2 ms·
The law is explicitly not what you imagine might make sense. The US government spent millions of dollars pursuing this and went with "honest services fraud" bas
by michaelmrose 2y ago
The law is explicitly not what you imagine might make sense. The US government spent millions of dollars pursuing this and went with "honest services fraud" based on Amazons code of conduct which it then admitted this was incorrect.
Either this was the best ammo they had or they are horrendously incompetent.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoI'd bet on "incompetent". It feels like a straightforward federal private->private bribery law would run into the commerce clause of the constitution so we have this hodge-podge instead. Perhaps some states have more straightforward statutes.
- michaelmrose 2y agoIt's not terribly useful to adjudge someone guilty of a second crime in a complex situation that will never see a judge because the case that DID see the light of day destroyed someone's life by dint of inherently defective reasoning.
- bryanlarsen 2y agoThere are different standards for different scenarios. Do I think he belongs in jail? That threshold of proof has not been met. Would I ever hire or do business with the husband or the wife? Definitely not. That threshold is very low, and they're far over it.
- smsm42 2y ago> they are horrendously incompetent. US government being horrendously incompetent is like the least surprising revelation this case could make. I mean we just witnessed the head of the service which was created to protect the President from all imaginable threats to claim it's impossible to put a sniper on a slightly sloped roof - right after a sniper shot a (former) President from that roof. Compared to that level of incompetence, a botched prosecution is small change. They probably have thousands under their collective belts.
- slowmovintarget 2y agoThis DoJ seems primarily interested in political comeuppance, not justice.
- lylejantzi3rd 2y agoOr corrupt.