Almost forgot that the Obama administration would also go after democrats that dared to voice opposition to its legacy policies.
Justice Drops the Menendez Hunt
Prosecutors finally admit they had a weak corruption case.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) looks on during a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 23. PHOTO: AARON BERNSTEIN/REUTERS
By
The Editorial Board
Feb. 2, 2018 7:15 p.m. ET
122 COMMENTS
The Justice Department showed some humility and wisdom this week by dropping corruption charges against New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez. This is an implicit recognition of Supreme Court holdings that being sleazy isn’t a crime.
Mr. Menendez was charged in 2015 with 14 counts of corruption and honest services fraud, a catchall prosecutors use to criminalize unseemly conduct. The timing of the indictment was suspicious coming amid the Senator’s criticism of the Obama Administration’s Iran nuclear deal, which compelled him to resign his ranking post on the Foreign Relations Committee.
The problem for prosecutors was that the Supreme Court substantially narrowed the bounds of political corruption in its landmark Skilling (2010) and McDonnell (2016) rulings. Prosecutors now must demonstrate a clear quid-pro-quo—that is, public officials exchanged something specific and tangible of value in return for an official act.
Justice marshaled evidence of political favors Mr. Menendez performed for his longtime friend Salomon Melgen, a Palm Beach doctor and Democratic Party donor who was convicted of Medicare fraud last year. The Senator supported visas for Melgen’s Brazilian girlfriends and lobbied Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to change a Medicare reimbursement policy. She refused. But prosecutors couldn’t distinguish Mr. Mendendez’s intercessions from constituent service or friendship.
Prosecutors also argued that Mr. Menendez in return received campaign contributions and access to the high life—private jet trips and luxurious vacations to the Dominican Republica. But they couldn’t prove a quid pro quo, since the two men had been friends for 25 years and Melgen donated to other Democratic politicians.
Ten of the 12 jurors in the case supported acquittal, resulting in a mistrial, and prosecutors at first vowed to retry the case. We’re glad they decided to walk away. Mr. Menendez will answer to voters this November.
Appeared in the February 3, 2018, print edition.
Justice Drops the Menendez Hunt
Prosecutors finally admit they had a weak corruption case.
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) looks on during a Senate Banking Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, Jan. 23. PHOTO: AARON BERNSTEIN/REUTERS
By
The Editorial Board
Feb. 2, 2018 7:15 p.m. ET
122 COMMENTS
The Justice Department showed some humility and wisdom this week by dropping corruption charges against New Jersey Senator Bob Menendez. This is an implicit recognition of Supreme Court holdings that being sleazy isn’t a crime.
Mr. Menendez was charged in 2015 with 14 counts of corruption and honest services fraud, a catchall prosecutors use to criminalize unseemly conduct. The timing of the indictment was suspicious coming amid the Senator’s criticism of the Obama Administration’s Iran nuclear deal, which compelled him to resign his ranking post on the Foreign Relations Committee.
The problem for prosecutors was that the Supreme Court substantially narrowed the bounds of political corruption in its landmark Skilling (2010) and McDonnell (2016) rulings. Prosecutors now must demonstrate a clear quid-pro-quo—that is, public officials exchanged something specific and tangible of value in return for an official act.
Justice marshaled evidence of political favors Mr. Menendez performed for his longtime friend Salomon Melgen, a Palm Beach doctor and Democratic Party donor who was convicted of Medicare fraud last year. The Senator supported visas for Melgen’s Brazilian girlfriends and lobbied Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius to change a Medicare reimbursement policy. She refused. But prosecutors couldn’t distinguish Mr. Mendendez’s intercessions from constituent service or friendship.
Prosecutors also argued that Mr. Menendez in return received campaign contributions and access to the high life—private jet trips and luxurious vacations to the Dominican Republica. But they couldn’t prove a quid pro quo, since the two men had been friends for 25 years and Melgen donated to other Democratic politicians.
Ten of the 12 jurors in the case supported acquittal, resulting in a mistrial, and prosecutors at first vowed to retry the case. We’re glad they decided to walk away. Mr. Menendez will answer to voters this November.
Appeared in the February 3, 2018, print edition.
