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

Thursday, June 3, 2010


Chris Cillizza at the Washington Post posts the White House statement credited to Robert Gibbs on the alleged job offered to Andrew Romanoff in return for his dropping out of his Senate race with incumbent Michael Bennet. He also has Romanoff's official statement.

There is a claim made in the White House statement that is both new and not echoed in Romanoff's statement. According to Gibbs, Romanoff applied for a job with the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) after Obama's election but before his inauguration. The statement seems to use that application to soften the blow of offering a quid pro quo to Romanoff in September of 2009 to drop out of the Senate Race.

Here is the White House statement Via WAPO:
STATEMENT FROM THE PRESS SECRETARY ON COLORADO SENATE RACE Andrew Romanoff applied for a position at USAID during the Presidential transition. He filed this application through the Transition on-line process. After the new administration took office, he followed up by phone with White House personnel.

Jim Messina called and emailed Romanoff last September to see if he was still interested in a position at USAID, or if, as had been reported, he was running for the US Senate. Months earlier, the President had endorsed Senator Michael Bennet for the Colorado seat, and Messina wanted to determine if it was possible to avoid a costly battle between two supporters.

But Romanoff said that he was committed to the Senate race and no longer interested in working for the Administration, and that ended the discussion. As Mr. Romanoff has stated, there was no offer of a job.
I guess we're to believe that because Romanoff made the initial inquiry, the White House should be off the hook for waiting until it responded - conveniently when it benefited them and not the agency.

As Cillizza points out, Romanoff makes no mention of applying for a job with USAID during Obama's transition. If he did, wouldn't one think he'd include that in his statement? If he didn't, he'd be lying in writing by saying he did.

Like the Sestak case, this one is likely not over either.

Click HERE to read Romanoff's statement.

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