Bob Menendez’s indictment is exceptionally vibrant, even according to New Jersey norms.

Bob Menendez’s indictment is exceptionally vibrant, even according to New Jersey norms.



Bob Menendez’s indictment is colourful​ even by Jersey standards

CORRUPTION IS “not unique to New Jersey”, says Elizabeth Matto of the Eagleton Institute of Politics⁤ at Rutgers University. “But the state does seem to have a knack‍ for it.” Even so, the 39-page indictment charging Bob Menendez, the state’s Democratic‍ senior senator, with ‍three counts⁢ of corruption is impressive. Mr Menendez has pleaded not ‌guilty and was released on a $100,000 bond and told ‍to surrender his passport. He asserts that the federal prosecutors have “misrepresented the normal‌ work of a congressional office”.

The indictment, ‍unsealed on ⁤September 22nd, accuses ​Mr Menendez of using ​his position to provide‌ help for three associates. This alleged assistance included attempting to interfere in a criminal prosecution against one of them and⁤ protecting ⁢a business​ monopoly owned by another. Prosecutors allege he used his position as head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to share sensitive and non-public information with Egyptian government⁢ officials through one of⁣ his associates. ⁤This⁣ information included that an American ban​ on ‌sales of arms and ‌ammunition to Egypt had ⁣been lifted. He is also accused​ of ghostwriting a letter lobbying other senators to support lifting a hold on $300m in aid to Egypt.

Prosecutors accused Mr Menendez and his ⁣wife Nadine of accepting bribes in the form of cash, gold,​ a Mercedes-Benz and mortgage payments. When searching ‌the ⁤senator’s home, FBI agents found ⁢$100,000 in gold bars and $480,000 in cash. Some of ‍the money was hidden in clothes, including jackets with Mr Menendez’s name stitched ‍on ‌the front. His wife and his three friends have also been charged. A defiant ‍Mr‍ Menendez again denied any wrongdoing during a press conference in Union City,‍ where he once served as mayor. He explained he had earned the money lawfully and ‌that he had withdrawn the cash from his savings accounts ⁢“for emergencies and because of the history of my…

2023-09-28 07:32:13
Post from www.economist.com
rnrn

Exit mobile version