Unfortunately, this vote is symbolic, because those who voted for the measure know that it will never get through the Senate, and even in the very unlikely event that it did, Biden would veto it.
The wall of shame—the 11 Democrats voting against: Cynthia Axne (IA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Jared Golden (ME), Vincente Gonzales (TX), Susie Lee (NV), Stephen Lynch (MA), Seth Moulton (MA), Stephanie Murphy (FL), Tom O’Halleran (AZ), Jimmy Panetta (CA), Chris Pappas (NH)
And to give credit where credit is due, the Republicans who voted yea: Andy Biggs (AZ), Lauren Boebart (CO), Michael Cloud (TX), Matt Gaetz (FL), Paul Gosar (AZ), Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA), Nancy Mace (SC), Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Rosendale (MT), Chip Roy (TX), Fred Upton (MI)
As much as I appreciate the motion, one does have to ask why the bill, approved by both the House and Senate last term and vetoed by Trump has not been brought back to the floors of both houses to put the pressure squarely on Biden. Just theatre I guess. They knew Trump would veto it and aren’t quite as sure about Biden.
The article is, once again, outstanding. And now -- so what? What can be done? What specific actions??
For example - about the all-encompassing corruption at all level of US government:
1. Can a sitting Senator or Congresswoman be removed for CORRUPTION?
2. Are there prior cases -- in prosecuting corruption?
3. What is necessary to initiate a process?
4. What are other 10 or 20 specific actions population can undertake in fight of a massive and endemic corruption at all levels of US government?
PS: The "soo bad" China executes yearly few extreme cases of corruption in China; when was the last time any major US politician was jailed in the US (beyond few months or years)?
(1) Yes, in principle, sitting members of Congress can be removed for corruption. However, legally, you would need to make a more specific charge than "corruption." "Corruption" is a broad abstract concept rather than a crime defined by statute that can remove someone from office. Bribery, however, is defined crime and can disqualify a member of Congress from office. The Constitution specifically states that all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office if they are convicted of bribery, treason, or other high crimes or misdemeanors. Be advised, however, that it is extremely difficult for a prosecutor to successfully bring corruption charges against a political official.
(2) There are prior cases prosecuting bribery, so yes. There are many at the state level and some at the federal level as well. The most prominent recent examples would be former Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson, who is currently serving time in federal prison on a bribery charge and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who chose not to seek re-election after getting indicted for laundering campaign money. (He was convicted after a trial but his conviction was overturned on appeal.) I am sure there are others and probably some other recent examples, but those come to mind.
(3) If the specific crime at issue was a federal crime, then proceedings would need to be initiated by the Department of Justice. If it was a violation of a state law, then it would come from a state prosecutor. Offenses related to corruption in public office are generally going to be criminal charges rather than civil charges, so a prosecutor's office would need to decide to pursue a case; a private citizen couldn't sue a member of Congress for corruption of their own volition.
(4) 10 or 20 is a lot and the realistic part of me thinks that corruption is just part of politics anywhere. For some industries, however, it is more damaging than for others. Corruption on behalf of big oil, big pharma, and the arms industry have much more severe consequences than, say, corruption on behalf of tech companies for the most part. Personally I would like to see public Congressional hearings into the political influence of the arms industry. After World War I in the United States, some members of Congress made a name for themselves by holding hearings on that very industry, which they nicknamed the "Merchants of Death."
I can't speak to Sinema but the standard for proving bribery for a lawmaker requires a prosecutor to prove that a lawmaker accepted "a thing of value in exchange for an official act." The difficult aspect of this standard is that it places the prosecution to prove that the lawmaker in question wouldn't have performed a specific act absent receiving a thing of value. For example, if a member of Congress votes against a climate change bill and receives something of value from a fossil fuel company, the member of Congress can often say "the thing that I received didn't effect my vote because I was going to vote against that bill anyway." The burden is on the prosecution to prove otherwise.
This is a difficult standard but it isn't impossible. I'm not familiar enough with case law to speak authoritatively on it but as I mentioned previously, there is at least one former member of Congress in jail for bribery.
Other than some self-serving rhetoric to appeal to “progressives,” Biden has done nothing to end these ongoing war crimes and crimes against humanity. He is complicit. Are any of us surprised?
This is fantastic news. Whether or not it actually makes it past Biden's desk, we shall see, but I advised my fellow anti-war activist to not give in to despair. The pressure must be kept on, or they will never know how we feel.
Where would I look for the most cogent and preferably compact theory, written, of why we should support Saudi Arabia in its war on Yemen? It doesn't have to be good, just better than the rest.
Unfortunately, this vote is symbolic, because those who voted for the measure know that it will never get through the Senate, and even in the very unlikely event that it did, Biden would veto it.
The wall of shame—the 11 Democrats voting against: Cynthia Axne (IA), Cheri Bustos (IL), Jared Golden (ME), Vincente Gonzales (TX), Susie Lee (NV), Stephen Lynch (MA), Seth Moulton (MA), Stephanie Murphy (FL), Tom O’Halleran (AZ), Jimmy Panetta (CA), Chris Pappas (NH)
And to give credit where credit is due, the Republicans who voted yea: Andy Biggs (AZ), Lauren Boebart (CO), Michael Cloud (TX), Matt Gaetz (FL), Paul Gosar (AZ), Marjorie Taylor Greene (GA), Nancy Mace (SC), Thomas Massie (KY), Matt Rosendale (MT), Chip Roy (TX), Fred Upton (MI)
As much as I appreciate the motion, one does have to ask why the bill, approved by both the House and Senate last term and vetoed by Trump has not been brought back to the floors of both houses to put the pressure squarely on Biden. Just theatre I guess. They knew Trump would veto it and aren’t quite as sure about Biden.
The article is, once again, outstanding. And now -- so what? What can be done? What specific actions??
For example - about the all-encompassing corruption at all level of US government:
1. Can a sitting Senator or Congresswoman be removed for CORRUPTION?
2. Are there prior cases -- in prosecuting corruption?
3. What is necessary to initiate a process?
4. What are other 10 or 20 specific actions population can undertake in fight of a massive and endemic corruption at all levels of US government?
PS: The "soo bad" China executes yearly few extreme cases of corruption in China; when was the last time any major US politician was jailed in the US (beyond few months or years)?
(1) Yes, in principle, sitting members of Congress can be removed for corruption. However, legally, you would need to make a more specific charge than "corruption." "Corruption" is a broad abstract concept rather than a crime defined by statute that can remove someone from office. Bribery, however, is defined crime and can disqualify a member of Congress from office. The Constitution specifically states that all civil officers of the United States can be removed from office if they are convicted of bribery, treason, or other high crimes or misdemeanors. Be advised, however, that it is extremely difficult for a prosecutor to successfully bring corruption charges against a political official.
(2) There are prior cases prosecuting bribery, so yes. There are many at the state level and some at the federal level as well. The most prominent recent examples would be former Louisiana Congressman William Jefferson, who is currently serving time in federal prison on a bribery charge and former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, who chose not to seek re-election after getting indicted for laundering campaign money. (He was convicted after a trial but his conviction was overturned on appeal.) I am sure there are others and probably some other recent examples, but those come to mind.
(3) If the specific crime at issue was a federal crime, then proceedings would need to be initiated by the Department of Justice. If it was a violation of a state law, then it would come from a state prosecutor. Offenses related to corruption in public office are generally going to be criminal charges rather than civil charges, so a prosecutor's office would need to decide to pursue a case; a private citizen couldn't sue a member of Congress for corruption of their own volition.
(4) 10 or 20 is a lot and the realistic part of me thinks that corruption is just part of politics anywhere. For some industries, however, it is more damaging than for others. Corruption on behalf of big oil, big pharma, and the arms industry have much more severe consequences than, say, corruption on behalf of tech companies for the most part. Personally I would like to see public Congressional hearings into the political influence of the arms industry. After World War I in the United States, some members of Congress made a name for themselves by holding hearings on that very industry, which they nicknamed the "Merchants of Death."
Thank you very much. Soo -- were are specific actions, e.g., Sinema, 500 other?
I can't speak to Sinema but the standard for proving bribery for a lawmaker requires a prosecutor to prove that a lawmaker accepted "a thing of value in exchange for an official act." The difficult aspect of this standard is that it places the prosecution to prove that the lawmaker in question wouldn't have performed a specific act absent receiving a thing of value. For example, if a member of Congress votes against a climate change bill and receives something of value from a fossil fuel company, the member of Congress can often say "the thing that I received didn't effect my vote because I was going to vote against that bill anyway." The burden is on the prosecution to prove otherwise.
This is a difficult standard but it isn't impossible. I'm not familiar enough with case law to speak authoritatively on it but as I mentioned previously, there is at least one former member of Congress in jail for bribery.
Other than some self-serving rhetoric to appeal to “progressives,” Biden has done nothing to end these ongoing war crimes and crimes against humanity. He is complicit. Are any of us surprised?
This is fantastic news. Whether or not it actually makes it past Biden's desk, we shall see, but I advised my fellow anti-war activist to not give in to despair. The pressure must be kept on, or they will never know how we feel.
Where would I look for the most cogent and preferably compact theory, written, of why we should support Saudi Arabia in its war on Yemen? It doesn't have to be good, just better than the rest.
I have seen little more than purest realpolitik.