Legalizing Bribery

Last Thurdsday, USA Today ran an article entitle,

Justices likely to ease rules involving public corruption

In a case coming from Virginia in which former Republican Governor Robert McDonnell and his wife were convicted of receiving over $175,000 in gifts and loans from the owner of a vitamin company.

From USA Today.

From USA Today.

Were they everyday favors or bribes?

That was the discussion on the U.S. Supreme Court during the hearing.

Ironically, one of the gifts was the payment $15,000 for a daughter’s wedding.

Former Governor George Ryan got $3,185 for one of his daughter’s weddings.

Ryan went to jail.

The former Governor of Virginia may not.

The problem with the law is that there is no “workable standard,” according to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy.

So, because of the incredible discretion afforded U.S. Attorneys, a decision may come down from the U.S. Supreme Court that will take the inhibitions of politicians on whether there are quos for favor seekers’ quids


Legalizing Bribery — 8 Comments

  1. The US Supreme Court has rendered itself null and void.

    I don’t think anyone particularly pays attention to anything they “rule” on (with the exception of mass media that thinks everything they say is now the “Rule of the Law”;like their opinions on same sex marriage. et al.).

  2. The US Supreme Court has rendered itself null and void.

    LOL – sure, if you say so.

    But good to know that you a) don’t understand how the US government works, b) don’t believe in the US Constitution, and/or c) disagree with separation of powers.

  3. alabama?

    a. you are really ignorant;

    b. you’re a nitwit; and

    c. you are a maroon.

    You must be married to Mrs.

    You are both peevish and peckish while you confusedly believe you are being droll.

  4. Ah, the old “can’t make an argument, so lets make a personal attack” comments.


    I’m not married, good try though.

    And I’m not not ignorant, a nitwit, or a maroon.

    And I also understand the US Constitution and separation of powers.

    I also understand the role of SCOTUS.

    But seriously – if ya’ll think that the SCOTUS is now null and void, I have no idea what to tell you.

    Just curious – is the SCOTUS null and void on all things? Or just on things that you disagree with them on?

    Is the Hobby Lobby decision null and void?

    Or just the Obergefell decision?

    By the way… I’ll help out.

    The Obergefell decision is the marriage equality decision, so you don’t have to look up what that is.

  5. Alabama, what Cindy is saying is ‘What good are they?”

    If they’re not going to rule properly on Corruption then they are useless.

    Why the argument there?

    She’s absolutely right.

  6. Landon – her comment was well beyond just corruption.

    She actually said this:

    “I don’t think anyone particularly pays attention to anything they “rule” on.”

    Its an inane position to take.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *