The Sestak story smells enough to require a grand jury

http://tinyurl.com/33ma8ph
****The Sestak story ( that the White House offered him something of value to quit the Senate primary race ), repeated by Sestak many times until yesterday, is at variance with both the long-continued stonewalling of the subject by Press Secretary Gibbs and the diversionary remark by President Obama that his administration would issue a formal explanation "shortly" and the formal explanation itself, issued during the usual news blackout of the runup to the Memorial Day Weekend.
FoxNews, however, didn't go on vacation as expected and convened a special broadcast to analyze and to keep the issue alive through the weekend.
The WH counsel's story, as of yesterday, is that Rahm Emanuel asked President Clinton to approach Rep. Sestak with an offer of an "unpaid advisory position on some panel or other", which he could keep while staying a Representative, if he would quit the primary race against Senator Specter. Clinton was called to the White House before the "report" was issued and Rep. Sestak's brother (and campaign manager) was called on his cellphone before, as well. One might, cynically, presume that these were efforts to coordinate stories.
Sestake had, at the time of the first putative approach, already campaigned throughout Pennsylvania, a large state, was an obvious and qualified candidate for the Senate, and would --one would think--require more incentive than an unpaid part-time post as a member of some advisory panel, to quit a Senate race to which he had already devoted considerable time and resources. If, indeed, that was all he was offered, his even mentioning the matter several times would seem to be a blot on his character, claiming far more than actually happened. Moreoever, he had conceded it was a "job" and indicated it was at a "high level." All his mentions are at variance with the modest "offer" described as having been communicated by President Clinton, as well as with the necessity to ring in an ex-President to make the offer.
The lawyer's "report" mentions several communications ( plural ) and one might reasonably expect that this very modest offer was, even if accurately described, a "first offer." The report is ambiguous as to whether there were other offers. it being reasonable to think that Sestak was referring to another (or other) offer(s.)
Even so, it would seem that the admitted offer, however modest, still violated perhaps three Federal Laws including the Hatch Act since it was an "offer, direct or indirect of something of value" to influence a Federal election ( which is, nevertheless, controlled by the states.)
Clinton, being queried about this subsequent to the report and his visit to the White House, brushed off questions. Sestak ambiguously verified the story without gainsaying that there was more. Holder's Justice Department will clearly not convene an investigation requiring the parties to testify under oath ( no one will really fall on his sword and go to jail to protect the President -- whose loyalty-lack himself is well-known-- if it means perjury and possibly going to prison.)It is, therefore, important either for public opinion to force the matter or for one of the AGs of the states involved ( Pennsylvania or Virginia ) to investigate further.
The story just doesn't make sense and it smells of coverup of a very clumsy and stupid sort. If the American public lets these guys get away with this ( and it was replicated in Colorado and in Illinois, where Blagojivich is set to go to trial ), the electorate deserves what it got and is getting in Barack Obama and the thugs from Chicago.****