Day: September 30, 2023
Further reading
On our other sites

-
Sep 27th, 2023
-
by Gwendolyn Whidden, Katherine Fang and Clara Apt
Sep 27th, 2023
-
Sep 26th, 2023
-
Sep 25th, 2023
-
by Tess Bridgeman, Ryan Goodman and Megan Corrarino
Sep 22nd, 2023
-
by Norman L. Eisen, Ryan Goodman, Siven Watt, Samara Angel and Beth Markman
Sep 19th, 2023
-
by Brian Finucane and Heather Brandon-Smith
Sep 18th, 2023
-
by Norman L. Eisen and Tom Joscelyn
Sep 15th, 2023
-
Sep 15th, 2023
-
by Jordan Street and Ilya Jones
Sep 14th, 2023
-
by Clara Apt
Sep 13th, 2023
-
Sep 12th, 2023
-
Sep 11th, 2023
-
Sep 11th, 2023
-
by Jane McAdam
Sep 5th, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman, Justin Hendrix and Norman L. Eisen
Sep 1st, 2023
-
by Morgan Moon and Jon Lewis
Sep 1st, 2023
-
Aug 31st, 2023
-
by Patrick C. Toomey, Sarah Taitz and Kia Hamadanchy
Aug 30th, 2023
-
Aug 28th, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman, Norman L. Eisen, Siven Watt, Allison Rice, Francois Barrilleaux, Beth Markman and Michael Nevett
Aug 25th, 2023
-
by Faiza Patel and Harsha Panduranga
Aug 25th, 2023
-
Aug 24th, 2023
-
Aug 22nd, 2023
-
Aug 21st, 2023
-
Aug 21st, 2023
-
Aug 18th, 2023
-
by Norman L. Eisen, Joshua Kolb, Joshua Stanton, Andrew Warren and Siven Watt
Aug 16th, 2023
-
Aug 16th, 2023
-
Aug 15th, 2023
-
Aug 15th, 2023
-
Aug 14th, 2023
-
Aug 9th, 2023
-
by Owiso Owiso and Sharon Nakandha
Aug 9th, 2023
-
Aug 8th, 2023
-
by Erin Sikorsky and Admiral Sam Locklear (Ret.)
Aug 8th, 2023
-
Aug 7th, 2023
-
by Tom Joscelyn
Aug 3rd, 2023
-
Jul 31st, 2023
-
by Tess Bridgeman and Ryan Goodman
Jul 31st, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman and Andrew Weissmann
Jul 30th, 2023
-
Jul 28th, 2023
-
Jul 28th, 2023
-
Jul 27th, 2023
-
by Chiara Giorgetti and Patrick Pearsall
Jul 27th, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman
Jul 27th, 2023
-
by George Croner and James Petrila
Jul 26th, 2023
-
by Faiza Patel and Ivey Dyson
Jul 26th, 2023
-
by Mark Nevitt
Jul 25th, 2023
-
Jul 24th, 2023
-
Jul 24th, 2023
-
Jul 20th, 2023
-
by Chinmayi Sharma and John Speed Meyers
Jul 18th, 2023
-
by Dick Durbin
Jul 17th, 2023
-
by Norman L. Eisen, Noah Bookbinder, Donald Ayer, Joshua Stanton, E. Danya Perry, Debra Perlin, Kayvan Farchadi and Jason Powell
Jul 13th, 2023
-
by Adam Keith
Jul 12th, 2023
-
Jul 11th, 2023
-
by Justin Bassi, Maeve Ryan and Lisa Curtis
Jul 10th, 2023
-
Jul 7th, 2023
-
Jul 7th, 2023
-
Jul 5th, 2023
-
by Michael Depp
Jun 30th, 2023
-
Jun 29th, 2023
-
Jun 29th, 2023
-
by Heidi Urben and Peter Feaver
Jun 28th, 2023
-
Jun 27th, 2023
-
Jun 26th, 2023
-
by Annie Shiel and Priyanka Motaparthy
Jun 23rd, 2023
-
by Alexa Koenig
Jun 22nd, 2023
-
Jun 20th, 2023
-
Jun 20th, 2023
-
Jun 20th, 2023
-
Jun 16th, 2023
-
by Rachel VanLandingham, Lt Col, USAF (Ret.)
Jun 16th, 2023
-
by Michael Meeropol and Robert Meeropol
Jun 16th, 2023
-
by Lauren Cochran and Rebecca Brocato
Jun 15th, 2023
-
Jun 15th, 2023
-
by James Kraska
Jun 14th, 2023
-
Jun 13th, 2023
-
by Gleb Bogush and Sergey Vasiliev
Jun 12th, 2023
-
by Jesse Marks and Hardin Lang
Jun 12th, 2023
-
by Tess Bridgeman and Brianna Rosen
Jun 10th, 2023
-
Jun 9th, 2023
-
Jun 8th, 2023
-
Jun 8th, 2023
-
by Tess Graham
Jun 6th, 2023
-
by Andrew Weissmann, Ryan Goodman, Joyce Vance, Norman L. Eisen, Fred Wertheimer, Siven Watt, E. Danya Perry, Joshua Stanton and Joshua Kolb
Jun 2nd, 2023
-
by Dr. Gabija Grigaitė-Daugirdė
Jun 1st, 2023
-
by Scott Paul
May 25th, 2023
-
May 25th, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman
May 22nd, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman
May 22nd, 2023
-
by Ikechukwu Uzoma and Mooya Nyaundi
May 18th, 2023
-
by Patrick Quirk and Santiago Stocker
May 17th, 2023
-
by Tom Joscelyn, Norman L. Eisen and Fred Wertheimer
May 12th, 2023
-
May 10th, 2023
-
by Ryan Goodman and Norman L. Eisen
May 9th, 2023
-
by Faiza Patel and Charles Kurzman
May 8th, 2023
-
by Paras Shah, Tiffany Chang, Michelle Eigenheer and Clara Apt
May 4th, 2023
-
May 4th, 2023
-
Jul 17th, 2023
-
May 9th, 2023
-
by Paul R. Williams, Milena Sterio, Yvonne Dutton, Alexandra Koch, Lilian Waldock, Floriane Lavaud, Ashika Singh and Isabelle Glimcher
Feb 13th, 2023
-
by Eileen B. Hershenov and Ryan B. Greer
Jan 26th, 2023
-
by Ambassador Peter Mulrean (ret.) and William J. Hawk
Jan 4th, 2023
-
by Clara Apt and Katherine Fang
Nov 18th, 2022
-
Oct 10th, 2022
-
Oct 25th, 2022
-
Sep 20th, 2022
-
by Tess Bridgeman and Brianna Rosen
Mar 24th, 2022
-
by Nasir A. Andisha and Marzia Marastoni
Aug 15th, 2022
-
Feb 18th, 2022
-
Jan 24th, 2022
-
by Emily Berman, Tess Bridgeman, Megan Corrarino, Ryan Goodman and Dakota S. Rudesill
Jan 20th, 2022
-
by Laura Brawley, Antara Joardar and Madhu Narasimhan
Oct 29th, 2021
-
Sep 13th, 2021
-
by Tess Bridgeman, Rachel Goldbrenner and Ryan Goodman
Sep 7th, 2021
-
Jul 19th, 2021
-
by Kate Brannen
Jun 30th, 2021
-
by Fionnuala Ní Aoláin and Kate Brannen
Jun 14th, 2021
-
by Steven J. Barela and Mark Fallon
Jun 1st, 2021
-
May 29th, 2021
-
Feb 1st, 2021
-
by Beth Van Schaack and Chris Moxley
Nov 16th, 2020
-
by Erik Dahl
Jun 7th, 2022
-
by Justin Hendrix, Nicholas Tonckens and Sruthi Venkatachalam
Aug 29th, 2021
-
by Ryan Goodman and Juilee Shivalkar
Aug 8th, 2021
-
by Kate Brannen and Ryan Goodman
May 11th, 2021
-
Feb 10th, 2021
-
by Ryan Goodman, Mari Dugas and Nicholas Tonckens
Jan 11th, 2021
-
by Ryan Goodman and Danielle Schulkin
Nov 3rd, 2020
-
Aug 24th, 2020
-
by Ryan Goodman and Danielle Schulkin
Jul 27th, 2020
-
by Ryan Goodman and Julia Brooks
Mar 11th, 2020
Reactions came quickly to the federal indictment on Sept. 22, 2023, of New Jersey’s senior U.S. senator, Democrat Bob Menendez. New Jersey Gov. Phil Murphy joined other state Democrats in urging Menendez to resign, saying, “The alleged facts are so serious that they compromise the ability of Senator Menendez to effectively represent the people of our state.”
The indictment charged Menendez, “his wife NADINE MENENDEZ, a/k/a ‘Nadine Arslanian,’ and three New Jersey businessmen, WAEL HANA, a/k/a ‘Will Hana,’ JOSE URIBE, and FRED DAIBES, with participating in a years-long bribery scheme … in exchange for MENENDEZ’s agreement to use his official position to protect and enrich them and to benefit the Government of Egypt.” Menendez said he believed the case would be “successfully resolved once all of the facts are presented,” but he stepped down temporarily as chairman of the Senate’s influential Committee on Foreign Relations.
The Conversation’s senior politics and democracy editor, Naomi Schalit, interviewed longtime Washington lawyer and Penn State Dickinson Law professor Stanley M. Brand, who has served as general counsel for the House of Representatives and is a prominent white-collar defense attorney, and asked him to explain the indictment – and the outlook for Menendez both legally and politically.
What did you think when you first read this indictment?
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.
In addition, as judges routinely instruct juries in these cases, the indictment is not evidence and the jury may not rely on it to draw any conclusions.
Prosecutors say these are some of the gold bars a New Jersey businessman used to bribe Sen. Bob Menendez and his wife. (Courtesy of the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York)
The average reader will look at the indictment and say, “These guys are toast.” But are there ways Menendez can defend himself?
There are a number of complex issues presented by these charges that could be argued by the defense in court.
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.
There is evidence of conversations and texts that coyly and perhaps purposely avoid explicit acknowledgment of a corrupt agreement – for instance, “On or about January 24, 2022, DAIBES’s Driver exchanged two brief calls with NADINE MENENDEZ. NADINE MENENDEZ then texted DAIBES, writing, ‘Thank you. Christmas in January.’”
The government will argue that this reflects acknowledgment of a connection between official action and delivery of cash to Sen. Menendez, even though it is a less-than-express statement of the connection.
Speaking in this kind of code may not fully absolve the defendants, but 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 government has also charged a crime called “honest services fraud” – essentially, a crime involving a public official putting their own financial interest above the public interest in their otherwise honest and faithful performance of their duties.
The alleged failure of Menendez to list the 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.
Cash federal investigators say they found in Sen. Bob Menendez’s home. (Courtesy of the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York)
This case involves alleged favors done for a foreign country in exchange for money. Does that change this case from simple bribery to something more serious?
The issue of foreign military sales to Egypt may also present a constitutional obstacle to the government.
The indictment specifically cites Menendez’s role as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and actions he took in that role in releasing holds on certain military sales to Egypt and letters to his colleagues on that issue. The Constitution’s speech or debate clause protects members from liability or questioning when undertaking actions within the “legitimate legislative sphere” – which undoubtedly includes these functions.
While this will not likely be a defense to all the allegations, it could require paring the allegations related to this conduct. That would whittle away at a pillar of the government’s attempt to show Menendez had committed abuse of office.
In fact, when the government has charged members of Congress with various forms of corruption, courts have rejected any reference to their membership on congressional committees as evidence against them.
How likely is Menendez’s ouster from the Senate?
Generally, neither the House nor Senate will move to expel an indicted member before conviction.
There have been rare exceptions, such as when 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. With current Democratic control of the Senate by a margin of just one seat, Menendez’s ouster seems unlikely even though the Democratic governor of New Jersey would assuredly appoint a Democrat to fill the vacancy.
‘In the history of the United States Congress, it is doubtful there has ever been a corruption allegation of this depth and seriousness,’ former New Jersey Sen. Robert Torricelli said. True?
That seems hyperbolic. The Menendez case is just the latest in a long line of corruption cases involving members of Congress.
In the Abscam case, seven members of the House and one Senator were all convicted in a bribery scheme. That scheme involved undercover FBI agents dressed up as wealthy Arabs offering cash to Congress members in return for a variety of political favors.
In the Korean Influence Investigation in 1978 – when I served as House counsel – the House and Department of Justice conducted an extensive investigation of influence peddling by Tongsun Park, a South Korean national, in which questionnaires were sent to every member of the House relating to acceptance of gifts from Park.
Going all the way back to 1872, there was the Credit Mobilier scandal that involved prominent members of the House and Vice President Schuyler Colfax in a scheme to reward these government officials with shares in the transcontinental railroad company in exchange for their support of funding for the project.
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

It happened quickly, the final invasion, and with hundreds of Orthodox Christians killed by the aggressors. Armenia, led by a one-time human rights lawyer, had no alternative but to save thousands of its people from death by surrendering their enclave at Nagorno-Karabakh to the brutal forces of Ilham Aliyev, dictator of Azerbaijan.
It was Russia, once again, that was principally to blame: it was given by a foolish UN Security Council the duty to keep the peace, but when Armenia condemned the invasion of Ukraine, Putin in revenge withdrew all protection of Nagorno-Karabakh and let the Azerbaijan army off its leash.
120,000 citizens are now at its mercy, being forced either to abandon their ancestral homes or else live under a tyranny that has fomented hatred against them for many years.
Nagorno-Karabakh is a small, mountainous country in the clouds, settled by Armenians for many centuries. It was the first in 301 AD to adopt Christianity.
Hundreds of Orthodox churches, and their ancient mysterious tombstones (many now defaced or demolished by the aggressors), attract visitors from Yerevan, Armenia’s capital, who take the 6 hour road trek via Mount Ararat to Stepanakert, centre of the Karabakh’s democracy that was this week snuffed out. The trip is only 20 minutes by air from a modern airport. But planes have not flown for years because the Azeri government threatens to shoot them down.
The country fell to Russia in the early nineteenth century, and the demographic evidence from the first census of that time proves that it was all-Armenian and the area should have been allocated to this state when Stalin divided the territory in 1920. Instead, he gave it to Azerbaijan, and the mistake was not rectified until a civil war after the collapse of the USSR.
The Armenians of Nagorno-Karabakh – still the great majority of the population – voted first to join with Armenia (the wiser course) but then (courageously as they thought) opted for independence. The war had commenced with pogroms by Azeris in Sumgait and Baku. But in time a local Karabakh defence force took the upper hand. Fighting was brutal. With ethnic hate on both sides. The siege of Stepanakert during which Azeri forces killed several thousand in bombings of schools and hospitals, was Guernica writ small. The people only survived because of supplies brought on a narrow road – a humanitarian corridor – from Armenia, which Azerbaijan closed earlier this year.
Nagorno-Karabakh won the war by 1994 and declared, like Kosovo, its right to self-determination. For the next quarter-century it governed itself with help from Armenia. It did so, reasonably enough, with fair elections and democratic institutions like an independent judiciary – as I found when investigating the situation in the country for a court case in 2014. It was not, as many news reporters said last week, a country of “Armenian separatists” but of an Armenian people whose ancestors had lived in these highlands for centuries and who had fought for, and won, for a quarter of a century, the right to resist a brutal dictator. But there were many Azeri provocations at the border – the “line of control”.
The Security Council, quite absurdly, entrusted the enclave security to Russia which did not take its duties seriously and in 2020 the war broke out again. Armenia voted at the UN to condemn Russia for attacking Ukraine and in consequence Putin determined to end all support for it and to take revenge. The last straw came this month, when Armenia joined the International Criminal Court (ICC) which is prosecuting Putin for kidnapping Ukrainian children. Last week the Kremlin carpeted the Armenian ambassador and made what it described as a “harsh protest”: it threatened to withdraw its security mandated protection for Nagorno-Karabakh. When it did so, Azerbaijan invaded.
How should the UK react? Aliyev, like Putin, is guilty of the international crime of aggression, and this country should denounce this violation. Russia, too, should be condemned for betraying the duty imposed on it by the Security Council. We should certainly offer to take some of the many thousands of refugees: they are innocent victims of an international double-cross. They have every reason to fear persecution if they stay where they belong. Their political leaders are already being arrested.
As for the United Nations, Nagorno-Karabakh will be remembered as yet another reason why it is no longer fit for purpose. That purpose, its Charter reminds us, is to “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war,” yet it cannot expel Russia (even were Putin to use nuclear weapons) which would veto its own expulsion, and it cannot even expel Azerbaijan for aggression (because Russia would veto the necessary Security Council recommendation).
The only way forward is to replace the United Nations, because its Security Council is not fit for purpose. It is incapable of reform, because Russia and China will veto reform. ‘Security” will only come from an international representative body with the moral, military, economic power to deter authoritarian aggression.
Geoffrey Robertson AO KC is a former UN war crimes judge and author of An Inconvenient Genocide: Who Now Remembers the Armenians?
