongdoing here.

    Anybody who thinks that the law was broken either has no understanding of the law, or is engaging in wishful thinking or that flat are not terribly bright.
     
  15. thumbs

    thumbs Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2002
    Messages:
    10,225
    Likes Received:
    237
    Judge Andrew Napolitano alone is good enough for me. However, there are several U.S. representatives who also must not be "terribly bright." All that is being asked is for a fair, impartial investigation of the facts en toto to determine whether there were serious (felonious, if you will) improprieties committed? Why are you and others here so afraid of an investigation?
     
  16. GladiatoRowdy

    GladiatoRowdy Member

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2002
    Messages:
    16,596
    Likes Received:
    494
    I am not afraid of anything except wasting money. A special prosecutor for this case would be flushing money we don't have down the toilet. There was no official act, but more to the point, NO OFFICIAL ACT WAS ASKED FOR. Withdrawing from an election is not an official act that only a US Representative could perform. That one thing is required for a bribery charge and not only was there no official act, no official act was even mentioned, much less asked for.
     
  17. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,446
    Likes Received:
    15,886
    No, there are not. There have been dozens of experts quoted in this thread alone. I challenge you to find a few dozen on the other side. Even GOP-leaning ethics experts laugh this off.

    I think it's possible you might be guilty of murder. You probably disagree. But to be sure, we should have a fair and impartial investigation, because our opinions have equal weight. Is that your logic? Any time there is an accusation, there must be a full investigation regard of the merits?

    See above.

    The facts are already out there. What people fear is a witch hunt.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now