The Joe Sestak Job Offer

The mysterious Joe Sestak job offer continues to make news - Jake Tapper reports that all seven Republicans on the Judiciary Committee have asked Eric Holder to appoint a Special Prosecutor.  As if.  I am not a lawyer but this law seems clear enough:

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.

Well, maybe this is the Washington equivalent of driving 70 in a 55 zone.  But you know Dems are nervous when even Greg Sargent admits there is a problem (he says it is Sestak's problem, but it won't be Sestak getting investigated for breaking the law).

My guess as to what is happening?  Dave Weigel inadvertently provides a possible answer with his absurd argument that Sestak, a retired Admiral, could not have been offered Secretary of the Navy because that had already been offered to Ray Mabus, a former boy-wonder governor of Mississippi who had been in the Navy for a cup of coffee in 1970-72.  From Weigel:

For obvious reasons, the story would have been worse for all sides if the callow White House was politicizing the military.

Sestak is arguably more qualified for the Navy slot.  Why only "arguably"?  Sestak would have brought his own perspective, his own alliances, and his own enemies; SecDef Gates might have preferred someone a but more compliant, like Mabus, who would presumably be a strong administrator without strong opinions.

That said, if Sestak was offered SecNav, the full conversation would have had to include a promise to renege on the Mabus appointment and re-purpose him; given Mabus' extensive background in government that should have been easy enough, but it would no doubt be embarrassing to the White House (and Mabus) to re-hash that now.

OVER/UNDER: How many Sestak questions will be asked at Obama's press conference today?  I'll bet none - waltzing with Gibbs is part of the job, but actually embarrassing Obama on national television imperils valuable access and possible book deals.

AN ADDITIONAL WRINKLE: I read somewhere (and have not verified) that Sestak would be subject to a five year freeze-out before being eligible for Secretary of the Navy.  He left in July 2005 (under a bit of a cloud), so the (hypothetical) plan would have been to let Mabus keep the seat warm for a year, then appoint Sestak in 2010.  Is there a point?  Well, if (IF!) the job in question was Secretary of the Navy, the discussions would have required a fair level of detail as to timing and moving Mabus.  Which means there is a lot to cover up now, since revealing that Mabus was mooted as being reassigned after a year would be a bit awkward.

There may be even more to cover, since the same Admiral Mullen who dumped Sestak in 2005 is now Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and might not be keen to see Sestak running the Navy.

Comments

[daddy]

What I'd like is for some Senator to say to Sestak "Say it ain't so Joe."

Baseball fans among us will remember that that is the famous line the little kid asked of Shoeless Joe Jackson when he was banned from baseball for life for crookedly throwing the 1919 World Series as a member of (gasp) the CHICAGO Black Sox. What a coinkydink ">http://www.kudzumonthly.com/kudzu/jul01/sayitaintsojoe.html"> Link.

[Danube of Thought]

The word "promise" in the statute might make this a tough one to prosecute. But then, who cares about an actual prosecution? Just let all these scumbags twist slowly, slowly in the wind.

[Melinda Romanoff]

There is no is here.

And I'm from Chicago, this never happened.

If there's an investigation, it will be "their guy" doing it.

If there's a trial by jury, they, an all alternates, will be bought.

If there's a trial by judge, that judge will be bought.

If anybody even talks, which I doubt will happen.

See? It didn't happen.

Damn Republicans trying smear this good administration and conjure up another distraction. I can just hear it now...

[They'll try to pretend Obama was out of the loop. Hey, maybe he was.]

We note John Dean, er, the President's personal lawyer, is trying to run the pushback.
================

[Captain Hate]

I'm just enjoying the spectacle of a commiecrat White House in a pissing match with a donkeycrat Senate candidate. What could go wrong with that other than Michael Steele throwing them both a lifeline?

[Clarice]

When it comes to this kind of political horse trading I think it's a stupid law. I don't mind this story hanging around to batter the Administration's credibility but if the Republicans get side tracked from smaller govt/fiscal responsibility to this nonsense, I'll be angry.

[sbw]

[OT] Did I miss any recent discussion of the fall of M3 indicator of money supply?

"It’s frightening," said Professor Tim Congdon from International Monetary Research. "The plunge in M3 has no precedent since the Great Depression. The dominant reason for this is that regulators across the world are pressing banks to raise capital asset ratios and to shrink their risk assets. This is why the US is not recovering properly," he said.

The US authorities have an entirely different explanation for the failure of stimulus measures to gain full traction. They are opting instead for yet further doses of Keynesian spending, despite warnings from the IMF that the gross public debt of the US will reach 97pc of GDP next year and 110pc by 2015.

I am a fan of Milton Friedman. What context do you put this in? [/OT]

[Jane]

I just heard Tom Coburn this AM talking about Congress and all the spending say:

"WE are incompetent?"

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

Lawbreaking? Well, add it to the list. Bribes, payoffs, scams, ponzi schemes, failure to pay taxes, illegal immigration, invading private property (SEIU thugs).
If Dodd, Rangel, Gore, Frank, Andy Stern, Kevin Jennings, Obama are our leaders...well what do we expect?
These dishonorable people give each other awards for heaven sake...and our MSM fawn over them.

I just watched that SEIU video at Hot Air. LUN What lawlessness. Every member of that mob should be prosecuted for being on that citizen's private property. This is no joke. These leftists are behaving criminally.

[Pagar]

"This is why the US is not recovering properly,"

IMO, another major reason "the US is not recovering", is that every single effort made by the Obama Administration is designed to destroy existing private industry. With the uncertainty of what expenses the Obama Administration policies will add to the economy, I do not see how anyone/any company could feel that adding employees is a smart decision

[Clarice]

depends on the meaning of job offer..how the administration is waltzing to protect itself and Sestak..he misunderstood.
http://legalinsurrection.blogspot.com/2010/05/it-depends-upon-what-meaning-of-job.html>Sestak

[MarkO]

Whatever we think about the law or its application generally, here we have one witness who will testify someone broke this law. Sestak says he was offered a job to drop out of the race. I'll take that case.

Who cares who was most qualified, that's only an effort to cast doubt on the witness's credibility. There is probable cause here. There is a case that can be won by a reasonably competent lawyer.

Now for the cover up.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

and from your link Clarice, our media will muddle up the word games. A non-news junkie citizen will come away with - nothing much really happened but the Republicans are desperate, and are just attacking Obama's administration...making a big deal out of nothing.

With cases like this, where explanations of the law are required, the media has the power. The media always works for the Dems..

[narciso]

They sent Mabus down to Saudi Arabia, last time around where he was thoroughly worthless
there, so they'd probably make him one of the new heads of either the consumer protection
board, or the medicare advisory panel. The thing I don't understand, is why go all to all this trouble for Specter

[peter]

When it comes to this kind of political horse trading I think it's a stupid law. I don't mind this story hanging around to batter the Administration's credibility but if the Republicans get side tracked from smaller govt/fiscal responsibility to this nonsense, I'll be angry.

I agree, Clarice. Horse trading does not have the pay off that smaller government/ lower taxes/seal our borders memes have.

Have to choose your battles. Sestak scandal not going anywhere.

[Pagar]

One other result of the Sestak offer discussion is that it leads one to ponder what political decision caused the selection of the unqualified who were selected for all of the Obama Administration positions.

[centralcal]

Another one, in addition to Sestak????

Yesterday, going to the bank, Hannity was on talking about some Democrat candidate in Colorado (Romanoff?) who is also claiming he was offered a job by the WH to drop out of a race.

I haven't been able to find anything on the web - have any of you got any info on this new claim?

[Appalled]

narciso:

Specter was locking up vote 60 for a whole series of Democratic nostrums (including the "health care reform" that dare not speak its name). And I think Obama would have been right to be concerned about Specter staying bought.

As for the scandal -- I think the real surprise is Sestak got himself and his administration into this bind. I don't see a credible endgame here other than throwing somebody under the bus. The question is who goes under the greyhound. My guess is that, if it is Sestak, the person Sestak talked to in the administration is too high up to sacrifice (e.g. Rahm, or even Obama himself). Because the White House really cannot afford to give up the PA senate seat. And, somehow, I don't see the PA Dems pulling a New Jersey, and returning to battle with Snarlin' Arlen.

As for what I think -- in this case, "The law is an ass." The conduct described should not be illegal, because laws like that are routinely violated probably should not be on the books.

[anduril]

All very interesting, and we'll probably find out the truth after it's too late to impeach--if the MSM has anything to say about it. Here's something else we'll probably figure out long after it's too late to do anything about it: US money supply plunges at 1930s pace as Obama eyes fresh stimulus. Money quote (pun intended):

David Rosenberg from Gluskin Sheff said the White House appears to have reversed course just weeks after Mr Obama vowed to rein in a budget deficit of $1.5 trillion (9.4pc of GDP) this year and set up a commission to target cuts. "You truly cannot make this stuff up. The US governnment is freaked out about the prospect of a double-dip," he said.

...

Mr Summers acknowledged in a speech this week that the eurozone crisis had shone a spotlight on the dangers of spiralling public debt. He said deficit spending delays the day of reckoning and leaves the US at the mercy of foreign creditors. Ultimately, "failure begets failure" in fiscal policy as the logic of compound interest does its worst.

However, Mr Summers said it would be "pennywise and pound foolish" to skimp just as the kindling wood of recovery starts to catch fire. He said fiscal policy comes into its own at at time when the economy "faces a liquidity trap" and the Fed is constrained by zero interest rates.

Mr Congdon said the Obama policy risks repeating the strategic errors of Japan, which pushed debt to dangerously high levels with one fiscal boost after another during its Lost Decade, instead of resorting to full-blown "Friedmanite" monetary stimulus.

"Fiscal policy does not work. The US has just tried the biggest fiscal experiment in history and it has failed. What matters is the quantity of money and in extremis that can be increased easily by quantititave easing. If the Fed doesn’t act, a double-dip recession is a virtual certainty," he said.

Mr Congdon said the dominant voices in US policy-making - Nobel laureates Paul Krugman and Joe Stiglitz, as well as Mr Summers and Fed chair Ben Bernanke - are all Keynesians of different stripes who "despise traditional monetary theory and have a religious aversion to any mention of the quantity of money". The great opus by Milton Friedman and Anna Schwartz - The Monetary History of the United States - has been left to gather dust.

[bunkerbuster]

``But then, who cares about an actual prosecution?''

Indeed. The regulars here need no evidence, let alone proof. Anyone, EVERYONE associated with Obama is guilty, guilty, guilty until proven innocent.

[narciso]

Gill and Soros, really got their money's worth when they leased Weigel 'If the administration was policitizing the military'
like focusing on the repeal of don't ask don't tell, like stinting on our committments
in Afghanistan, like slashing our forward air
strategy for the next decade

[Appalled]

bb:

How do you reconcile Sestak's comments with the administration's comments? Somebody is guilty of something, don't you think?

[Captain Hate]

I'm glad that TM has added Weigel to the Axis of Catamites that regularly gets skewered by their inane pronouncements.

[anduril]

Today's WSJ has excellent coverage of the Polish air crash. Unfortunately the online version doesn't offer the same graphics as does the hard copy version:

Polish Crash Probe Focuses on General:
Investigators Look at Impact of Air Force Chief's Cockpit Visit on Pilots in Air Disaster That Killed President, 95 Others

Here are some of the key findings so far:

"There's no specific command to land on the record," said Mr. Klich. "Psychologists will have to assess the stress levels the pilots were subjected to." That review is a part of the investigation that remains to be completed, he said.

The Tupolev's pilots ignored multiple warnings from the Smolensk control tower that visibility was poor and they should divert. Just four minutes from impact, another Polish flight crew already on the ground told the pilots that horizontal visibility at the airport was down to 200 meters, and vertical visibility was just 50 meters, according to details recently released by investigators in Moscow.

The military airport wasn't equipped to work with the Tupolev's landing system, and the safety visibility threshold for landing was 1,000 meters, the investigators said.

Unable to see, the pilots flew their Tupolev into a depression one kilometer from the airport. The plane was 15 meters below the elevation of the runway when its "terrain approaching" alarm went off, indicating the aircraft was less than 100 meters from the ground. Yet the pilots appear to have switched off the autopilot and sought to pull up only after the plane shuddered on hitting a 10.8-meter-high tree. That was 13 seconds after the alarm and just five seconds before impact.

A five-meter-tall birch tree sheared off part of the left wing and sent the plane into a spin before it landed on its back and disintegrated, according to the investigation.

Mr. Klich said there appeared to have been coordination problems among the crew in the cockpit, but didn't elaborate.

...

"On the face of it, 13 seconds appears a long delay to respond. You should react to a terrain warning immediately with full power and a pull-up," said Paul Hayes, director of safety at Ascend Ltd., an aviation consulting firm in London, who has reviewed the investigation materials released so far.

Mr. Hayes also questioned the presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit. "You should have a sterile cockpit during final approach. You should just have the crew talking about the work at hand. But there's no indication yet whether the noncrew members were a distraction," he said.

...

One other passenger on the doomed Tupolev, still not identified, entered the cockpit 16 minutes before the crash, Mr. Klich said.

[Ignatz]

This,

--if the Republicans get side tracked from smaller govt/fiscal responsibility to this nonsense, I'll be angry.--

I agree with.

This,

--When it comes to this kind of political horse trading I think it's a stupid law.--

I don't.
I've looked at it from several angles and cannot discern the difference between offering him a job and slipping him a duffle full of unmarked bills.
Seems to me it's the kind of corruption and patronage that creates political machines which have done so much to make smaller government and fiscal responsibility impossible.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

The WaPo doesn't have any screaming headlines about Sestak, so they are gonna wait until the administration gets it's story straight. Maybe a tsk,tsk later, but that will be all.
Not like the relentless screaming about Ted Stevens or Libby.
Selective outrage is an art with our MSM.

[narciso]

Yes they had to go and manufacture some of the evidence in the first case, along with cover up some of impeachable proclivities of their star witness, and they hid exculpatory
evidence in the latter case, and suppressed a large part of the defense.

Now if Bush had offered Toomey an Ambassadorship or other post, in return for
not challenging Specter, you think the media
would be so blase, I don't think so

[anduril]

Meanwhile, Wall Street’s Next Debacle Gets Help From Senate: Roy C. Smith.

Plus: Central banks - crisis creators

[PDinDetroit]

I just watched that SEIU video at Hot Air. LUN What lawlessness. Every member of that mob should be prosecuted for being on that citizen's private property. This is no joke. These leftists are behaving criminally.

Janet, thanks for posting that. I have heard bits and pieces, but have been more concerned with current health issues occurring. It is complete lawlessness in my book, aided and abetted by the local LEOs and the MSM.

It just takes one person standing up for their rights to make a difference here. The saying "when seconds count, police are only minutes away" rings true here, especially when the LEOs will not provide protection for you (and SCOTUS has confirmed that they have no duty to except for General Public Safety). I encourage all reading this to have basic self-protection accounted for (meaning have and train with a firearm).

My daughter has been trained with 90% of my firearms and is more accurate than I am. Had this occurred at my house with her alone, she would have armed herself with HER Shotgun or HER Mini-14 and made sure HER Safety was not compromised.

Before I decided to arm myself properly, I considered the "less-lethal" option of a Pepper Ball Gun, just like a Paintball Gun/Marker. Sadly, I do not have that option here in MI. See LUN.

Can you imagine the teenager in the story having a Pepper Ball Gun and using it on the crowd? Now THAT would have made a GREAT VIDEO.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

and if this law is not a big deal or stupid...then fine, but I don't want it to be a big deal only for Republicans.
Repeal the law or rule, or enforce it.

[Porchlight]

I'm trying to figure out the media angle on this. Why are they following this story at all when they have studiously ignored so many other fine examples of WH corruption and lawbreaking? I smell "distraction."

That said, I agree with Ignatz that you can't just let this stuff slip or eventually it'll get to the point where a straight up cash bribe will be looked at as not that big a deal either. Ideally this will be one more arrow in the GOP's quiver for November and not the main focus.

[Captain Hate]

anduril. what your account leaves out is the graphic in the article that shows the terrain on the approach sloping upward (the verbage indicates "a depression" but that doesn't completely communicate the landscape that the illustration, admittedly not to scale, does imo) that would make it extremely treacherous to rely on instrumentation in low visibility. At first I thought it was a situation similar to the Die Hard movie when in reality it was much different in terms of a comparison to the layout at Dulles or anything in DC.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

Mental note for future purchase...Pepper Ball Gun!

[Threadkiller]

Video of Sestak’s 2nd secret meeting at the Whitehouse.

Graphic content warning.

[anduril]

I forgot to link this earlier this week. From Stratfor: Germany After the EU and the Russian Scenario.

The basic idea is that the EU doesn't make all that much sense for Germany--after all, what do Spain and Greece have to offer Germany except cheap vacation destinations? Russia? Now that's a different matter entirely! And so George Friedman builds a scenario in which Germany and Russia build a cooperative relationship. What could come between these two nations? Well, the same country that's always been between them: Poland. And so Friedman begins by sketching what's going on between Poland and the US--noting especially that the wily and persistent Poles have managed to get what they really wanted all along:

For example, the Polish government recently announced that the United States would deploy a battery of Patriot missiles to Poland. The missiles arrived this week. When the United States canceled its land-based ballistic missile defense system under intense Russian pressure, the Obama administration appeared surprised at Poland’s intense displeasure with the decision. Washington responded by promising the Patriots instead, the technology the Poles had wanted all along. While the Patriot does not enhance America’s ability to protect itself against long-range ballistic missiles from, for example, Iran, it does give Poland some defense against shorter-ranged ballistic missiles and substantial defense against conventional air attack.

Russia is the only country capable of such attacks on Poland with even the most distant potential interest in doing so, and at this point, this is truly an abstract threat. In removing a system that was really not a threat to Russian interests — U.S. ballistic missile defense at most can handle only a score of missiles, meaning it would have a negligible impact on the Russian nuclear deterrent — the United States ironically has installed a system that could affect Russia. Under the current circumstances, this is not really significant. While much is being made of having a few U.S. boots on the ground east of Germany within 40 kilometers (about 25 miles) of the Russian Baltic exclave of Kaliningrad, a few hundred technicians and guards are simply not an offensive threat.

Still, the Russians — with a long history of seeing improbable threats turning into very real ones — tend to take hypothetical limits on their power seriously. They also tend to take gestures seriously, knowing that gestures often germinate into strategic intent. The Russians obviously oppose this deployment, as the Patriots would allow Poland in league with NATO — and perhaps even by itself — to achieve local air superiority. There are many crosscurrents in Russian policy, however.

For the moment, the Russians are interested in encouraging better economic relations with the West, as they could use technology and investment that would make them more than a commodity exporter. Moreover, with the Europeans preoccupied with their economic crisis and the United States still bogged down in the Middle East and needing Russian support on Iran, Moscow has found little outside resistance to its efforts to increase its influence in the former Soviet Union. Moscow is not unhappy about the European crisis and wouldn’t want to do anything that might engender greater European solidarity. After all, a solid economic bloc turning into an increasingly powerful and integrated state would pose challenges to Russia in the long run that Moscow is happy to do without. The Patriot deployment is a current irritation and a hypothetical military problem, but the Russians are not inclined to create a crisis with Europe over it — though this doesn’t mean Moscow won’t make countermoves on the margins when it senses opportunities.

For its part, the Obama administration is not focused on Poland at present. It is obsessed with internal matters, South Asia and the Middle East. The Patriots were shipped based on a promise made months ago to calm Central European nerves over the Obama administration’s perceived lack of commitment to the region. In the U.S. State and Defense department sections charged with shipping Patriots to Poland, the delivery process was almost an afterthought; repeated delays in deploying the system highlighted Washington’s lack of strategic intent.

It is therefore tempting to dismiss the Patriots as of little importance, as merely the combination of a hangover from a Cold War mentality and a minor Obama administration misstep. Indeed, even a sophisticated observer of the international system might barely note it. But we would argue that it is more important than it appears precisely because of everything else going on.

After sketching out Germany's Russian Option, Friedman returns to the Patriots:

And this brings us back to the Patriot missiles. Regardless of the bureaucratic backwater this transfer might have emerged out of, or the political disinterest that generated the plan, the Patriot stationing fits neatly into a slowly maturing military relationship between Poland and the United States. A few months ago, the Poles and Americans conducted military exercises in the Baltic states, an incredibly sensitive region for the Russians. The Polish air force now flies some of the most modern U.S.-built F-16s in the world; this, plus Patriots, could seriously challenge the Russians. A Polish general commands a sector in Afghanistan, something not lost upon the Russians. By a host of processes, a close U.S.-Polish relationship is emerging.

The current economic problems may lead to a fundamental weakening of the European Union. Germany is economically powerful but needs economic coalition partners that contribute to German well-being rather than merely draw on it. A Russian-German relationship could logically emerge from this. If it did, the Americans and Poles would logically have their own relationship. The former would begin as economic and edge toward military. The latter begins as military, and with the weakening of the European Union, edges toward economics. The Russian-German bloc would attempt to bring others into its coalition, as would the Polish-U.S. bloc. Both would compete in Central Europe — and for France. During this process, the politics of NATO would shift from humdrum to absolutely riveting.

The whole thing is definitely worth a read.

[Jane]

As for what I think -- in this case, "The law is an ass." The conduct described should not be illegal, because laws like that are routinely violated probably should not be on the books.

Was that your attitude when they announced the prosecution of Blago?

I'm more interested right now in Obama's cover up lawyer, who also was involved in getting him out of trouble in the Blago case.

I bet he is knee deep in that one too.

[anduril]

Cap'n, not my fault. Me: "Unfortunately the online version doesn't offer the same graphics as does the hard copy version." I tried to locate the graphic you describe online but was unable to--it only seems to appear in the hard copy version, for some reason. Yes, that graphic was excellent. The online version had graphics on the plane itself, which was not nearly as compelling.

[Cecil Turner]

The whole thing is definitely worth a read.

Both articles are clueless. A "controller" doesn't "warn" a pilot of weather "below minimums," he directs him to proceed to an alternate. The only way a pilot can ignore such an order is in an emergency, something not discussed here. "Sterile cockpit" does not refer to keeping observers off the flight deck, and there is no explanation for landing short, which is not something that can be blamed on poor visibility.

And only someone who can't count could possibly assert a handful of Patriots is going to materially affect the balance of air power between Russia and Poland.

But hey, at least it was short and/or on topic. [Oh, wait . . .]

[Captain Hate]

I wish daddy would see that hard-copy graphic and comment on the chances of a safe landing happening in that circumstance. As it is I'm incredulous that somebody would order any plane, much less one that was packed with the highest officials of a country, to land in those circumstances.

[MarkO]

The Sestak matter is not a question of having evidence (or even "proof"). A US Congressman and retired Navy Admiral has openly stated that someone in the Obama White House comitted a felony.

It is not unreasonable to conclude that Obama (the grand legal scholar) simply didn't understand that the bribe he had Rham offer was a felony. It is not unreasonable to conclude that the President was involved in the decision and that the action was taken with his knowledge and consent.

Remember, we already have evidence of the crime.

But, given the reaction even on this thread, I can see why the MSM is not taking it seriously. The reasons run from the analog to the Arizona law (it's a stupid law) to the idea that there really are more important things to worry about.

[jimmyk]

I've looked at it from several angles and cannot discern the difference between offering him a job and slipping him a duffle full of unmarked bills.

One difference is enforceability. The motives for offering someone a job are difficult to establish--normally both sides have something to gain anyway. A transfer of cash doesn't have that, so it's prima facie evidence of some other motivation.

[narciso]

I hear a whole lot of caveats and hedges in that report, they still don't have the cockpit voice recorder, or the black box, why did they direct them to a military airport
incompatible with the Tupolev?

The main foe of the Russians for the last czarist century or so, were the Turks, or the Poles, Persia had a brief role, as did the Brits and the French, reading Tolstoy

[narciso]

Yet another example of 'these are not the droid's you're looking for" in the LUN

[anduril]

Both articles are clueless. A "controller" doesn't "warn" a pilot of weather "below minimums," he directs him to proceed to an alternate. The only way a pilot can ignore such an order is in an emergency, something not discussed here. "Sterile cockpit" does not refer to keeping observers off the flight deck

I'm going to assume that "Paul Hayes, director of safety at Ascend Ltd., an aviation consulting firm in London, who has reviewed the investigation materials released so far" has some knowledge of what the Sterile Cockpit Rule means. Here's what the "clueless" article says (it's quoting Mr. Hayes, not speculating on its own):

Mr. Hayes also questioned the presence of Gen. Blasik in the cockpit. "You should have a sterile cockpit during final approach. You should just have the crew talking about the work at hand. But there's no indication yet whether the noncrew members were a distraction," he said.

So, Hayes "questioned" the presence of the general but declined to say that the general's presence ipso facto violated the Sterile Cockpit Rule. The implication is that the general's presence may have distracted the crew and may have violated the rule, if any conversation between the crew and the general were deemed "non-essential":

No flight crewmember may engage in, nor may any pilot in command permit, any activity during a critical phase of flight which could distract any flight crewmember from the performance of his or her duties or which could interfere in any way with the proper conduct of those duties. Activities such as eating meals, engaging in nonessential conversations within the cockpit and nonessential communications between the cabin and cockpit crews, and reading publications not related to the proper conduct of the flight are not required for the safe operation of the aircraft.

The general was NOT merely an "observer." His presence was detected by the cockpit recorder--he was engaging in conversation with the pilots during their approach to the landing strip, which could have been a distraction--we don't know the details yet. However, it is difficult to view any conversation with the general as "essential" in the circumstances and, as the article points out, psychologists could well conclude that the mere presence of such a high ranking officer would be a distraction.

As for Friedman's article, he specifically references the combination of Patriots and the fact that "The Polish air force now flies some of the most modern U.S.-built F-16s in the world." The US and Poland are also engaging in long term modernization of the Polish military, both in terms of equipment and well as other areas.

[Jane]

It is not unreasonable to conclude that Obama (the grand legal scholar) simply didn't understand that the bribe he had Rham offer was a felony. It is not unreasonable to conclude that the President was involved in the decision and that the action was taken with his knowledge and consent.

I agree with all of this. And I'm not ready to let it go either. If the job was Sec of the Navy he had to be involved as only the President can offer a cabinet position.

And I don't think for one second Obama knows squat about the law.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

Maybe the MSM just doesn't know what to do. In a he said/he said argument, it is easy if one of the "he saids" is Republican. They are lying. But if both of the "he saids" are Dems. then the MSM is in a muddle.
If the MSM doesn't know what to do, they just sit quietly and report nothing.

[anduril]

why did they direct them to a military airport
incompatible with the Tupolev?

narciso, I believe you have that backwards. The airport at which the Poles attempted to land was the "military airport incompatible with the Tupolev." They were directed to alternate civil airports that were either 1) had more modern equipment or 2) had more favorable weather conditions. If you can point to contrary information...

[bunkerbuster]

``It is not unreasonable to conclude..''

At least you admit that your conclusions require no proof.
The Sestak case is he said vs he said. Why is it not obvious that you should wait for more evidence before concluding anything?

[narciso]

He made the allegation, and it is arguable that his win last Tuesday was in part attributable to the suspicions raised, so
was Sestak lying, then what kind of a candidate have the voters of Pennsylvania promoted, well we already know that part, he's
the tool of Sandy Berger and the Clintons

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

Maybe if we rented a bullhorn and went to the homes of WaPo "reporters" we could get them to write a complete story about Sestak. I hear this is an acceptable form of protest now. Position someone on the front porch, and start listing the stories that should be covered. As long as we stay clear of abortion clinics this type of protest shouldn't be a problem.

[Jane]

I'm considering snarkblogging the president's press conference over at You Too. Anyone know what time it starts?

[Rob Crawford]

Considering that the options are either Sestak is lying or the administration is lying, you'd think the left would decide to throw Sestak under the bus. The attempt to proclaim innocence all around is idiotic, particularly in light of the out-and-out bribery involved in getting Obamacare passed.

[anduril]

Question: is Jane's constant self advertising merely rude or is it impermissibly OT?

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

I think 11:45 Jane...the LA Times said 9:45 PDT.

[Threadkiller]

Why is it not obvious that you should wait for more evidence before concluding anything?

Still waiting on your evidence that dual citizens/British subjects can be POTUS.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

She does it for me Anduril cause I want to know. Thanks Jane.

[jimmyk]

you'd think the left would decide to throw Sestak under the bus.

They're too concerned about losing the Senate, and they figure Obama will get out of it somehow, as he always does (with the help of the pliant media).

[narciso]

He's kind of the Peter Venkman as President'
pretend I don't know anything about metallurgy, or astrology or architecture" except he was more sympathetic with his snark

[narciso]

Ditto, Janet

[Captain Hate]

At tomorrow's presser, will Gibbs have the jar with Fake Tapper's balls in it on display, or will they keep it hidden in case he asks any difficult questions?

[Jane]

They're too concerned about losing the Senate, and they figure Obama will get out of it somehow, as he always does (with the help of the pliant media).

Do you really think so? I think Obama cares more about hanging out on Air Force One than he thinks about the senate.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

No, 12:45 according to Weasel Zipper. Apparently I don't know how many time zones there are in the U.S.!

[narciso]

What is the press conference for, to tell us all the things he hasn't done about the oil
spill, including shut down future oil production in the Arctic

[PDinDetroit]

Question: is Jane's constant self advertising merely rude or is it impermissibly OT?

Pot, meet kettle.

[narciso]

Yet another example of the 'brilliance' of the Obama administration, in the LUN

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

It is kinda odd that the time of the press conference was so hard to find on Google. Maybe they don't want a lot of people watching!

[Jane]

Janet,

Would you go to the August event or the 9-12 Tea party if you could only pick one. I'm leaning to the Tea Party.

[Jane]

Wow Narciso, that is disturbing on so many levels. I just can't believe what is going on in this country.

[Jane]

Hey! I am not a kettle!

[centralcal]

Jane: Great - I am at work during the press conference, so please do blog it at you too.

[centralcal]

PD, you owe Jane an apology - there simply is no comparison to be made between her and Mr. Obnoxious.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

The 9-12 Tea Party. I think the 8-28 event is not really political...more thanks to our military and celebrating honor. LUN for the 8-28 event. I went to hear Marcus Luttrell speak one evening...really good. I followed that whole story on Blackfive back when Marcus was the one unnamed survivor. I'm such a lurker on military sites...a big fan.

[Pagar]

Even in the Godless, hate filled world of the American leftists, one would think that one could accept the word of a retired Admiral that he was offered a job if he did a certain thing. If one was not willing to believe that statement, why would one be willing to vote for him to be their US Senator?

[Jane]

No press conference so far.

[Rob Crawford]

If one was not willing to believe that statement, why would one be willing to vote for him to be their US Senator?

There's the rub, innit?

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

I will try to go to both. If you want to come down you are welcome to stay* with us Jane.

*health warning: home contains second hand smoke and dog hair!...but we are very friendly.

[Porchlight]

If one was not willing to believe that statement, why would one be willing to vote for him to be their US Senator?

No kidding. Either Sestak is lying meaning he shouldn't be elected, or the WH is lying meaning the Dems have even bigger problems.

Let's just say that if the media is pushing this as a distraction from Obamaspill, then the polling on Obamaspill must be even worse than we imagined.

[Jane]

It's at 12:45.

[Threadkiller]

"If one was not willing to believe that statement, why would one be willing to vote for him to be their US Senator?

The just require a "willing suspension of disbelief"

[Threadkiller]

They just...

[matt]

Pagar;

Sestak is no longer an admiral, but a quite liberal politician and loose cannon. This is a case of believing one snake over another. Polygraphs all around if they're ever going to get o the truth.

[Janet hates Obamacare & Obamadebt]

Sorry, @ my 11:09 post I corrected the time.

[Jane]

Janet,

Thank you. I will talk to Caro and let you know.

[LouP]

What bothers me about this whole Sestak thing is that it appears to be part of trend I've begun to notice. The Obama administration seems to be working with an attitude that they are solely responsible - whatever whim of the moment dictates - for deciding what laws are applicable, or what to enforce. (Immigration laws; voting place intimidation, i.e., Black Panthers...)

With a smorgasbord of laws to chose from, and with no accountability for which laws to enforce, we'd be pretty darn close to a dictatorship if the executive branch had the sole power to decide.

[centralcal]

I agree with you, LouP.

[Pagar]

Matt, I'm not arguing, I'm simply saying if one does not believe what he said about the job offer, why would one believe that he should be their Senator. I also agree he is no longer an Admiral. But I'm also sure if he is drawing retired pay as an Admiral, he is a retired Admiral.

[Ranger]

I am sure the White House is terrified of another "acted stupidly" moment. Hiding the press conference during the day when everyone who pays taxes is at work means they can count on their friends in the MSM to just show the nice, stong, telepromper scripted soundbites on the news tonight.

[jimmyk]

if one does not believe what he said about the job offer, why would one believe that he should be their Senator

This is a rhetorical question, right? You're not seriously suggesting that leftists care about the character and honesty of their candidates? Exhibit One: Teddy Kennedy. Exhibit Two: Arlen Specter - that even 45% of them could vote for this POS. Do I have to go on?

[Captain Hate]

Add me to agreeing with LouP; and a good example of that could be the DOE contractors that have pled not guilty to accessing the jugeared idiot's student loan records. There could be a job-related reason for doing that and still technically be violating the letter of the law. That nothing of what they may have seen has come out in any publication or been mentioned by anybody indicates that there was no obvious malign intent. Yet the feds are going after them.

[PDinDetroit]

PD, you owe Jane an apology - there simply is no comparison to be made between her and Mr. Obnoxious.

I affirm anyone's right to be offended if they so choose. I meant no comparison between the two, only to point out the hypocrisy of one person's post. Take it as you will. I believe you will find that I denigrate trolls only.

Many of us post OT self-promotion items - Jane for her show, Matt for his blog, Clarice for her AT pieces, me for my Gun Rights sites, anduril - for whatever kooky stuff. I am grateful that TM allows it, for I learn much from those here and these posts.

[Jane]

Me three. And I think we are getting closer to that by the minute.

[Jane]

A better example is what Narciso posted earlier - this.

[Cecil Turner]

The implication is that the general's presence may have distracted the crew and may have violated the rule . . .

The reporter is clueless. The "general's presence" is not a violation. (Extraneous conversation may well be.) But that doesn't explain the blatant rule violation (conducting an approach below minimums), nor does poor visibility explain impacting well short of the runway.

As for Friedman's article, he specifically references the combination of Patriots and the fact that "The Polish air force now flies some of the most modern U.S.-built F-16s in the world."

Again, if he thinks they alter the balance of power between Russia and Poland, he can't count. And if you think focusing on a few dozen pieces of equipment (and neglecting the most important part: AIM 120C) is dispositive, you're just as clueless on the subject.

[Topsecretk9]

LINK

Larry Kane still has game. The veteran journalist who recently celebrated his 45th year in broadcast journalism, the guy who in his early twenties accompanied the Beatles on their first tour of the United States, is the one who first thought to ask Joe Sestak whether the White House offered him a job to get out of the race against U.S. Senator Arlen Specter. Sestak's answer, and his non-answer, are still reverberating three months after Kane asked the question.

For months, Kane had been hearing from sources that the White House had been "dangling" a job in front of Congressman Joe Sestak, so long as he would abandon his bid to unseat Senator Specter. So back in February, when Sestak was a guest on Kane's "Voice of Reason" program on the Comcast Network, he asked, "Were you ever offered a federal job to get out of this race?"

By now everyone knows how Sestak replied: "Yes."

Via Nice Deb Breaking – Jobgate II: Sestak May Not Be The Only Dem Candidate Offered Job By Obama White House Not To Run

Not long after news leaked last month that Andrew Romanoff was determined to make a Democratic primary run against Sen. Michael Bennet, Romanoff received an unexpected communication from one of the most powerful men in Washington.

Jim Messina, President Barack Obama’s deputy chief of staff and a storied fixer in the White House political shop, suggested a place for Romanoff might be found in the administration and offered specific suggestions, according to several sources who described the communication to The Denver Post.

Romanoff turned down the overture, which included mention of a job at USAID, the foreign aid agency, sources said...

Yet several top Colorado Democrats described Messina’s outreach to Romanoff to The Post, including the discussion of specific jobs in the administration. They asked for anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject.

oh and...

Blagojevich Motion: Redacted Material Claims Obama Pushed Valerie Jarrett For Senate...

The document also alleges that President Obama suggested Valerie Jarrett get his old seat, and that he contacted labor union officials about lobbying the Governor's office on her behalf.

Didn't Andy Stern make a visit to Blagojevich?

I agree with Blagojevich on one score -- Patrick Fitzgerald should release ALL the tapped phone calls.

[Jane]

I fear that Holder will be forced to appoint a special prosecutor and he will appoint someone in the tank.

[sbw]

I haven't read the info, but a pilot can fly an IFR approach even if the airport is below minimums.

The pilot decides by the Missed Approach Point whether he can visually complete the landing, never going below the minimum altitude called for for that type of approach.

[Ignatz]

Without an independent investigation we don't actually know this is a he said/he said issue do we? Maybe there are emails or other recorded correspondence between Sestak and the WH or within the WH, or perhaps someone has first hand knowledge of correspondence or overheard conversations. That's the point of investigating.

--The motives for offering someone a job are difficult to establish--normally both sides have something to gain anyway. A transfer of cash doesn't have that, so it's prima facie evidence of some other motivation.--

I question the premise. Except in the case of theft both sides have something to gain in the voluntary transfer of cash and in the absence of conclusive evidence of a direct and illegal quid pro quo hard to see how a crime can be prosecuted. Ask Bill Clinton and Al Gore re various Chinese "donations" that might as well have been in duffel bags.
So evidence of an illegal inducement for a certain behavior has to be produced in either case.
My point was a non cash bribe is at least as corrupting as and should be taken just as seriously.

[Topsecretk9]

Mukasey

At a reception Wednesday night, Mukasey told The Washington Post blog “Right Now” that the Sestak case warrants a special prosecutor.

“It seems to me that if the offer came from the White House, you need a special prosecutor,” Mukaskey said. “People were railing on me for months, demanding a special prosecutor for this, a special prosecutor for that. But here’s a case where … well, he hasn’t said what happened.”

“To call somebody in and tell them, ‘Look, you bow out and we’ll offer you a job’ is very serious,” he continued. “No rational prosecutor should indict unless it’s that blatant.’ ”

[LouP]

"I fear that Holder will be forced to appoint a special prosecutor and he will appoint someone in the tank."

Jane, undoubtedly he will do just that. But even forcing him to admit that the law is not an option, i.e., cannot be ignored, is - in my mind - a small victory for Democracy.

[Melinda Romanoff]

tsk9-

I am not involved in Colorado's races.

For the record.

And I believe Stern had a lackey deliver the message to Blago, who remained in constant contact. I'll have to go look for the name.