Here, you are urged and encouraged to run your mouths about something important.

Wednesday, March 17, 2010


This is really starting to shape up to be a potentially very dangerous scandal for the Obama administration. Prior to March 16th, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was questioned five different times about Pennsylvania Democratic Senate candidate Joe Sestak's claim that the White House offered him a job to drop out of his primary race with Arlen Specter. In all five instances - February 23rd, March 1st, March 9th, March 11th, and March 12th - Gibbs said he had no information and wouldn't comment further, saying only that he would "get back" to the questioners.

Interestingly, on the sixth attempt by various members of the White House press corps. to pry an answer out of Gibbs, they got more than they had to that point. Interestingly, the man who received the longest answer yet from Gibbs was none other than progressive talk show host Bill Press.

Here is the relevant excerpt from the March 16th press briefing:
Q Robert, perhaps a sore point, but Congressman Darrell Issa has accused you, Robert Gibbs, of being part of a cover-up because you will not say whether the White House offered Joe Sestak a job for not running against Arlen Specter. Guilty or not guilty?

MR. GIBBS: Look, I’ve talked to several people in the White House; I’ve talked to people that have talked to others in the White House. I’m told that whatever conversations have been had are not problematic. I think Congressman Sestak has discussed that this is -- whatever happened is in the past, and he’s focused on his primary election.


Q Did the White House Counsel’s Office look into whether this was a crime --

MR. GIBBS: I’d refer you to my previous lines.

Q Sestak says he was offered something.

MR. GIBBS: I’ll refer you to what I just said a minute ago.
Note the key points here. First, Gibbs did not deny that Sestak was offered a job. Second, Gibbs claimed there was no wrongdoing relative to the matter, which could ultimately implicate Gibbs personally if he knows the opposite to be true. Lastly, note that tactic used by Gibbs. Although he doesn't say it explicitly, he insinuates quite clearly that the White House's stance is that whatever happened is old news and that Sestak wants to focus on the primary with Specter.

The problem with this should be obvious. Even though it's not even close to being old news based on the fact that it's still in the news and growing daily, if one were to assume that it were old news, Gibbs would be the one most responsible for it becoming old news because he never got back to anybody after being asked about the matter five times, starting in late February.

Gibbs' responses seemed to indicate that he was hoping the questions would fizzle out, allowing the White House to render it "old news" as the campaign office of another person of interest in this scandal, Andrew Romanoff was quoted as saying when asked by KHOW radio host Peter Boyles to go on record to refute similar claims he was offered a job to drop out of Colorado Senate race with Michael Bennet.

More at CNSNews

No comments:

Accuracy in Media
American Spectator
American Thinker
Big Government
Big Journalism
Doug Ross
Flopping Aces
Fox Nation
Fox News
Free Republic
The Hill
Hope for America
Hot Air
Hot Air Pundit
Jawa Report
Jihad Watch
Michelle Malkin
Naked Emperor News
National Review
New Zeal Blog
News Real
Pajamas Media
Red State
Right Wing News
Say Anything
Stop Islamization of America
Verum Serum
Wall Street Journal
Washington Times
Watts Up With That
Web Today
Weekly Standard
World Net Daily

Blog Archive