I don’t know who Randall Eliason is but he makes a really good point in the Washington Post. While we are all aghast at the outright corruption and bribery recently unveiled by Michael Cohen, it is even more alarming to realize that thanks to a Supreme Court ruling, which was just one more brick in the ramp that tilted our nation towards rule by the wealthy, all of this may matter in the court of public opinion but NOT in a real court.
In fact, it would take a great deal for Cohen’s activities to cross the line into criminal corruption. And that is the remarkable, and disturbing, aspect of the Cohen story: just how freely access to government power may be bought and sold these days without running afoul of the criminal law.
Thus, a disturbing hypothetical: Even if Cohen explicitly sold access in the form of meetings with Trump administration officials — indeed, even if those officials themselves received a portion of Cohen’s fees in exchange for attending the meetings — it would be difficult, if not impossible, to mount a successful public-corruption prosecution.
The case was McDonnell vs US.
Robert F. McDonnell — or, more precisely, the Supreme Court justices who unanimously overturned McDonnell’s convictions.
McDonnell was found guilty of corruption after accepting more than $170,000 in secret gifts. But in June 2016 the court found that McDonnell’s favors for his benefactor — including sending emails, making phone calls and arranging introductions to other government officials — did not amount to “official acts” under federal corruption law. The court ruled that bribery requires a more substantial exercise of government power as part of a corrupt deal. Merely providing introductions or access to public officials is not enough.
It is not enough to sell influence or access apparently because,according to the court, selling time or introductions is not an official enough act to count as bribery. This, of course, goes against the common sense impression that there are only so many minutes in an important politician’s day and that these minutes or attention are VERY important. After all what else were Novartis, AT&T, etc. paying for? But,
In Cohen’s case, a bribery prosecution would require proof that, in exchange for the payments, he secured agreements from Trump or other administration officials to perform specific official acts, such as lifting sanctions against Russia or pursuing a particular health-care or telecommunications policy. But proving such a clear quid pro quo is not easy. Personal connections may result in influence and tacit understandings that are simultaneously very real and nearly impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. And that again explains why access itself can be such a valuable commodity
Now we (I) can understand why Mick Mulvaney was so blatant in saying that unless you paid him as a Congressperson, he wouldn’t talk to or see you. I had wondered why he was being so forthright about pay to play. Now it makes sense. It is PERFECTLY LEGAL TO BRIBE AN OFFICIAL IF IT IS ‘ONLY’ FOR ACCESS!
How did I miss this? By being too complacent during the Obama years. Never again! I (and probably at least some of you) forgot that there were malign oligarchy creating forces out there still working during that time Sometimes I feel I and others let Obama and his hardworking cadre of people down by sleeping through those years and not fighting the forces of corruption alongside them. Imagine if all the marches, calling campaigns, etc, we are engaging in now had been used in those years to further Obama’s administrations’ Democratic (or democratic, still don’t know the difference) agenda. Where would we and the country be now? Obviously in a much better place.
But of course we can’t change the past and we probably had no chance to directly influence a Supreme Court decision, but these outrages that built to the corrupt kakistocracy we have now, CAN serve to keep us fired up to take our country back and do whatever we can to correct this.
On another note; THANK YOU!!! To all those, many on this site, who continued to fight while some of us were asleep. I have a feeling things would have been much worse without your efforts. And now, we are with you!
Because,
McDonnell was simply the latest in a series of Supreme Court decisions over the past two decades narrowing federal corruption laws. Cumulatively, those decisions have created multiple safe harbors for behavior that most would consider clearly corrupt. Congress could step in and reform those laws but has shown little interest in doing so.
Swamp, drain thyself? I don’t plan to hold my breath.
www.washingtonpost.com/.