The first question being "June and July 2009":
"Efforts were made in June and July of 2009 to determine whether Congressman Sestak would be interested in service on a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board..."But, according to the memo (and now, Sestak) the contact between Clinton and Sestak was one phone call, that lasted less than one minute. The memo does not refute the original claim by Sestak that he was offered a Federal high level job by someone in the White House. It merely admits there was a quid pro quo - but claim it was an unpaid position offered via Clinton. No where does it provide information on what the other "efforts" were that took place over a two month period.
Secondly, the "non-paying advisory" position:
"...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 for which he was highly qualified."OK, so the White House want us to believe that they offered Sestak a non-paying advisory position that would allow him to serve the public, as well as retain his seat in the House. However, his position in the House actually makes him ineligible:
In a little-noticed passage Friday, the New York Times reported that Rep. Joe Sestak was not eligible for a place on the President’s Intelligence Advisory Board, the job he was reportedly offered by former President Bill Clinton. And indeed a look at the Board’s website reveals this restriction:Thirdly, the memo fails to explain why the White House enlisted the help of President Clinton.
The Board consists of not more than 16 members appointed by the President from among individuals who are not employed by the Federal Government. Members are distinguished citizens selected from the national security, political, academic, and private sectors.As a sitting member of Congress, Sestak was not eligible for the job. And since the White House intended for Sestak to remain in his House seat, he would not have been eligible for the board after this November’s elections, provided he was re-elected to the House.
The story that the White House would enlist such a high-ranking emissary — a former president is just about the highest-ranking you can get — to deliver such a meager offer strikes House Republican investigators as highly implausible. “The messenger is huge,” says one investigator, “and the message is puny.” If the White House took the trouble to involve an extremely busy former president, then the issue must have been a pretty high priority.Next, the Secretary of Navy position.
There was a lot of speculation that the position Sestak was offered was the Secretary of Navy position. The memo claims this was not the case, because Obama made his intentions known on March 26, 2009 to nominate Ray Mabus as the Secretary of Navy.
"On March 27, 2009, Mabus was nominated by President Obama as Secretary of the Department of the Navy. He was informally sworn in on May 19, 2009, however it was not until an official ceremony at Washington Navy Yard on June 18, 2009 that Mabus was officially sworn in by the Secretary of Defense Robert Gates."Ok, on it's face, it would seem strange that Obama, in the process of nominating Mabus to the Sec of Navy position would offer the position to Sestak. (Although, besides this video, it was never confirmed that this is the job Sestak was offered.) So, if Sestak does believe he was offered the Secretary of Navy position, how do you explain Ray Mabus?
Well...looking at the history of Secretary's of the Navy, there are only about 6 former Secretary's of Navy who have ever served three or more years. Most have served for one to two years, and some as little as a week or two. Including Mabus, there have already been three Secretaries under Obama. Is it really that hard to believe that Obama promised to appoint Sestak to the position in a year? Perhaps after sitting for another two years in the House?
Another unanswered question is why did Obama and Clinton have a private lunch together the day before the memo came out.
Also, why did the White House contact Sestak's brother that same day?
Lastly, the memo also fails to explain this story from the Denver Post:
Not long after news leaked last month that Andrew Romanoff was determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet, Romanoff received an unexpected communication from one of the most powerful men in Washington.This is the third time Obama and Rahm Emanuel have been tied to a qui pro quo scandal - Blagojevich, Romanoff and Sestak. Does anyone see a pattern here?
Jim Messina, President Barack Obama's deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post.
Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said. Then, the day after Romanoff formally announced his Senate bid, Obama endorsed Bennet.
This is the original interview when Sestak was asked about the job offer:
KANE: “Were you ever offered a federal job to get out of this race?”Here he seems to confirm it was Secretary of Navy:
KANE: “Was it secretary of the Navy?”
SESTAK: “No comment”
Later Kane asks again, “Was there a job offered to you by the White House?” to which Sestak nods and replies “yes, someone offered it.”
Kane asks “It was big right?” Sestak replies, “Let me ‘no comment’ on it.”
“Was it high-ranking?” Kane asked. Sestak said yes.
Bill Clinton refused to answer questions about this yesterday:
Sestak repeated his claims, over and over again:
And now Sestak says this?
Things just don't add up.
It is not believable that Sestak was offered a non-paying advisory roll, since Sestak would be ineligible to hold an advisory position while maintaining his roll in the House, which the memo claims was the intent.
It is not believable that the memo states that "during June AND July 2009 efforts were made" and Sestak now claims it was one phone call that lasted less than one minute. So, what else was happening during June AND July?
The memo doesn't refute the possibility that Sestak spoke with others in the White House, as Sestak has claimed, just that Clinton did offer a quid pro quo, albeit with an unpaid position (that Sestak couldn't even accept).
And it is really not believable that Bill Clinton held a conversation that lasted less than one minute.
It is not believable that the White House would enlist the help of President Clinton to offer such a meager position.
It is not believable that Sestak, who claimed for months that he was offered a high ranking federal job to drop out of the race, is now saying it was a barely made offer about a non-paying advisory roll.
And it is not believable that the appointment of Ray Mabus excludes the possibility that Sestak was promised an appointment to Secretary of the Navy, based on the length of service of previous Secretaries.
Timeline: The Sestak Bribe and the White House Coverup
H/T Gateway Pundit and the other blogs I linked above.