Question by justgetitright: Were the job offers from the Bush administration illegal ?
Since Obama has been accused of wrong doing, many point to job offers made by the Bush White House as being the same.
Bush did in fact offer Sen. Benson a job as Secretary of Agriculture, Benson is a democrat and the offer was made to allow the governor of Nebraska to appoint Bensons replacement.
Bush also offered Representative Gillman a position to keep him from running. Was this different from the offers made by the Obama White House?
The Obama White House said that there was no wrong doing, if that is the case why is Eric Holder so adamant against the republicans concerning an independent investigation.
The actions of both administrations are similar in nature, why would one be legal and one illegal.
Your thoughts
** other than Bush did it it is illegal **
@easyee888
Come back later, perhaps you will understand.
@RLP
Which actions are you referring to? Holders dismissal of the request made by the Republicans ?
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100605/ap_on_el_se/us_republicans_political_deals
@RLP – update
Here is a link to the law that would apply to both cases.
http://law.onecle.com/uscode/18/600.html
Here is the text of USC 18 ยง 600
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.
Note this section of the law:
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
It should be obvious that when Bush offered a job to Benson he was not participating in an election.
Gillman was “contemplating” running in a different district but had not yet entered the contest.
What Bush did was Legal
What Obama did was a violation and an investigation should be done. It is obvious that Bill Clinton may be guilty, based only on the “Whoever, directly or indirectly” though it is not clear if he had full authority to offer the position.
Best answer:
Answer by eazyee888
Still talking about Bush huh….you don’t say! LOL
May want to come up with something better than a child could come up with…..”he did it, then so can I” LOL…..its all illegal no matter who did it, put Bush and Obama in the same cell then.
Know better? Leave your own answer in the comments!

Welcome to AgroLeads.com. 


11 Responses
He’s been accused by lying Rep/Cons. There’s nothing of substance. Where’s your source for the actions AND the law?
_________
The source for what was “actually” illegal and the law that says it’s illegal. All that link basically states is that Holder’s not going to appoint a special prosecutor.
If the White House violated the law, there should be prosecutions. There’s no evidence a law was violated.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 4:07 am
no not any more so then Obama’s it is a normal political practice
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 4:48 am
Yes, so are Obama’s.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 5:04 am
The Benson offer definitely wasn’t but the Gillman offer may have been. I don’t remember the details about that one..
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 5:42 am
Two wrongs do not make a right. Obama is in office. He needs to step down and some people need to go to jail.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 6:28 am
i always lol when the obama regimes actions are justified by GWB’s actions when those of your
ilk whined for 8 years over his actions!!!
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 6:36 am
Don’t you just LOVE the out-of-control double standard thing? I can’t figure out if the people bitching about Obama are really THAT stupid, or if they’re really THAT lacking in recalling the past. In either case, they’re pretty pathetic.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 6:55 am
I am amazed that someone would in one breath blame Bush for everything bad that has happened in the last 50 years and in another breath claim that they can do something because Bush did it. Isn’t that a bit contradictory?
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 6:59 am
Simple. It is illegal to interfere with an election.
The two Bush examples you cited had nothing to do with an in-progress election.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 7:05 am
Bush is no longer president! But we sure got a social(ist) worker for President! So what does bringing George W. Bush’s name up? The prasident can name to whatever who, but in some cases, a senate hearing is required for approval.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 8:05 am
Back room or right out front! The Brown act also comes into play.They can’t even get past the Blogo affair with openness. It’s apparent to all thinking, reasoning individuals that This Administration of the Law is CORRUPT to it’s CORE and don’t want any more pay off to Congress Persons for Votes.Vote out ALL Incumbents in NOV.
Posted on March 8th, 2011 at 8:31 am
Add A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.