Gibbs Stays Mum On Sestak Job Offer Claim

Back In February of this year, Congressman Joe Sestak went on the "Larry Kane: Voice Of Reason" show and said that he had been offered a federal job to stay out of the Pennsylvania Senate race. Since then, everyone's been trying to find out if it's true, or if Sestak was fibbing. (And if you're thinking to yourself, "But, I thought that kind of thing happens all the time, in Washington, in the spare moments between all the sex people are having with their aides," you are right, but rarely does the quid pro quo game come with such zazzy political implications. Trust me: most professional journalists are just as uninterested as ever in the way lobbyists and other professional influence-traders are ruining America.)

So the news made on the "Larry Kane: Voice Of Reason" show lives on. And since Joe Sestak defeated Arlen Specter in the Democratic primary this past Tuesday, it opens the door for the White House correspondents (in this case, Jake Tapper and Ed Henry) to take up the issue and jump up and down on White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs' head -- the end result of which is that Gibbs looks kind of stupid for repeating the same line over and over again, and nobody learns anything new about the story.

It all happened yesterday in a moment I will title, "I Don't Have Anything To Add To What I Said In March."

Q And Sestak -- several months ago, I asked you on February 23rd if you could find out more about what Sestak said about the White House making him an offer to not run. And I know that in March you said whatever conversations have been had are not problematic. But I'm wondering since this has become an issue in Congressman Sestak's campaign and will likely be -- continue to be an issue, if you could -- if you want to put it to rest right now, what exactly was the conversation?

MR. GIBBS: Jake, I don't have anything to add to what I said in March.

Q But you never -- you never really explained what the conversation was.

MR. GIBBS: Then I don't have anything to add today.

Q But if the White House offers a congressman a position in the administration in order to convince that congressman to not run for office --

MR. GIBBS: Jake, I don't have anything to add to that.

Q But you've said a number of times that you would get something for us on that.

MR. GIBBS: And I did. And I gave that answer in March, and I don't have anything to add to that.

Q But do you really think the American people don't have a right to know about what exactly the conversation was?

MR. GIBBS: Jake, I don't have anything to add to what I said in March.

Q Can I ask a quick follow on that, because yesterday Congressman Sestak was on CNN and said, in fact, that he was offered something. He wouldn't say more, but he said he was offered a job. Would you deny that?

MR. GIBBS: Ed, I don't have -- I wouldn't give you --

Q But that's correct?

MR. GIBBS: I don't have anything to add to what Jake asked me.

Q So you can't rule out that a job was offered?

MR. GIBBS: I don't have anything to add to what I said in March.

Q Is that because the Counsel's Office said to, Robert?

MR. GIBBS: No.

Q On advice of the Counsel's Office?

MR. GIBBS: No.

Q Could you seek more information?

MR. GIBBS: I don't have anything to add to what I said in March.

Q I know you don't now, but why can't you -- it sounds like you're saying you don't -- you have no interest in getting information.

MR. GIBBS: I will just refer you to what I said in March.

I don't have anything to add to this!

[WATCH]

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to [e-mail] -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Comments

[davecarlson]

05:49 PM on 05/26/2010

Sestak from Pennsylvania is a delusional fabulist - Ah yes, "personal accountability".
They teach that in the Navy. Sestak never learned accountability, that's why Admiral
mullen relieved him. According to Robert Gibbs and David Axelrod, no such inappropriate offer was made to Joe Sestak. Which means: Someone is lying. Specifically, it means that Robert Gibbs and David Axelrod are calling Joe Sestak a liar. Sestak says he answered honestly, are you kidding?

Now you may be suspicious about the administration's investigation of itself on this
matter, and their lack of transparency in publishing the results. But consider this
Most Navy Admirals would not let themselves be called a liar by sad sacks like Fibbs
and AxleGrease if they weren't lying. Joe Sestak is a professional liar.......

Joe Sestak didn't contest Gibbs or Axlerod. The fact that Joe Cesspool even after being
called a liar by them, has not come forward and made a statement to the
authorities about felony corruption that he claims to have witnessed says something about
Joe Sestak. And what it says is this: Joe Sestak is a coward, a liar, and a
political leech. Whatever Joe Cesspool learned in the Navy, it wasn't "personal accountability." But he's in comfortable company with Obama who supports his toilet bowl politics.......

[Malik Nidal]

04:22 PM on 05/26/2010

Obama is 'da Man!!!

The Chicago Way!!!

More corrupt than Mayor Daley, and totally in your face!!!

[davecarlson]

05:40 PM on 05/26/2010

Lawbreakers stick together, so U R 1 2.......

[davecarlson]

12:26 PM on 05/26/2010

The people of PA should demand that Sestak come clean. How can they vote for this guy if he is lying. It is against the law what he alleges has occured with the promise of job for dropping out. So by Sestak remaining silent, he is breaking the law.......

And the fib from Gibbs, his lame line of defense today is “trust us, nothing happened.” Why trust him? The White House and Sestak are all guilty, If Sestak is the best Pennsylvania DemoRats have got to offer, it's a sad day in Pennsylvania......

[davecarlson]

09:29 AM on 05/26/2010

Sestak has it all on tape or he would not mention the offer. Admirals tend to have secure phones with recording devices, same as the White House. The only job big enough for a retired admiral is secretary of the Navy. Obama had to approve a cabinet position offer, and that would be an impeachable offense to bribe a candidate. Tampering with evidence is also a crime. I always suspected Harvard awarded affirmative action summa cum laudes.

As long as this remains an issue, Toomey wins. Sestak must walk a tightrope to the election. On the one hand, he is the antiestablishment candidate. But now that he has the nomination but refuses to press the attack against the Obama administration, he looks wishy-washy to independent voters and will ultimately use his Senate seat to pitch Obama policies. Sestak cannot win so long as his attempted bribe remains part of the debate.

A special prosecutor is more in order here than at any other time since the inception of the office. Did someone try to throw or alter an election by offering something? And; if this is a substantive question, what other problems may be escaping the country?

[oldstuff]

05:55 PM on 05/25/2010

In 1981, President Reagan offered S.I. Hayakawa, then California's senior senator, a job if he declined to run for reelection. We know this because Reagan's chief political adviser admitted as much on the record.

In 1997, then-Massachusetts Attorney General L. Scott Harshbarger negotiated a Justice Department post while he decided whether to run for governor. The Clinton White House did not want him to make that bid -- they wanted to clear the field for Rep. Joe Kennedy.

(Remember when William Weld was nominated to ambassador to Mexico? Same reason, same motivation. Jesse Helms scuttled this, but for reasons having nothing to do with presidential political interference.)

More recently, after Rep. Ben Gilman found his congressional district eliminated by redistricting in 2002, the White House tried to persuade him from challenging another Republican congressman in another district by considering him for an administration position. Karl Rove repeatedly intervened in Republican primaries. And Tim Pawlenty is not a senator because Rove urged him to run for governor instead.

[BoulderGuyTC]

12:48 AM on 05/26/2010

This is how Watergate started.... same denials and all the talk about "this is nothing"..... the best thing OB has going for him on this is a friendly press who will probably lay off on this by the end of the weekend..... but if the consrvative lawyers get their way, this will come up just in time for the next election cycle.... my guess is OB gets somebody to take the fall for this soon, so it is not hanging over him then..... when does Tony Rezko get out ??

[davecarlson]

09:33 AM on 05/26/2010

U still have that "oldstuff" that was not right then and is not right now. How can you defend what was wrong then (backroom dealing) and what is still wrong now? Voters R fed up with bad "oldstuff" like U and the dishonest Pres U try to defend.......

[oldstuff]

04:10 PM on 05/25/2010

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201005250001 read this and tell me it was an illegal act man you guys looking for something wrong are just goofy. I've emailed my congressmen and senators have you?

[JTHC75]

06:58 PM on 05/25/2010

Man, you are all over this thread. Defensive much? Is that you, Gibbs?

[McFarlandProps]

07:48 PM on 05/25/2010

Seriously! Faved and fanned for being funny, but also probably true!

[BoulderGuyTC]

01:46 AM on 05/26/2010

there is no question it is illegal guy. It is a felony for the government to offer you a job in return for anything.... The law has been used in Chicago after people were caught giving out jobs for cash payments.
The question is will anybody be charged.

[Catita]

01:51 PM on 05/25/2010

Agreed that anytime of bribery is illegal...including all the OIL REGULATORS and GOVERNORS who sacrifice public safety to an exchange of nothing. Let us all support the PROSECUTION and JAIL TIME for these criminals.

Where was the outrage from the right when Cheney received the Multi-Million OIL bonus in wink wink, exchange for close door energy negotiations.

The bottom line, this is politics as usual...nothing changes. In this case SESTAK needs to come clean and tell us WHO in the administration OFFERED him the quid-pro-quo and lets PROSECUTE the individual the same style of Blago. Let;s hear the tapes of the committed crime otherwise, it will be a case of he said, she said...and it will all boil to nothing.

[oldstuff]

04:19 PM on 05/25/2010

agreed, Make your case Sestak and all you republican (I can't even think of a word for it, crybabies?). Make your case. They won't be able to, because there isn't one.

"Where was the outrage from the right when Cheney received the Multi-Million OIL bonus in wink wink, exchange for close door energy negotiations. "

There was lot's of outrage but nothing was done or will be done. I still want to know what happened in those meetings, just as much as I want to know what happened in these meetings with Sestak that every Republican or "independent who voted for Obama" seem to just be oh so certain broke the law.

[BoulderGuyTC]

12:43 AM on 05/26/2010

How about the fact it is a felony crime with minimum 1 year in jail for each count?

[davecarlson]

09:13 AM on 05/25/2010

If there was nothing inappropriate in the job offer, how come no info is
forthcoming? It is because the same "barack backroom dealing" that he is known
for was done here. It is nothing more than an attempt at "damage control" for a
Pres image already tarnished from dishonesty and a departure from the truth.

It is more of the same "Modus Operandi" from a radical, socialist, Markist,
fringe DemoRat group legislating and governing from the "left ditch". Sestak
simply wanted the prospective voters to think he was so honest and accountable
making him different than Specter. Now that he defeated Specter, the cat won't
go back in the bag. He will be hounded on this until November when the undecided
voters figure out his little masquerade, they will abandon him, and he will be
defeated by Toomey. It will be "hasta la vista, cesspool, take a hike".....

[oldstuff]

04:20 PM on 05/25/2010

davecarlson = obvious fringe nonsense from a wingnut.

[fencesitting13]

08:26 AM on 05/25/2010

Apparently if Sestak is telling the truth this constitutes a felony according to David Axelrod.

[ConservativeAmerica]

09:06 PM on 05/24/2010

This should be a front page story on the Puffington. This is a huge story. Another bribe by "the most transparent administration in history".

This could be an impeachable offense.

[Salty 2]

09:11 PM on 05/24/2010

Obama-gate. The longer they hide on this the worse it will get.

[OLJW00]

09:53 PM on 05/24/2010

Count them...three felonies were committed. 3!

[oldstuff]

03:10 AM on 05/25/2010

again, prove it. should be easy enough. Call your Congressmen and Senators. Let's get this ball rolling. Maybe you should prosecute it since you just KNOW 3 felonies were committed. Just stop whining about it here.

[davecarlson]

01:48 PM on 05/24/2010

Well here's the take on Cesspool, or is it "O NO, I didn't really offer him a job and commit a felony did I?" NOBAMA should now endorse him and flush all the evidence which he has probably been busy doing by deleting emails. Too bad the Pres can't scrub all the evidence, He's going down with this felony, who will bring him cigarettes in jail?

[oldstuff]

02:26 PM on 05/24/2010

“Something happened last July before I got in the race and I never got asked about it, since someone asked me,” Sestak said. “You know what, I answered it honestly. I just said, ‘yes.’ I didn’t go beyond that. And actually, I don’t think I should.”"

no laws were broken. job offered before he was in the race. not a crime. no evidence to scrub.

[McFarlandProps]

05:45 PM on 05/24/2010

Wrong, if true and proven, would be a violation of the Bribery Act of 1962 - federal law. The law, as written and literally interpreted, would make it illegal to offer someone a job to not run for office,

Lot's of evidence to scrub.

[OLJW00]

09:56 PM on 05/24/2010

Wrong... try again...

[fencesitting13]

09:26 AM on 05/24/2010

You have to love the party of change defending this by saying it happens all the time.

[OLJW00]

09:56 PM on 05/24/2010

So transparent these guys...

[Lairs]

01:28 AM on 05/22/2010

Poor ole Gibby alias Pillsbury Dough Boy, is not really good at this job, is he???

[DeSwiss]

01:22 AM on 05/22/2010

Their nomination-success ratio sucks too.

[dennissinned]

12:45 AM on 05/22/2010

So why is this a big deal?

[essayons7]

01:57 AM on 05/22/2010

1, Because if what Sestak said is true, someone in the White House broke federal law.
2, If the reublicans take ontrol of the House in November, look for a congressional investigation.

How high up does this thing go?

[oldstuff]

07:57 PM on 05/22/2010

what sestak said is true and it doesn't mean a federal law was broken. You just want it to be a case of a federal law being broken. no laws broken here. repubs just looking for some red meat.