When visiting Shrewd'm with a laptop, it can be pleasant to hold Command (or Ctrl with Windows) and '+' a few times. The site scales to allow any font size, and the larger font can be pleasant to read even for Shrewds with perfect sight! For luxury Shrewdness, you can combine that with setting the browser to full screen. You'll then find yourself Shrewding a lot.
- Manlobbi
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy❤
No. of Recommendations: 2
'Sen. Bob Menendez indicted over gifts of gold bars, car, apartment'
Snip
'A federal grand jury in New York has returned a sweeping indictment against United States Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., chairman of the powerful Foreign Relations Committee.
The investigation focused on a luxury car, gold bars and an apartment allegedly received by Menendez and his wife, Nadine Arslanian. His wife was also indicted.
The indictment charges Menendez, 69, and his wife with having a corrupt relationship with three New Jersey businessmen -- Wael Hana, Jose Uribe and Fred Daides.'
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sen-bob-menendez-i...Oh well, the left doesn't care....He is a democrat.
No. of Recommendations: 9
No, LM. Unlike the Republicans who refuse to abandon the very WORST politicians in their party, Dems don't. Glad he's getting what he deserves.
WHEN will you ever let go of our most corrupt and incompetent POTUS EVER! Trump is your golden man-boy.
No. of Recommendations: 16
He needs to resign. Immediately. Full stop. Do not pass GO. Get Out.
The only thing more frustrating about this is that he SHOULD have been convicted roughly six years ago for very similar corrption charges. He was indicted in 2015 by the DOJ (during a Democratic administration, mind you) on charges of bribery, fraud and making false statements. It went to trial in 2017 but the judge declared a mis-trial after the jury was unable to reach a verdict on any of the charges. The DOJ at that time (during a Republican administration, mind you) declined to retry the case. As Wikipedia indicates, that is possibly due to the fact that another Supreme Court decision in 2016 made raised the bar substantially for prosecutors to prove charges of bribery of a public official. That case was McDonnell vs United States, involving one-time Virgina Governor Bob McDonnell. McDonnell (a Republican, mind you) was indicted, tried and convicted in 2015 on multiple accounts of taking gifts from a Virgina businessman but appealed to the Supreme Court which, in mid 2016, tossed his conviction UNANIMOUSLY, at which point the DOJ declined to re-try. Keep in mind, this is the same Supreme Court whose track record for integrity has been utterly destroyed with MULTIPLE cases of MULTIPLE justices enjoying hundreds of thousands of UNDISCLOSED dollars in gifts, luxury travel or indirect income from parties with obvious business before the court.
WTH
No. of Recommendations: 12
For those keeping score @home...
Hillary Clinton: 0 felony counts
Joe Biden: 0 felony counts
Dr. Fauci: 0 felony counts
Barack Obama: 0 felony counts, but did get millions of Americans healthcare coverage and won a Nobel Peace Prize!
Donald Trump: 2 divorces, 4 bankruptcies, 1 Draft Dodge (Vietnam), 1 Rape (-$5 Million and counting), 1 Insurrection attempt and 78 FELONY COUNTS, so far.
Since 1968 Democrat Admins have had 3 criminal indictments, 1 conviction, 1 prison sentence.
Since 1968 Republican Admins Have had 120 criminal indictments, 89 convictions, 34 prison sentences. Wow!
"Once you start down the dark path, forever will it dominate your destiny. Consume you, it will." ~Yoda
No. of Recommendations: 3
A federal grand jury indictment is a serious thing, and I am confident in the U.S. Justice system. Bags of cash are a bad sign and need to be explained. And there are plenty of other questionable actions. The courts will sort this out. U.S. public officials should be careful when accepting anything of value. Part of the job should be avoiding suspicious acts. Suspicious actions should be investigated. I support more funding for FBI anti-corruption investigations and IRS tax cheat investigations. U.S. public officials will often be held accountable by both voters and the U.S. Justice system.
==== links ====
Sen. Menendez, wife indicted on bribe charges as probe finds $100,000 in gold bars, prosecutors say
https://apnews.com/article/senator-menendez-indict...COUNT ONE (Conspiracy to Commit Bribery) (As to All Defendants) in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 201(b)(1)(A) and (C) and (b)(2)(A) and (C).
https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23989449/me..."The first offense, codified in section 201(b), prohibits the giving or accepting of anything of value to or by a public official, if the thing is given "with intent to influence" an official act, or if it is received by the official "in return for being influenced.""
https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resou...Sen. Whitehouse: 'Very possible illegal conduct' in billionaires' SCOTUS gifts
https://www.msnbc.com/the-last-word/watch/sen-whit...
No. of Recommendations: 6
He needs to resign. Immediately. Full stop. Do not pass GO. Get Out.
The only thing more frustrating about this is that he SHOULD have been convicted roughly six years ago for very similar corruption charges.
It's perhaps worth mentioning that back then, New Jersey had a Republican governor. Now it has a Democratic governor.
There will be very different pressures on Menendez today than there were back then.
No. of Recommendations: 12
It's perhaps worth mentioning that back then, New Jersey had a Republican governor. Now it has a Democratic governor.
There will be very different pressures on Menendez today than there were back then.
Hadn't thought of that. That's another sign of how corrupt this entire system has become.
Assuming Menendez at the time wanted to stay, did the Republican Governor find it preferable to allow a corrupt Democrat to twist in the wind to taint the wider Democratic Party? Or did the Democratic Party NOT push Menendez to resign knowing that a Republican could appoint a Republican to fill the vacancy? Could be both.
Meanwhile, we sit with a House paralyzed to pass any legislation or finalize a budget, threating benefits to American citizens and national security by delaying / jeopoardizing decisions on military aid to Ukraine. And while the House does nothing, the Senate has failed to process nominations for 300+ military promotions, because ONE Republican Senator with the IQ of a college football coach is objecting to a procedure that allows all confirmations to be approved en masse. And Democrats in the Senate, wanting to make a point of THAT level of instrangency and obstruction are essentially rewarding it under the claim that reviewing appointments individually would take up too much of the Senate's precious time... Precious time they could be spending passing legislation that STILL won't become law because the House cannot pass ANY legislation. Precious time they could be spending haggling over dress code issues cuz one Democratic Senator wants to wear shorts and hoodies. (***)
We are living in dangerous times and these are the issues occupying our so-called leaders.
WTH
*** For the record, shorts and hoodies in ANY government setting is inappropriate attire. Clearly, Fetterman has some other "neuro-atypical" issues with clothing that predate his stroke and post-stroke recovery. If he was bringing to the Senate unique, insightful solutions that only an "outside-the-box" thinker would be willing to state that were being taken up in debate and moving the government off dead-center towards solutions -- in ANYTHING -- I would have no problem with his attire. To m knowledge, he has NOT brought that kind of "out-of-box" thinking to the floor or in any committee. And dressing like you're on after-school pickup duty for the kids is not "out-of-the-box." I think there's some value in putting on adult clothes before showing up for work in the US government. Maybe doing so provides an internal reminder each time that you're not just stepping up to the mic at a PTA meeting, you're voting on issues costing trillions of dollars and affecting billions of lives -- not just those in the US.
No. of Recommendations: 5
We are living in dangerous times and these are the issues occupying our so-called leaders.
"Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard."
Tuberville is doing what he's doing because the people in his state care a lot about fighting abortion. The Democratic Senate is doing what they're doing because the people in their states care a lot about preserving access to abortion. Matt Gaetz is doing what he's doing because his constituents want someone that will "fight" for what their small subset of the electorate thinks the U.S. government should be. Etc.
As for Menendez, it's certainly easier to take a hard moral stand and demand a fellow member of your party resign if you know your party will name the replacement. It's a lot tougher to hand the other party a Senate seat, and the advantages of incumbency in the next election. But now that the Democrats hold the governor's mansion, they're going to be a little more comfortable talking to him about stepping aside.
The timing is different, too. The prior indictments were handed down in April 2015, two and a half years before the 2018 election, and the trial was over well before the primaries. That won't happen this year - the primary is on June 4, and his trial won't even start before then. He'll likely draw a primary challenger, simply because the party has very good reasons for not wanting to have a nominee that might be convicted between the primary and the election....and the Democrats literally cannot afford to lose the NJ Senate seat. Menendez' indictment will make recruiting a Republican opponent the easiest lift in the world - there's no way any quality candidate would pass on throwing their hat in against either Menendez or someone different (save maybe for Chris Smith).
No. of Recommendations: 8
Best Comment:
Xeorge Xonway @gtconway3d
Menendez needs to switch parties. The other party would let him have at least two more indictments.
No. of Recommendations: 3
Why is it illegal for a public servant to accept a bribe, but never do we see prosecution of the perpetrators who offer the bribe.
