Let's imagine that a president decides to, say, stop aiding Ukraine, and in exchange, Putin promises said president a couple billion dollars. Stopping aid to U

Let's imagine that a president decides to, say, stop aiding Ukraine, and in exchange, Putin promises said president a couple billion dollars. Stopping aid to Ukraine is definitely an official act, which, on its own, is within their powers. Trading said official action for the billion dollars is what is fraudulent, but if I am understanding the Roberts opinion correctly, it cannot be prosecuted, because the motives of the president should not be used as part of the ruling of immunity. So... free bribery, as long as said president pays their taxes.