It’s a great idea, but I’m not sure I could sit through the obligatory shower scene.

On the other hand, the ocean gusher presents Obama’s own supporters as the ones most angry with him; for the first time, they are asking good questions and expressing discontent with his answers. His aloofness has violated their sense of passion with regards to the environment. This is a war of the gods: obama v gaia. And while the Sestak question is legal, technical, and unsensational, the effects of the ocean gusher are immediate, photographic and sensational.

“I think the president’s a pretty legitimate, you know, person,” he said.

But only by a few months.

I’m reminded of the time President Eisenhower was asked to say what leadership qualities Richard Nixon had — the man who had served as his vice-President for eight years, whom Eisenhower was then supporting in the race for the Presidency. Eisenhower replied, “If you give me a week, I’m sure I could think of something.” Talk about damning with faint praise!

Maybe the President was willing to offer Sestak a plum job in order to keep him out of the race. I doubt the President will ever look upon him that favorably again.

That is a job offer. Taken together: feeling out how serious Sestak is + Rahm has spoken about = job offer. That is a crime, and that conjunction of elements is directly admitted in the White House statement. According to the law in question, it doesn’t matter whether or not the job offer was direct or indirect.

That Bill Clinton was sent to speak with Sestak only adds heft to the weight of the evidence. The White House clearly wanted Sestak out of the race.

There’s probably little chance of an inquiry which goes beyond kabuki. However, if genuine inquiry somehow occurred, a delicious tension would exist between Rahm and Bill Clinton: one of them broke the law. Which? Each would want the other to go down. That would be SUCH a delicious skirmish. Too bad it will never happen. Someone should write a play which imagines the delicious legal skirmish between Rahm and Clinton did actually happen, and further resulted in skeletons being exposed in everyone’s closets. Ahhh. I would see this fairy tale for conservatives twice, and remember it forever.

One thing they don’t discuss in any detail is the subject matter jurisdiction question. The offer to Sestak sounds like a violation of federal law. I’ve never heard it mentioned as a violation of Pennsylvania law, which might limit the ability of Corbett to convene the grand jury. The article, however, claims that the doctrine of “universal jurisdiction” would overcome that apparent barrier. International law proponent Justice Kennedy would probably be receptive to the notion of “universal jurisdiction,” but I’m not sure how it would fly in a Pennsylvania court