Sunday, May 23, 2010
Why Joe Sestak Is Such A Problem For Obama And The Clintons
Read the rest: The Senator from Sandy Berger
Berger began his rehabilitation in March 2006 with a fundraiser for Joesph Sestak, a former vice admiral forced into retirement for what the U.S. Navy charitably called "poor command climate." Before being recruited to run for Congress by the Clinton shadow government, Sestak had expressed no political ambitions and had not lived in his Pennsylvania district for 30 years.
Although hosted by Berger, the fundraiser was held at the law offices of Harold Ickes, a veteran Clinton fixer, and Janice Enright, the treasurer of Hillary Clinton's 2006 Senate campaign. Kicking in to support Sestak was a who's who of Clinton national security exiles. These included former secretary of state Madeleine Albright, Richard "Against All Enemies" Clarke, former national security adviser Anthony Lake, former White House chief of staff, John Podesta, and Hillary Clinton herself.
Berger was not the only Sestak supporter to have a cloud hanging over his head. Donor John Deutch, formerly Director of Central Intelligence, had signed a criminal plea agreement in connection with his mishandling of national secrets a day before being pardoned by the outgoing President Clinton.
Another interesting contribution came in from Mary O. McCarthy, recently dismissed by the CIA reportedly for failing a polygraph on leaked classified information in regard to CIA prisons overseas. As it happened, a timely leak shortly before the 2006 election would ultimately do in Sestak's Republican opponent.
Before the campaign was through, Clinton insiders would enlist Stonebridge's Director of Communications to serve as Sestak's campaign spokesperson, summon former president Clinton to rally the troops, and finally call in the federales. Their reasons for supporting Sestak were transparent even to the local media. "A Sestak victory," observed suburban Philadelphia's Delco Times early in the campaign, "would muzzle a Republican congressman who blames Clinton for doing irreparable harm to America's national security during the 1990s."
That Congresman was 10-term Republican Curt Weldon. Weldon had committed one unforgivable crime: investigating the intelligence failures of the Clinton era. Payback began in 2004 after The Los Angeles Times ran a series on members of Congress whose family members lobby or work as consultants. The Weldon family member in the spotlight was his daughter, Karen Weldon. In 2002, the then 28 year-old had co-founded Solutions North America, a business consultancy.
That much said, as the Times also acknowledged, "Congressional ethics rules provide few barriers to the practice. They do not forbid members of Congress from helping companies or others who are paying their relatives." The House Ethics Committee, in fact, cleared Weldon of any wrongdoing.
That was not clearance enough for the mischief-makers from the George Soros-funded watchdog group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). Melanie Sloan, a former assistant United States attorney and now the executive director of CREW, petitioned the Justice Department to investigate Weldon and determine whether the congressman had violated a federal bribery law. This petition, once executed and amplified, would spell the end of Weldon's career.
Also at American Thinker, Ben Barrack asks Will Toomey Play Hardball with Sestak?, hoping the answer from Pat Toomey will be "yes". Why? Because, in Barrack's words, should Toomey play his cards right, he could bring down "what a growing percentage of Americans now view as the most corrupt presidential administration in this nation's history."
When Joe Sestak defeated Arlen Specter to secure the Democratic nomination for Senator of Pennsylvania, you could almost feel the White House cringe. Although it's too early to say that Sestak's loose lips in a February media interview with Larry Kane could sink the Obama administration's ship, his primary win almost certainly has the White House scrambling for sandbags to reinforce the stonewall.Sestak is quite possibly the means by which to bring down the Obama White House and the Clintons along with it, but it will take a focused campaign by Pat Toomey and continual pounding by the New Media to help get the job done in the run up to November.
Sestak clammed up in that interview after admitting that someone in the administration offered him a job in July to drop out of the primary -- presumably, that job was Secretary of the Navy. The problem is that the claim implicates the administration in the commission of at least one felony and Sestak could be implicating himself in the misprision of a felony as long as he remains silent about what job was offered and who offered it.
Republican candidate Pat Toomey is now running against Sestak and told KDKA radio's Mike Pintek on May 19th that he will run his campaign like he's twenty points down in what is, on paper a close race. If he means that, perhaps he should shine the spotlight on this scandal now that he is on a national stage.
On its face, a strategy that involves calling national media attention to the scandal known as 'Jobsgate' might seem like Toomey would be going negative, slinging mud at his opponent over a matter not relevant to the campaign. That is a misguided and shortsighted view. With the national stage Toomey now has, the opportunity to expose a scandal of gigantic proportions, reaching all the way to what a growing percentage of Americans now view as the most corrupt presidential administration in this nation's history, is now his as well.
As a one-time congressman seeking higher office in the Senate, conventional wisdom - in addition to his handlers - is likely telling Toomey to play it safe by riding the wave of Tea Party conservatism which will help him defeat Sestak in the arena of ideas while capitalizing on the momentum that is expected to benefit conservative Republicans in November.
This scandal is much bigger than Toomey's aspirations. It's also much bigger than taking down Sestak before the election. The irony is that what Toomey likely perceives as going negative may just be the best thing he could possibly do for his country. With the national exposure that accompanies this campaign coupled with Sestak's self-inflicted wound, Toomey has the opportunity to achieve greatness by putting his political aspirations in the back seat; that's irony.
The MSM? Maybe.