FOX News - Hannity - ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow Discusses This Question: Did White House Commit a Crime by Offering Sestak a Job?
There's a growing controversy underway in Washington over whether U.S. Senate candidate Joe Sestak of Pennsylvania was offered a job by the Obama Administration if he would agree to stay out of a primary battle against incumbent Sen. Arlen Specter.
Sean Hannity discusses the issue with ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow. You can watch that interview here.
A transcript of the interview is posted below.
Did White House Commit a Crime by Offering Sestak a Job?
FOX News - Hannity - May 25, 2010
SEAN HANNITY: All right, so if Joe Sestak is telling the truth and one of the president's advisers did, in fact, offer him a job, many have suggested that a senior administration official and maybe even the president himself is guilty of a crime. Now, offering Sestak a job may have put the administration in violation of section 210 of the federal criminal code, which makes it a crime to offer or promise, quote, "any money or thing of value to any person in consideration of the use or promise to use any influence to procure any appointive office."
Here to explain exactly what that means and how likely it is that any administration officials could end up behind bars, former deputy assistant attorney general and partner at DeGenova and Toensing LLP, Victoria Toensing, and chief counsel of the American Center for Law and Justice Jay Sekulow.
High crimes and misdemeanors, Jay?
JAY SEKULOW, AMERICAN CTR FOR LAW AND JUSTICE: Well, article 2, section 4 of the Constitution is there for a reason. And Sean, this is spinning out of control, as far as the White House is concerned right now. This is getting big coverage and it's getting big coverage because something's wrong here. It's undercutting democracy if, in fact, offers were made to have someone not run.
And it's not just one or two sections of federal law that's been violated here. We've done an analysis of this. There could be four or even five sections of the federal criminal code that was violated. When I first got out of law school, I was -- I worked at the office of chief counsel for the Department of Treasury. Victoria worked for the Justice Department.
These are serious allegations here. And I'm going to tell you something. I understand why Mr. Sestak is trying to not say anything right now because he's now obtained the nomination and he may want the White House support. But the reality is, somebody's going to have to speak. And if, in fact, it is established that an offer of employment was made so that he would not run, that is interference with a political campaign, it's interference with elected office, it's the promise and solicitation of a job opportunity in order to forego something. That violates...
HANNITY: All right, Victoria...
SEKULOW: ... not only the Constitution, it violates federal law.
HANNITY: ... Sestak has been very clear. There's been no ambiguity on his part. He has said over and over and over again that they offered him a job. He just won't specify what job it was. Even David Axelrod said that this would constitute a serious breach of law. That's David Axelrod's take on this. Do you agree with that assessment?
VICTORIA TOENSING, FORMER JUSTICE DEPT. OFFICIAL: Oh, yes, I do, Sean. And it's not just 18USC-210, but also 211. And actually, that is more appropriate for this situation because it's against the law for anyone to solicit a thing of value in return for a promise to get a federal job, which is exactly what this White House official did, according to the congressman.
Let's be very clear about something, though. Just because something is a quid pro quo doesn't mean it's against the law. We do quid pro quos every single day. You know, here's 10 grand, give me your used car. But Congress made a policy decision that certain things were not for sale, a senator's vote and federal offices. And it is specifically in those two statutes against the law for somebody to ask for a federal job and to give something of value...
HANNITY: All right, well...
TOENSING: ... but more importantly, for this White House official to solicit something of value.
HANNITY: Wait a minute. But based on your description, that would make the "Cornhusker kickback" and the "Louisiana purchase," in my mind, something that was illegal. But let's stay focused here for...
TOENSING: No, no, no, no, no because that's for a job. It's very specifically for a job.
HANNITY: OK. All right, Jay...
SEKULOW: Yes, it is.
HANNITY: ... Jay (INAUDIBLE) but I didn't like the whole bribery side of that, but that's my, you know, pet peeve. Jay, I want to stay very focused here because we have two competing stories. Politically, the fact that the White House can't seem to get its footing here is amazing to me. They're being -- even the media now is following our lead and they're finally beginning to ask some really important questions. Now...
SEKULOW: The real questions, right.
HANNITY: I can't imagine that anybody that works for President Obama was able to offer a job, as Sestak says, without the president's approval. So don't we...
SEKULOW: Well, Sean...
HANNITY: Are we going to get to the point -- What did the president know, when did he know it?
SEKULOW: Oh, I think so because, look, we're not talking about some, you know, low-level position in an administrative agency, which, by the way, would still be a violation of the law. We're talking about -- what is being reported is that we're talking about senior positions. And of course, it would be a senior position. It's a sitting congressman. He wasn't going to leave that to just take some administrative responsibility. You're talking the secretary of the Navy or something in that magnitude? Look, I mean, at the end of the day, Sean -- and I really believe this -- if the White House does not come clean and come clean very quickly here, I think...
HANNITY: All right...
SEKULOW: ... this tempest in a teapot is going to blow.
HANNITY: All right, and -- by blow...
SEKULOW: I really do.
HANNITY: By blow, you mean what?
SEKULOW: I think it could go back on the president of the United States very significantly, and certainly senior administration officials. Whether someone's going to take the fall for this or not, that we'll see what Washington politics do. But at the end of the day...
(CROSSTALK)
SEKULOW: ... senior levels here, there's a serious problem here.
TOENSING: Sestak could clear this up. Sestak or a grand jury subpoena could clear this up in about 30 seconds. Hello?
SEKULOW: They're going to resist that grand jury subpoena...
TOENSING: We have a question for you...
SEKULOW: ... with everything they have. They're going to -- Holder's already said he's not appointing a special prosecutor. But at the end of the day, Sean, the political pressure coming from the outside could be so significant, will be so significant...
HANNITY: Yes, I agree with you.
SEKULOW: ... that the real questions are going to be asked and...
(CROSSTALK)
TOENSING: It's reached critical mass now. I don't...
SEKULOW: It has. Absolutely.
TOENSING: Sestak cannot do an interview without being asked about this.
HANNITY: All right...
SEKULOW: Absolutely not.
HANNITY: All right, so...
TOENSING: So that stops...
HANNITY: And Sestak is -- he's painted himself into a corner because Sestak can't...
SEKULOW: Oh, yes.
HANNITY: ... come out and say, Oh, I didn't really mean that, because his chances of getting elected in Pennsylvania will at that point become zero. So Sestak is going to have to tell the truth. So the question is, who in the administration offered the job and by whose authority did they make the offer? Isn't that the next question?
SEKULOW: Sure. And Sean, if it -- if we're talking about the level of job we're talking about -- and you know, again, it has to be because this was a sitting congressman. This is now someone that has the Democratic senatorial nomination. This was a senior position. You know it could not possibly have been authorized unless the president...
HANNITY: All right, let me -- let me...
SEKULOW: ... was at least indirectly involved.
HANNITY: Victoria, if it turns out Sestak told the truth -- and let's say it was the position of secretary of the Navy -- is there -- and let's say that somebody in the administration offered it to him and that the president knew about it. Is he in trouble?
TOENSING: Well, there's a hypothetical. I'd have to say yes. But what I would assume would happen is that that person would fall on his or her sword and say, I did it, no one else knew...
HANNITY: All right...
TOENSING: ... and I'm sorry and I'm leaving the White House.
HANNITY: ... hypothetically, if it was Rahm Emanuel, does he risk, you know, potential criminal charges?
SEKULOW: Absolutely. Absolutely.
TOENSING: Sure. I mean, anyone...
SEKULOW: Serious charges.
TOENSING: ... who did this risks criminal charges...
HANNITY: So Rahm...
TOENSING: ... because...
HANNITY: So Rahm -- so wait a minute. So Rahm Emanuel would risk going to jail to fall on the sword for the president.
TOENSING: Well...
(CROSSTALK)
SEKULOW: We can find that out pretty soon, Sean, because the reality is...
TOENSING: ... him out of jail.
SEKULOW: ... the statutes here have been violated.
HANNITY: Wow.
SEKULOW: Yes. Oh, it's a -- it's a one-year -- it's a one-year sentence for each charge. There's multiple charges. This is really serious. And somebody needs to be -- and the Department of Justice should be looking into it. They're not going to. It's now going to be the American people speaking out that's going to get the action...
TOENSING: Well, the press...
SEKULOW: ... here to force the hand.
TOENSING: The press is doing it because every time Joe Sestak does an interview, he's being asked about it, and they'll continue to do it now...
SEKULOW: Absolutely.
TOENSING: ... because it's reached that point.
HANNITY: We are -- will stay on this story here at "Hannity" because I think the public deserves an answer. Did they offer...
SEKULOW: You're right.
HANNITY: ... a position? What was offered to Sestak? Who offered it? And by whose authority? And what did the president know and when did he know it? And these questions, I agree with you, Jay and Victoria, will be answered in the days to come. Thanks for being with us.
TOENSING: Good to be here.
SEKULOW: Thanks for having us, Sean.