US Senator Menendez charged with bribery, steps down from Senate committee role

[CivilDiscourse]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/sen-bob-menendez-indicted-over-132641541.html

U.S. prosecutors on Friday charged powerful Senator Bob Menendez and his wife with taking bribes from three New Jersey businessmen, which could complicate Democrats' efforts to keep their slim majority in the U.S. Senate in next year's elections.

Menendez later stepped down temporarily from his role as chairman of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee until the case is resolved, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement, adding that Menendez had a right to due process.

The U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan said Menendez, 69, accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of cash and gold bars in exchange for using his power and influence as New Jersey's senior senator to benefit the government of Egypt and interfere with law enforcement probes into the businessmen.

© Copyright Original Source

It's not the first time he's been indicted on bribery charges. He managed to get a hung jury in 2017 after being indicted in 2015. Democrats were so concerned about the evidence of his corruption that major democrats in NJ (including the Governor) endorsed him in the primary (which he won 62% to 37%), and he won re-election with an 11 point margin.

[Cow Poke]

I'm sure it's only my imagination, but when it's a Republican, it seems it's always crystal clear it's a Republican, but when it's a Democrat, that's a bit more vague.

[Starlight]

Nice! Now do 200 more congresspeople.

[Cow Poke]

Nice! Now do 200 more congresspeople.

Why stop there - why not go for all 535?

[Starlight]

Why stop there - why not go for all 535?

Unfortunately country-destroying SCOTUS decisions by Republican appointed judges have made corruption legal in the US, so you can only get the politicians for corruption if they go excessively beyond the bounds.

While it's nice to hit the corruption around the edges with a case like this, systemically removing it from the US system seems impossible without replacing half of SCOTUS with Dem appointed judges.

[mossrose]

Why stop there - why not go for all 535?

And then add the president and his family.

[Diogenes]

Unfortunately country-destroying SCOTUS decisions by Republican appointed judges have made corruption legal in the US, so you can only get the politicians for corruption if they go excessively beyond the bounds.

What are these "country destroying" decisions that "have made corruption legal"?

While it's nice to hit the corruption around the edges with a case like this, systemically removing it from the US system seems impossible without replacing half of SCOTUS with Dem appointed judges.

[rogue06]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/sen-bob-menendez-indicted-over-132641541.html

U.S. prosecutors on Friday charged powerful Senator Bob Menendez and his wife with taking bribes from three New Jersey businessmen, which could complicate Democrats' efforts to keep their slim majority in the U.S. Senate in next year's elections.

Menendez later stepped down temporarily from his role as chairman of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee until the case is resolved, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement, adding that Menendez had a right to due process.

The U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan said Menendez, 69, accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of cash and gold bars in exchange for using his power and influence as New Jersey's senior senator to benefit the government of Egypt and interfere with law enforcement probes into the businessmen.

© Copyright Original Source

It's not the first time he's been indicted on bribery charges. He managed to get a hung jury in 2017 after being indicted in 2015. Democrats were so concerned about the evidence of his corruption that major democrats in NJ (including the Governor) endorsed him in the primary (which he won 62% to 37%), and he won re-election with an 11 point margin.

One of the issues is no-show do-nothing jobs used to funnel money. Sound familiar?

[rogue06]

Unfortunately country-destroying SCOTUS decisions by Republican appointed judges have made corruption legal in the US, so you can only get the politicians for corruption if they go excessively beyond the bounds.

While it's nice to hit the corruption around the edges with a case like this, systemically removing it from the US system seems impossible without replacing half of SCOTUS with Dem appointed judges.

Um, no. This sounds almost as asinine as when you insisted that the blood red state of New York is controlled by Republicans.

[Starlight]

Um, no. This sounds almost as asinine as when you insisted that the blood red state of New York is controlled by Republicans.

You're still bringing up your shame of wrongly trying to tell me that no, I couldn't possibly be right that the NY Senate was controlled by Republicans, because you'd heard it was a blue state.

Do you think you'll ever live down the embarrassment of me, a foreigner, knowing more about the politics of a US state than you?

[Starlight]

What are these "country destroying" decisions that "have made corruption legal"?

Buckley v. Valeo (1976), First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978), Citizens United vs FEC (2010), American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock (2012) and McCutcheon v. FEC (2015).

Their various rulings, amounting to saying that giving money to a politician is just an exercise of free speech rights, basically made corruption legal in a way that has destroyed America. It's the single biggest problem in US politics that corruption is absolutely rampant now because it's legal. All other issues are secondary because the politicians now just do whatever they're paid to do and democracy is somewhat of an irrelevant side-show to trick the populace that they still have a say.

Since most of these decisions were down party lines with Republican appointed justices voting for legalizing corruption and Dem appointed ones voting against it, there was some chance they could be reversed if the Dems got a SCOTUS majority and America saved, but that seems exceptionally unlikely now.

[Diogenes]

Buckley v. Valeo (1976), First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti (1978), Citizens United vs FEC (2010), American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock (2012) and McCutcheon v. FEC (2015).

Their various rulings, amounting to saying that giving money to a politician is just an exercise of free speech rights, basically made corruption legal in a way that has destroyed America.

I see you're backpedaling from "making corruption legal" to "basically made corruption legal".

It's the single biggest problem in US politics that corruption is absolutely rampant now because it's legal.

I would say congressional insider trading is more actual corruption than campaign funding. I would agree that is rampant.

All other issues are secondary because the politicians now just do whatever they're paid to do and democracy is somewhat of an irrelevant side-show to trick the populace that they still have a say.

Politicians at least have to appear to do what the populace wants as it's the populace that actually votes. If if sortition were implemented, you would just have an as hoc technocracy where the "experts" were consulted as nasuem by the those chosen by lots. That doesn't even address the effects of the bureaucratic class dominating those sorted.

Since most of these decisions were down party lines with Republican appointed justices voting for legalizing corruption and Dem appointed ones voting against it, there was some chance they could be reversed if the Dems got a SCOTUS majority and America saved, but that seems exceptionally unlikely now.

If all the politicians are corrupt, that would mean the Democrat ones are corrupt so you would still have corrupt individuals voting for SCOTUS justices. Why should corrupt Democrats be allowed to replace Republican. Of course, Democrats have no problem with taking money from unions (or corporations).

[Starlight]

I see you're backpedaling from "making corruption legal" to "basically made corruption legal".

Lol, I'm not backpedaling anything. Both statements are true and I endorse both.

I would say congressional insider trading is more actual corruption than campaign funding. I would agree that is rampant.

I'm not sure I have an opinion on which is worse. But yes, congressional insider trading is rampant and a serious problem.

Politicians at least have to appear to do what the populace wants as it's the populace that actually votes.

Not really, the billionaires can just pay a guy with a blue tie and a guy with a red tie to be their candidates and give the populace a "choice". One of the guys with a colored tie then gets elected and does the billionaire's bidding either way.

If if sortition were implemented, you would just have an as hoc technocracy where the "experts" were consulted as nasuem by the those chosen by lots. That doesn't even address the effects of the bureaucratic class dominating those sorted.

I can't say I understand your tangent here. Why are you rambling about sortition?

If all the politicians are corrupt, that would mean the Democrat ones are corrupt so you would still have corrupt individuals voting for SCOTUS justices. Why should corrupt Democrats be allowed to replace Republican.

I don't think I ever said all politicians are corrupt. The Dem party still has a few not corrupt ones, and even among the corrupt ones there still seems to be a bit of a will to improve the system away from the corruption.

[JimL]

Source: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/sen-bob-menendez-indicted-over-132641541.html

U.S. prosecutors on Friday charged powerful Senator Bob Menendez and his wife with taking bribes from three New Jersey businessmen, which could complicate Democrats' efforts to keep their slim majority in the U.S. Senate in next year's elections.

Menendez later stepped down temporarily from his role as chairman of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee until the case is resolved, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said in a statement, adding that Menendez had a right to due process.

The U.S. Attorney's office in Manhattan said Menendez, 69, accepted hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of cash and gold bars in exchange for using his power and influence as New Jersey's senior senator to benefit the government of Egypt and interfere with law enforcement probes into the businessmen.

© Copyright Original Source

It's not the first time he's been indicted on bribery charges. He managed to get a hung jury in 2017 after being indicted in 2015. Democrats were so concerned about the evidence of his corruption that major democrats in NJ (including the Governor) endorsed him in the primary (which he won 62% to 37%), and he won re-election with an 11 point margin.

Yeah, he's a crook, and the people of New Jersey knew he was a crook, but he wasnt found guilty and so they held their noses and voted for him because, Trump and the Republicans. But I don't think anyone is going to support his reelection bid after this one. Not only acrook, but must be an awfully stupid one as well. He luckily got away with it last time, and then starts right in again. He's got to be an idiot.

[Starlight]

Not only acrook, but must be an awfully stupid one as well. He luckily got away with it last time, and then starts right in again. He's got to be an idiot.

It's the same pattern I see with Trump: He's got away with his crimes for so many decades that he just can't understand the concept of being actually held accountable for them, so he just keeps doing them.

In a sense, it's not stupid, it's rational... if you've learned from personal experience that you can get away with your crimes, why would you expect a different outcome this time around? Menendez might get himself another hung jury and get away with it yet again. Worth risking if the literal gold bars keep pouring in.