Did Joe Sestak/Bill Clinton Conversation Break the Law?

CBS/AP

The White House enlisted the help former President Bill Clinton to offer Congressman Joe Sestak unpaid positions in the Executive Branch, but is flatly denying any of the overtures were improper or illegal.

In a legal memo today, White House Counsel Robert Bauer said the Democratic Party had a "legitimate interest in averting a divisive primary fight." He said it was believed that Sestak could continue to serve in the House while also taking on additional responsibilities in the Executive Branch.

Bauer said Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel asked President Clinton to see if Sestak would be interested in serving on a presidential or other senior executive branch advisory board if he would stay in the House. Sestak declined, Bauer wrote, and remained committed to his Senate candidacy.

Bauer said allegations of improper White House conduct in the Sestak case "rest on factual errors and lack a basis in the law."

Some Republican lawmakers have questioned whether the offers to Sestak violated federal bribery or extortion statutes. Lawyers said the outreach may have amounted to a technical violation of the law--although they said it's also the kind of thing that happens all the time in Washington.

"It's not the kind of thing anybody likes to talk about, but it does go on," said former Reagan Justice Department official Michael Carvin. "But it does fall within the literal language of the statute."

Last month, Rep. Darrell Issa, a California Republican, urged Atty. Gen. Eric Holder to open an independent investigation, arguing the efforts may have violated several federal statutes that are designed to prevent bribery and extortion. Those statutes generally are designed to criminalize situations where, for example, a person would be promised a job if he made a sizable campaign contribution.

One statue that Issa mentioned prohibits a person from promising employment or a position as "consideration" or "reward" for "any political activity." So the argument would be that Emanuel and Clinton promised Sestak a position on an Advisory Board as a reward for the political activity of dropping out of the Senate race.

But Bauer strongly defended the administration's role in reaching out to see whether Sestak would be interested in Executive Branch positions, in lieu of running for Senate. He said the discussions "are fully consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements."

"There have been numerous, reported instances in the past when prior Administrations--both Democratic and Republican, and motivated by the same goals--discussed alternative paths to service for qualified individuals also considering campaigns for public office," Bauer wrote. "Such discussions are fully consistent with the relevant law and ethical requirements."

Carvin, who represented George Bush in the 2000 election battle, said these issues most frequently arise after redistricting efforts, when legislative districts are eliminated and the parties or administration try to induce candidates not to run. He said he couldn't recall the law ever being enforced in a situation like Sestak's.

One White House official noted, for example, that when New York Rep. Ben Gilman's House district was eliminated and he was contemplating a bid from another district, the Bush White House in 2002 sought to find an Executive Branch job to make use of his foreign affairs expertise--and discourage him from running in the adjoining district.

Bauer said the White House did nothing wrong in the Sestak case, either.

"There was no such impropriety," Bauer wrote. "By virtue of (Sestak's) career in public service, including distinguished military service, Congressman Sestak was viewed to be highly qualified to hold a range of advisory positions in which he could, while holding his House seat, have additional responsibilities of considerable potential interest to him and value to the Executive Branch," Bauer wrote.

Bauer flatly denied Sestak was offered Secretary of the Navy, noting that President Obama announced he would nominate Ray Mabus in March 2009--more than a month before Arlen Specter announced he was switching parties.

"At no time was Congressman Sestak offered, nor did he seek, the position of Secretary of the Navy," Bauer wrote.

[jgg000101]

CBS, if you have to ask the question in the headline, you already know the answer.

[TornadoRed]

Everyone is a liar... except maybe Sestak, and he is not being 100% truthful. Obama, Gibbs, Clinton, all liars.

[endurorob_5]

Technically illegal? Done all the time? Whatever the the legality or the presidence it is flat out unethical. And as some have pointed out it is not cahnge that Obama promised. Obama is doing things the same old ways and seems to be taking the old ways to a new low.

[p_syrus]

unpaid advisory position == no quid pro quo

case dismissed. next.

[alanrobisch]

I guess you are a dem because I saw a liberal reporter pointing out the president's story has holes in it. Of course we should find out what actually happenned not just accept aself serving statement from the president

[endurorob_5]

He could fill the same presigious position as a senotor but the position is only offered if he decided not to run so yes there is quid pro quo which = Obama administration unethical behavior which = same old Washington and then some.

[Perish1]

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 under this
title or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.

I'm not a lawyer and think that this is not going anywhere with all democrat control of government including the DOJ. Still, it does read lie there migh be something there.

[lisaman]

I believe that the Sestak debate is nothing. People say Obama believed in change.
He certainly got it, oil spills, Haiti volcanos, but the biggest is how miserable the republicans are. They will do anything to slander,
go against , our President of the United States. Does anyone know why??
I think I do. Whether I am a democrat or a republican, it just doesnt feel right. We should honor and respect the President of US no matter if it is a republican or democrat. It isnt easy to take care of a whole country. The Sestak debate is nothing and that is all there is to it.

[p_syrus]

unpaid advisory position == No quid pro quo

case dismissed. next.

[lisaman]

One more thing, Hannity and the rest at foxnews will go on on and tear this man apart, just like they have for years bringing up the Ayers and the pastors name forever and ever.
Now we have to hear about Sestak. Fox is the culprit and their show should be banned,. Hannity saids the lawyer Burns should go back to school. What a joke. The wont win on this one.

In the last few days, I have not heard any sympathy for the lost ones on
the oil barge or any for the Haiti victims. All fox wants to do is pull Obama apart day after day. Sad isnt it??

[lisaman]

Sestak was not promised any job just asked . That breaks no code. He was not even entered in primary yet. And besides all that anyone can have an advisory position in any work place and doesnt get pd . Many workers have been approached in work places, and that includes all types of business, not only politics. The Law makes no sense. this is called head hunting and that is not illegal.
So lets all go on with our lives and see whats up next

[nfbloch]

Boy these Republicans really are desperate if this is the biggest scandal they can come up with. Politicians playing politics. What is the world coming to?

It's laughable to see them flail about trying to create an issue where none exists.

[Perish1]

by SueZeeeQue May 30, 2010 12:23 PM EDT
Speaking of backroom dealing, how many times did you vote for Bush?
---------
I voted for him at least 4 times. Twice for Texas governor and twice for President. Come on, look at the stiffs that you ran against him. Gore and Kerry. Thats almost as bad as the republicans running Dole and McCain.

[Cuda-Driver]

SueZeeeQue... You are right Reagan did it, so did Bush and Clinton including other presidents. But according to many experts Obama has not done anything illegal. Sestak was offered a non paying job when he was not even running for anything. So now if you offer a job to somebody that might run it's a crime? Plus he could have taken this non paying position and still ran. NEVER was he asked not to run.

Now I know somebody is going to say when did Bush do it?

Here is a list of real administrations considered or offered appointments to avert primaries or affect elections. Examples found, citing news reports:

President Bush?s team looking for an administration position for former Representative Benjamin A. Gilman of New York in 2002 to avoid him challenging another Republican incumbent after redistricting.

President Clinton nominating Gov. William Weld of Massachusetts to be ambassador to Mexico in 1997, making it easier for a Democrat to win the state office.

President Ronald Reagan?s advisers dangling an ambassadorship in 1981 if Senator S. I. Hayakawa dropped out of a California Republican primary.