top | item 47199315 (no title) specialist | 1 day ago IANAL, IIRC: SCOTUS has very narrowly defined bribery as explicit quid pro quo. And sometimes not even then. discuss order hn newest RajT88|1 day ago You recall correctly.And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way. nobody9999|6 hours ago >And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way.Yep. cf. Snyder v. United States[0][0] https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-limits-scop... roughly|1 day ago Trevor Noah pretty much nailed this in the first Trump admin:https://x.com/thedailyshow/status/1177221786720559105 trymas|21 hours ago https://xcancel.com/thedailyshow/status/1177221786720559105
RajT88|1 day ago You recall correctly.And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way. nobody9999|6 hours ago >And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way.Yep. cf. Snyder v. United States[0][0] https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-limits-scop...
nobody9999|6 hours ago >And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way.Yep. cf. Snyder v. United States[0][0] https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-limits-scop...
roughly|1 day ago Trevor Noah pretty much nailed this in the first Trump admin:https://x.com/thedailyshow/status/1177221786720559105 trymas|21 hours ago https://xcancel.com/thedailyshow/status/1177221786720559105
RajT88|1 day ago
And they did so, so they could take bribes with no consequences as long as they take them the right way.
nobody9999|6 hours ago
Yep. cf. Snyder v. United States[0]
[0] https://www.scotusblog.com/2024/06/supreme-court-limits-scop...
roughly|1 day ago
https://x.com/thedailyshow/status/1177221786720559105
trymas|21 hours ago