Originally Posted by franksargent
Stop right there.
No you have not proved it. Not to the point of your opening post. Impeachment.
The offer, whatever the offer actually was, TBD, was apparently tendered in July
, Sestak made his official
announcement in running for the Senate in August
AFAIK, no promise was made, a government position was offered per the rule of law.
In the English language we have this thing called punctuation. One of these punctuation marks is a question mark, which I happened to use. Obviously, if there was no wrongdoing or if Obama wasn't involved, impeachment is off the table. It may also be politically unrealistic, given that the Democrats control both chambers.
As for the timing: First, I don't know how the timing works wrt the law. The verbage changes slightly in the interviews, from "were you offered a job to get out
of the race" to "were you offered a job to not get into
the race." It may be that if the job was offered before he announced for the race, there was no wrongdoing.
However, I doubt the latter. The statute is pretty clear:
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 not more than $10,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
This would seem to indicate that being offered a job to not get into the race is still illegal. I've not yet heard any legal expert or even media figure make the argument you're making.