If you’re new here, hello and welcome. I am a longtime government and law teacher.
If you’re not new here, then you know how I feel about bad behavior from those in power.
And this most certainly applies to elected officials taking bribes from foreign governments – something that is incredibly easy *not* to do.
Allow me to demonstrate: a representative of a foreign government asks if you want to have lunch in an Italian restaurant in New Jersey. You have two options: say yes or say no.
If you say no, congratulations, you have successfully not taken a bribe from a foreign government.
But let’s say you agree to meet this person. When you arrive at the restaurant and are done exchanging pleasantries, the conversation shifts into talk of “I might be able to buy your wife a luxury car…” all you have to say is, “Thanks anyway, I’m all set for transportation.” And then you pay the bill and you walk out of the restaurant, and again, congratulations, you’re the winner, you did not take a bribe from a foreign government.
I’m not asking for much here, really.
But it’s become quite obvious that some grown adults still haven’t learned how to complete the very, very uncomplicated task of saying “no.”
Over the last year, politician after politician have been credibly accused of taking bribes or illegally using funds.
I’m sure former Republican Congressman George Santos probably pops into your mind. He is still facing more than 20 criminal counts including conspiracy, wire fraud, false statements, identity theft, falsification of records, and credit card fraud.
The House Ethics Committee investigation found “a complex web of unlawful activity involving Representative Santos' campaign, personal, and business finances” along with “substantial” evidence of criminal wrongdoing in the felony charges he’s facing.
It says he used campaign funds for things like Botox, Sephora, OnlyFans, and a purchase at Hermes.
And while he’s awaiting trial and facing jail time, he’s no longer a sitting member of Congress. Because some members of the House of Representatives mustered the courage to do the right thing. Not all of them, mind you. One hundred people thought it was fine if he stayed. But enough said, “Dude, what the eff?” and they voted to kick him out. He was only the 6th person ever to be expelled by the House.
And unfortunately, Santos isn’t the only person accused of wrongdoing in the House. Democratic Representative Henry Cuellar was recently indicted on federal charges of bribery, conspiracy and money laundering.
The House didn’t wait around, because their rules state an Ethics Committee must investigate within 30 days of a member’s indictment. I don’t know what the future holds with Cuellar, but I do know that he should resign.
Which brings me to the real question I have today. Why is Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, who is on trial for very serious charges, still able to walk into his office in Washington every day, read classified documents, and cash his paychecks paid for by you?
Menendez is facing 18 criminal charges including bribery and fraud. Prosecutors say he was given gold bars, wads of cash (like hundreds of thousands of dollars, some of it was found stuffed into boots, and other pieces of clothing), and a luxury car, in exchange for helping associates get lucrative business deals.
He’s also accused of acting as a foreign agent while leading the Senate Foreign Relations Committee as chairman. So the person in charge of one of the most powerful committees in the Senate, a person who had access to highly classified data, was using his power and influence to conspire to help a foreign government, and getting paid handsomely for doing it.
On the other side of the Capitol, the Senate has done nothing, and I do mean NO. THINGS. about Bob Menendez other than forcing him to step down as chair for the Foreign Relations Committee. (Their rules say anyone charged with a felony must do so.) Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has called the charges against Menendez “serious” but hasn’t called on him to resign, though some other Democratic and Republican senators have.
In fact, there hasn’t even been a formal investigation that we know of. That’s because the Senate doesn’t work the same way as the House when it comes to ethics investigations. It’s much more secretive, doing its work in private. Even though it can recommend disciplinary action, it almost never does.
The process goes something like this: A complaint is made against a senator. The committee holds a preliminary inquiry. The committee decides what to do next. Each year the committee releases a report outlining the “work” they did in the previous year.
The most recent report showed the Senate Ethics Committee received 145 complaints in 2023 and conducted 19 investigations, 12 of which were dismissed. Only one violation was found, and no reports were published. The ethics report from the House on George Santos was more than 1,000 pages, by the way.
The one violation was against Lindsey Graham, who received a “Public Letter of Admonition” for asking for campaign donations while talking with the media. It’s against the rules for a politician to do that when working in their official capacity as a senator.
A public letter of admonition! Oh no! I’m sure Lindsey Graham went home and cried for days after receiving such a letter. That’s like a mom wagging her finger at a kid who misbehaves. It changes nothing.
The committee also formally admonished Menendez in 2018 following a mistrial in a different federal corruption case against him. Clearly this public shaming did nothing to convince him he needed to straighten up. (Oh yes, did you think this was the first time Menendez has ever been indicted? Sadly, no.)
It’s not that there aren’t ethics rules in the Senate. There’s a manual!
The word bribe (or bribery) appears 25 times in that document.
In fact, the section on bribery says there will be punishment for anyone who ‘‘directly or indirectly, corruptly asks, demands, exacts, solicits, seeks, accepts, receives, or agrees to receive anything of value for himself or for any other person or entity, in return for… being influenced in his performance of any official act.’’
Why doesn’t the Senate do more to keep its members in line?
Here is the entirety of Chuck Schumers’s statement on Bob Menendez:
Sure, yeah, Menendez, and all Americans, have the right to due process and a fair trial. No disputes there.
But where they have the right to due process and a fair trial is in a court of law.
We can all agree that if a teacher is accused of molesting a student, they have the right to due process and a fair trial, but they should not remain in the classroom while the due process plays out. You don’t have a constitutional right to work with children.
We can all agree that if a doctor is accused of carving their initials into a patient’s uterus while performing surgery on them (yes, that really happened), they are entitled to due process and a fair trial. In a court of law. But they should not keep operating on people in the meantime. You have no constitutional right to perform surgery.
And the same principle is true here: Menendez, Cuellar, and Santos all have the right to due process and a fair trial in a court of law. They have no constitutional right to serve in Congress.
Serving in Congress is the highest privilege. Access to America’s secrets is a position of incredible public trust, and even the appearance of impropriety must be avoided.
Menendez and Cuellar should step down. But absent that, they should be removed. Chuck Schumer needs to remember that history is going to smile more kindly on a legacy of transparency and integrity than it is on protecting a voting majority. There is no excuse for the lack of any discernible action on the part of the Senate in regards to Bob Menendez.
I’d love to know: if you lived in New Jersey, would you want to be represented by Menendez? If you actually do live in New Jersey, do you think he should resign? Tell me in the subscriber comments here!