Hesitance from Senate Dem leaders to condem or call for Menendez to resign is understandable

[bigtree]

...he hasn't been convicted of anything, and press accounts don't equal evidence or proof of guilt.

Look, Menendez could beat these charges. He hired attorney Abbe Lowell on Friday who's also representing Hunter Biden.

Stanley M. Brand, was one of four experts invited to testify before the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil Rights, and Civil Liberties on March 11 about the constitutional framework for Congress’ ability to uphold standards of member conduct. Brand’s testimony discussed the limits of the constitutional power of the House to expel and punish its members for misconduct and discussed several landmark Supreme Court cases interpreting that power.

BRAND:

As an old pal once told me, “even a thin pancake has two sides.”

Reading the criminal indictment in a case for the first time often produces a startled reaction to the government’s case. But as my over 40 years of experience defending public corruption cases and teaching criminal law have taught me, there are usually issues presented by an indictment that can be challenged by the defense.

First, while the indictment charges a conspiracy to commit bribery, it does not charge the substantive crime of bribery itself. This may suggest that the government lacks what it believes is direct evidence of a quid pro quo – “this for that” – between Menendez and the alleged bribers.

...the government must prove the defendants’ intent to carry out a corrupt agreement beyond a reasonable doubt – and juries sometimes want to see more than innuendo before convicting.

____The alleged failure of Menendez to list gifts, as required, on his Senate financial disclosure forms will be cited by prosecutors as evidence of “consciousness of guilt” – an attempt to conceal the transactions.

However, under a recent Supreme Court case involving former Gov. Bob McDonnell of Virginia for similar crimes, the definition of “official acts” under the bribery statute has been narrowly defined to mean only formal decisions or proceedings. That definition does not include less-formal actions like those performed by Menendez, such as meetings with Egyptian military officials.

The Supreme Court rejected an interpretation of official acts that included arranging meetings with state officials and hosting events at the governor’s mansion, or promoting a private businessman’s products at such events.

When it comes time for the judge to instruct the jury at the end of the trial, Menendez may well be able to argue that much of what he did in fact did not constitute “official acts” and therefore are not illegal under the bribery statute.

read more: https://news.yahoo.com/menendez-indictment-looks-bad-defenses-182450408.html

[Effete Snob]

1. Talk about myopic

What a bizarre take. As if the law were some kind of determinant of what is socially acceptable and what is not.

If Bob Menendez habitually picked his nose and wiped his boogers on escalator railings, then such behavior should be condemned, and whether it fits some definition of unlawful behavior is entirely beside the point.

You do not take cash and gold bars from foreign governments attempting to curry favor in the US, regardless of whether you perform an "official act" in the furtherance of that enterprise.

If one needs that explained to them, then they have no business holding an office of public trust.

The OP is an exercise in missing the point.

[bigtree]

3. the point is whether he should resign based on these charges

...he damn well shouldn't resign based on news articles.

Btw, he says he bought the gold with his own money, but I'm sure that won't stop people from convicting him on the news report that he got them from Egyptians.

I don't believe we have all of the facts straight.

[Effete Snob]

8. The indictment is not a "news report"

You aren't addressing the facts alleged in the indictment.

I realize most people don't read the underlying document, but your constant reference to "news reports" as if the indictment is a media product is simply misdirected. I don't know if you think you are being clever by ignoring the indictment in its entirety, but no sale.

Incidentally, the fact that a jury hung on what was previously shown in court does not make what we already know about him to be some kind of "news report" either.

Menendez is a corrupt slimeball who did not belong in the Senate long before theses charges came along.

I have believed he is a miserable shitbag for years, and the recent news certainly hasn't changed my mind on that.

[bigtree]

10. Wael Hana, who is linked to serial #s on the gold is an Egyptian American businessman in New Jersey.

...but you claim the gold came from a 'foreign government.'

No one does this prosecution of any favors by misrepresenting facts to make this look more salacious.

This indictment and reporting is peppered with images of gold bars, expensive dinners and piles of cash collected during the federal probe.

None of it has yet been proven to be from anything illegal or improper, but ooh, the look of it!

[Effete Snob]

11. Did you read the indictment?

I'm going to guess you didn't.

Wael Hana is among the defendants in what was a carnival of corruption going on in the Menendez family.

Yes, he bought the gold bars. That's IN the fucking indictment which I suggest you read before embarrassing yourself further.


but you claim the gold came from a 'foreign government.'

You know, lying about what I said doesn't do you any good when it is all written out. Why do you feel an apparent need to lie?









Yeah, she's a real expert in Islamic dietary law. Give me a fucking break...

"Wael Hana, who is linked to serial #s on the gold is an Egyptian American businessman"

The indictment is absolutely clear that the gold bars came from that corrupt fucker who got a golden monopoly ticket in exchange for facilitating, among other things, the disclosure of non-public US military information to Egypt by Menendez.

You really should at least read the indictment before showing up here with red herrings and lying about what I said.

[uponit7771]

13. Menendez was cleared last time, I'll wait. Even with TFG indictments aren't convictions no matter...

... how strong the evidence that comes out of their mouths.

[Effete Snob]

17. The jury hung

He wasn't "cleared".

[bigtree]

20. he wasn't convicted either. That jury voted 10-2 for aquittal

...but go on.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2023/09/22/bob-menendez-nj-sentor-indicted-charges-history/70930479007/

[Effete Snob]

21. Once again you are taking the reductionist approach of...

...anyone who hasn't committed a crime is involved in appropriate behavior.

His wife, a noted Sharia law scholar, got a do-nothing job with a company upon which Egypt conferred a Halal certification monopoly. When that, predictably, had a negative impact on US exports, her husband rushed to tell the USDA to back off.

I don't give a shit whether that's illegal. It's wrong. And if you don't understand that, then you have lost your moral compass.

[bigtree]

29. you've decided his guilt without one day of him defending himself in court

...you don't have any room for accusing someone of lacking a moral compass.

From what I've been taught, charges don't automatically equate with guilt. Making that leap is antithetical to the justice you claim to support, especially with such a complex case involving interpretations of laws which define acceptable conduct of Senators.

[Effete Snob]

30. Still missing the point

He does not have to be guilty of a crime to be unfit to be a US Senator.

I understand that there are people who are unable to understand that there is unacceptable behavior which may not even be illegal.

But I see you saying none of these things about Trump. Why is that?

[bigtree]

34. I might agree if the facts of his guilt were clearer

...but he hasn't even offered his complete defense.

Here you are plastering his guilt all over this page like you have some inside knowledge. You know virtually nothing but the prosecution charges. It's just awful to read these responses which have morphed into associating ME with those projections of wrongdoing that you've decided on your own to accept without reservation.

Just really something. What a trip. THIS kind of bias is what Menedez is up against. You're arguing adjacent to this that he wasn't absolved of charges by a jury hung 10-2 on an acquittal where prosecutors decided to END their prosecution of Menedez.

[Wonder Why]

53. We are talking about resignation. He is a millstone on the Democrats and Trump and his Maggots

use this to show Menendez is no better than they are so Trump deserves the right to fight until after the election any attempts to convict him. What has made Biden successful is his willingness to hold his team and our party to a higher level than those maggots.

He should resign. For the good of the country and the party. Otherwise, we look to be as sleazy as they are. If he were a Repug, we'd all be saying how bad more and more of them are and would be demanding his resignation.

[bigtree]

14. you want a discussion, don't come on with superior assumptions that only you know the facts

...everything you wrote is out of context with the actual charges in the indictment and just amounts to misinformation based on your own projection of Menedez's guilt.

But you think it's fine to bash me over the head with it like it's proven fact.

Like I said, Dem leaders can't credibly determine Menedez's guilt from these charges. They don't even actually charge bribery, just a conspiracy, likely because they don't have the complete evidence.

Let the Senator have his day in court before convicting him.

[Effete Snob]

19. I don't want a discussion from someone who is going to LIE about the discussion.

Are you just going to ignore what you said?

..but you claim the gold came from a 'foreign government.'

That's pretty rich, to lie about what I said and then tell me how to have a discussion.

No, Senators, do NOT need to take a backseat to the criminal justice system and thanks for answering my question - you have no idea what's in the indictment.

Senators, on their own, have the power to expel a Senator, and that's not derivative of what any court might find.

I guess you're that guy wondering if Trump really moved those boxes around or tried to influence the election in Georgia because a jury hasn't heard the evidence yet.

I don't want a conversation with someone who is going to simply lie like that and ignore it when called on it, no.

[bigtree]

22. you said he accepted gold and cash from a foreign goverment

...and you came onto this thread with a heaping of scorn for my opinion.

Don't play a victim now that you've been confronted with actual facts disputing what you've written here.

you:

"You do not take cash and gold bars from foreign governments attempting to curry favor in the US"

[Effete Snob]

23. Hana was working with the Egyptian government

[bigtree]

24. it's right there in your response

"You do not take cash and gold bars from foreign governments attempting to curry favor in the US"

[Effete Snob]

26. HANA was working with the Egyptian government

He did so on their behalf.

What's crazy is that you then come up with "an Egyptian businessman" who is "linked" to the gold bars.

No, the entire Egyptian parliament did not come to New Jersey. Hana was clearly working for the Egyptian government.

Generous guy. Just gives out gold bars?

[bigtree]

25. there's no evidence the money came from foreign sources

...Hana is an American citizen and the gold belonged to him.

[Effete Snob]

28. He just hands out gold bars, eh?

So, how did his gold end up at the house of the woman whom he hired for a no-show "job" in Islamic dietary law which happened to get an exclusive franchise with the Egyptian government right around the time that she walked into his life?

[bigtree]

32. a prosecution that engaged in this kind of talk would be run out of court

...but to you, it represents some kind of justice.

Bizarre.

[Effete Snob]

33. I am not a court

Again, your standard of fitness for office is "not convicted of anything".

I guess it is merely a matter of having different standards.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a procedural rule for how trials are conducted. It does not, and of course should not, be a rule to live by, because it is a piss poor one.

Menendez is a slimy corrupt son of a bitch.

I guess you also believe that Trump is a fine specimen of a human being, having not been convicted of anything.

[bigtree]

35. no, you're an outside observer who decided to agree with the prosecution

...without hearing the actual defense to the charges.

Basically just an echo of prosecutors.

[bigtree]

39. I defended him back then against those weak charges

...so did the hung jury which voted 10-2 to acquit, which then caused the prosecution to completely drop the case, declining to bring charges again.

But you're comfortable pronouncing him guilty. Weird.

[bigtree]

40. just saw your despicable personal attack

"I look forward to your valiant defenses of Trump"

I swear, you've revealed more about yourself than you've said anything resembling any truth about me.

[LonePirate]

2. The issue is they rushed to seek Franken's resignation with no indictment vs. no rush for Menendez.

[bigtree]

4. that involved Franken resigning himself, which he regrets

...no one could actually force him out, aside from running their mouths.

[dsc]

5. They could, and were apparently about to, take him off all his committees

which makes resignation all but inevitable.

[bigtree]

7. I doubt they have the votes for an expulsion

...only one Senator has ever faced such a vote for charges alone.

Sen. Harrison “Pete” Williams was indicted in the FBI Abscam sting operation from the late 1970s and early 1980s against members of Congress. Williams resigned in 1982 shortly before an expected expulsion vote.
https://theconversation.com/menendez-indictment-looks-bad-but-there-are-defenses-he-can-make-214225

...in this case, the facts are less clear, notwithstanding the salacious DOJ pics and the media response.

The committee removal is automatic with charges, part of the Dem committee rules.

[LonePirate]

16. Every R would vote for expulsion. That's 49. Just need 18 more.

[bigtree]

18. good luck to them with that

....glomming onto republican hypocrites virtue-signaling.

[W_HAMILTON]

52. Hopefully that's a sign they learned their lesson after that debacle.

And -- with the current Republican frontrunner promising to exact revenge on his political rivals by having his handpicked DOJ leaders go after Democrats -- it might be a good time to come up with a more sensible approach to situations like these rather than demanding immediate resignation upon indictment.

[The Mouth]

6. If he was a Republican, what would the same people say?

[bigtree]

9. in the first place, he isn't. Secondly, they wouldn't.

...thirdly, he deserves his day in court.

Press reports have conflated a rich guy's largess found in his home with criminality, following DOJ's display of it all like it was dirty money. It remains to be seen if DOJ can sell all that to a jury.

Brand is correct. Charges don't equal guilt, and these are complicated enough for there to be a defense which I think should be given the benefit of the doubt until proven otherwise.

It's because he's not a Trump republican that I can suspend belief of the validity of these charges until he's had a chance to defend himself in court.

[Mad_Machine76]

12. I have been seeing Twitter takes

critical of Democrats for NOT calling for Menendez's resignation. Whether or not that should happen I don't know but at least they're not out there acting like Trump and defending him, attacking the prosecutors, etc.

[bigtree]

15. it doesn't take much to not behave like Trump

...and still a far stretch to proclaim Menedez guilty on a quid pro quo conspiracy prosecutors can't full identify enough to just call it bribery.

[Wonder Why]

27. I see we have some peope on this site that believe just like Republicans. "Not if they're my party"

[Effete Snob]

31. Yep

[bigtree]

36. it's called innocent until proven guilty

...and if that involves giving more consideration to Democrats than to goddamned republicans, that is a consequence of the utter depravity of the republican party, of which there is no doubt and should be no disagreement here.

And fark off equating me to republicans for that.

[Effete Snob]

38. We're not a jury

People who think "innocent until proven guilty" is some generally applicable principle are severely misguided.

No, if someone comes up to you and punches you in the nose, you don't have to consider that person innocent of jack shit.

Menendez had no business leaning on the USDA to protect his wife's payola from a company that had an exclusive Halal franchise with the government of Egypt.

None.

It is no different from Trump calling the governor of Georgia to attempt to influence the election.

George Soros is not convicted of anything either.

[bigtree]

41. no you're just here to say he's guilty, using the prosecution charges

...to the exclusion of any defense in court from Menendez.

The value of that ill-informed opinion should be obvious.

[brooklynite]

45. How is accepting the case of the Biden DOJ "defaming" Menendez?

[brooklynite]

48. Last time I checked, this is a public thread in a public forum.

[bigtree]

50. is that supposed to be a revelation?

...nothing in that says anything about the propriety or efficacy of butting into a conversation you weren't privy to just to make such a false complaint.

Not being part of that conversation, not even reading through it, and focusing soley on your own projection just to ridicule me in this thread is literally the reason why you got it wrong.

[brooklynite]

51. I did indeed read your prior discourse...

...and only chose to opine when you claimed Menendez was being "defamed" by someone who had the temerity to disagree with you.

BTW: Sherrod Brown just called for Menendez to step down. I'm sure he'll be duly chastised.

[Takket]

57. Being proven guilty in a court of law in the bar for taking away someone's freedom

And locking them in prison. It isn’t and shouldn’t be the bar to expect someone to step aside and let someone else finish their term when faced with charges that shatter the faith of the voter. Menendez is facing a trial where he will literally be fighting to determine if he dies in prison and that should be the focus of his time and energy from here forward.

The people of NJ deserve a representative with no such Shadow looming over them. As does the USA

[The Mouth]

42. And some of use don't really give a crap what party someone belongs to

when it comes to probability of guilt or innocence, or whether an act is right or not.


If it's wrong for a Rep to do, it's wrong for a Democrat. If I would believe a Republican guilty given a set of known facts, then I'm going to consider a Democrat, or an independent, or a socialist exactly as likely to be guilty. Just because I believe in and support most of the agenda of the Democratic party doesn't mean I trust *anyone* in authority without good reason to.

I like, indeed love, the principles of our party; I don't think that we should give anyone any more benefit of the doubt with a [D] after their name than one with an [R]. This isn't a team sport it is about objective reality on one hand and the subjective perceptions of the electorate on the other.

[madville]

43. Let's see if the other three guys charged cut a deal

And testify against Menendez. If the prosecutors can get their testimony that could seal the deal. Some of the money and the envelopes it was in has their DNA on it, they can't deny they handled the cash.

[bigtree]

44. they tried that the last time

...ended up only convicting the other fellow associated with the charges.

It may be undeniable he recieved cash from the other defendants. Not as clear-cut what it was for, hence the 'conspiracy' charge instead of outright bribery.

[Demsrule86]

47. He should not resign...you think the GOP will seat a new Senator...dream on.

We need him until after the elections. Perhaps he won't run or will lose a primary. Time will tell...I think handing over the Senate to the GOP for more than a year would be huuuuge mistake.

[brooklynite]

49. Republicans have no voice in seating a newly appointed Senator.

But they do have an opportunity to win an otherwise safe Democratic seat in 2034 if Menendez insists on staying in office.

[Demsrule86]

54. He can be primaried...or resign at the end of his term or even announce now...

But too much is going down right now for us to be down a Senator for any amount of time. And you are probably right about them not being able to stop him from taking the seat (although I don't know if the GOP can maybe find a way). But they can keep a vacancy on a committee from being filled...so I say no. Let him stay for now. He has not been convicted.

[brooklynite]

55. Once Menendez announces that he'll step down (if he does)

Governor Murphy can announce a replacement to take office at the same time.

[moondust]

56. Sen. Whitehouse: Let justice work (basically).

Not calling for resignation yet. On with Nicolle today.