WaPo: White House transparency could have ended Sestak 'scandal'

[spanone]

the headline says one thing, the article says another "scandal" haha


i'd call that fair & balanced....


--------------------

Okay, if all the facts are out, then we would agree: Nothing inappropriate happened. On the basis of the memorandum issued Friday by White House Counsel Robert F. Bauer, the Joe Sestak job-for-dropping-out-of-Senate-race scandal is a non-scandal -- except for the White House's bungling of the episode. The unnecessary coverup, it turns out, is always worse than the non-crime.

The talk had been that the White House had attempted to strong-arm -- "bribe," some critics claimed -- the Pennsylvania congressman to abandon his primary challenge of White House-endorsed Sen. Arlen Specter after the incumbent senator's party switch. The rumor was that the job being dangled was Navy secretary -- a rumor Mr. Sestak unhelpfully fueled by confirming some kind of job offer but issuing a "no comment" when asked about the Navy post.

This scenario never made much sense. President Obama nominated Ray Mabus to be Navy secretary in March 2009, a month before Mr. Specter's party switch; Mr. Mabus was confirmed in May, before the reported overture to Mr. Sestak. But why let an inconvenient timeline get in the way of a potential scandal?

In fact, according to the Bauer report, the White House not only wanted to keep the field clear for Mr. Specter but also wanted to keep Mr. Sestak in his current congressional seat -- understandably, given that Mr. Sestak had beaten a Republican incumbent in 2006. So White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel dispatched his old boss, former president Bill Clinton, to talk to Mr. Sestak about staying put but adding to his responsibilities.

The Bauer report says Mr. Clinton discussed with the congressman "a Presidential or other Senior Executive Branch Advisory Board, 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." The positions would have been unpaid.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/28/AR2010052802660_pf.html

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

1. I agree. The only scandal is how poorly it was handled and allowed

to grow all out of proportion.

I think the press handling part of the Obama White House needs work.

[Inuca]

4. Sestak handled it poorly

The WH may have needed Clinton's OK to say anything. I don't know when they got it.

[Dont TS Me Brah]

2. there IS no scandal, no law was broken. eom.

[RagAss]

3. This is typical Chicago Politics....Big fucking deal !

[Inuca]

5. WHat's so Chicago-like about it? n/t

[spanone]

6. i suspect it's typical washington politics

[Bitwit1234]

7. But the Washington Post still had to blame the White House for

somthing tho didn't they.

[rocktivity]

8. Rocktivity: Media Due Diligence would have ended Sestak Scandal, too

You're equally at fault for printing the Rethugs' accusations as fact. So suck it up, suckers!


rocktivity

[KonaKane]

9. Can someone define "Chicago politics" for me?

I've heard this annoying little meme pop up all the time, usually when someone is taking a swipe at Obama. I sense that most of the time the user has no idea at all what it actually means. Can anybody here clear the air for me?