Independent Voting recently hosted the 20th Annual Anti-Corruption Awards honoring Farhad Mohit, Gaby Cardenas and Katherine M. Gehl.
Video: The 20th annual anti-corruption awards
The 20th Annual Anti-Corruption Awards
Site Navigation
Search
Latest Stories
Start your day right!
Get latest updates and insights delivered to your inbox.
Top Stories
Latest news
Read More
New York Mayor Eric Adams is seen leaving Manhattan federal court on Sept. 27.
Andrea Renault/Star Max/GC Images)
Eric Adams is trying on Donald Trump’s playbook
Oct 04, 2024
Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.
It’s the go-to play nowadays.
If you’re a politician collared for alleged crimes, feign indignation, call it a “conspiracy,” blame the “corrupt” Department of Justice, and refuse to resign.
New York Mayor Eric Adams has been indicted on five federal charges related to 2021 campaign contributions, wire fraud, and bribery. The scathing 57-page indictment was unsealed on Thursday, and according to the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, Damian Williams, Adams was “showered” with gifts from foreign entities — namely Turkey — that he knew were illegal.
According to the indictment, there was luxury travel, free airline tickets, meals and hotel rooms from Turkish officials, and Adams allegedly tried to hide the gifts, the value of which exceeded $100,000 — all in return for political favors.
Adams is innocent until proven guilty. But the SDNY isn’t dumb.
As my CNN colleague Elie Honig, a former state and federal prosecutor, said, “I’m going to put this real unscientifically for you: if you’re going to charge the sitting mayor of New York City, you better be damn sure that you have the evidence on him, because if you don’t, it will be a disaster.”
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
But gone are the days of bowed-head press conferences and resignations in the wake of painful, costly, ugly and damaging scandals. So Adams has done what others before him did — some unsuccessfully, one very successfully.
First, he denied all charges and called them “lies.”
“My fellow New Yorkers, it is now my belief that the federal government intends to charge me with crimes. If so, these charges will be entirely false, based on lies.”
Then, he tried to claim he was being “targeted.”
“I always knew that if I stood my ground for all of you, that I would be a target, and a target I became.”
Then, he pointed fingers.
“Exactly who in the federal government, White House, do you say is targeting you for speaking out,” he was asked by one reporter.
“I think you need to ask the federal prosecutors who gave the directive and the orders, I don’t know. But we should ask them who gave the directive and orders that we’re going to take on and create this group of lies? They have the answer to that question.”
And finally, he refused to resign and let the people of New York get on with their business, instead insisting on dragging them into what will undoubtedly be a political circus that will unquestionably affect his ability to do his job.
But no matter — Adams is trying a play that was popularized by Donald Trump over decades. Deny, blame, deflect.
Over the course of his multiple indictments for alleged crimes during and after his presidency, Trump has blamed the “corrupt” DOJ, even going so far as to name and smear attorneys, judges, clerks, and their family members.
Many of those folks have endured death threats and harassment because of Trump’s baseless attacks.
Anyone can see how dangerous these attacks are, but Trump has so far managed to avoid prison, a trick others seem all too willing to try.
New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez tried it after he was indicted for a panoply of crimes, including corruption, conspiracy to act as a foreign agent, and obstruction of justice. For months he asserted his innocence, called the charges a conspiracy, and refused to resign.
In January, he had this to say: “The United States Attorney’s Office has engaged not in a prosecution, but a persecution. They seek a victory, but not justice.”
In July a jury found him guilty of all charges.
To believe these greedy, self-serving conspiracies, you’d have to ignore the fact that in fewer than four years, the Biden DOJ has indicted seven Democrats — including his own son!
But they’re not meant to make sense, only to enrage and tug at the conspiratorial impulses of a voter base that is now all too used to hearing tales of “rigged” and “stolen” elections, “the deep state,” and a “corrupt DOJ.”
To save their own political hides, Trump, Menendez and now Adams are shamelessly willing to smear and undermine these institutions to the point of breaking them.
And it’s working. Average confidence in institutions is at a pathetic 28%, with just 8% of Americans having “a great deal” of confidence in the criminal justice system. Forty-two percent have “very little.”
Among all the detritus and wreckage of the Trump era, this is one of his most enduring legacies — a playbook for politicians to try to save themselves by throwing everyone else under the bus. Including America herself.
©2024 S.E. Cupp. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.Keep ReadingShow less
Recommended
Maricopa County (Ariz.) Elections Department staff count votes on Nov. 5, 2020.
Courtney Pedroza/Getty Images
We need federal officials to help keep an eye on vote counting
Aug 30, 2024
Herbits is an American businessman and former consultant to several secretaries of defense.
Former President Donald Trump has not yet committed to accepting the results of the 2024 election. He continuously maintains that the 2020 election was stolen, despite 60 failed lawsuits. And his behavior on Jan. 6, 2021 demonstrates beyond any doubt that he has no sense of responsibility to democracy.
Moreover, report after report reveals various tactics that his supporters around the country are preparing so they can to prevent him from losing again this time — focusing on voting constraints and ballot processing.
For instance, the nonpartisan Center for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has identified at least 35 election officials in place for the 2024 election who were 2020 election deniers.
North Carolina’s State Board of Elections, with a 3-2 Republican majority, has empowered each county board to demand further information before certifying vote totals. Potential delays could prevent North Carolina certification and possibly throw the election to the House of Representatives.
The greatest and, frankly, likeliest threat is the hyperpartisan Supreme Court — perhaps the most political court since the Taney Court’s decision in the 1847 Dred Scot decision, which led in a straight line to the Civil War. Through any number of tactics, this court can hold up the results of cases long enough to prevent any candidate from winning 270 Electoral College votes. If that happens, the next president would be elected by the House of Representatives, where each state delegation gets one vote.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
The Supreme Court has original jurisdiction when there are differences between states. However, any of the 13 appellate courts may make a decision in favor of the citizens or the state where a case has been decided at the local level and then appealed, possibly all the way to the Supreme Court. Given Chief Justice John Roberts’ history of slow-walking cases in favor of Donald Trump, that is a real possibility. If the Supreme Court does not apply a final decision before Jan. 3, 2025, when the Electoral College meets, he has created a sure route to a Republican victory in the House.
Why would the justices do that? Look at Roberts’ record — an amplification of the Taney decision. He has systematically undermined the one person, one vote premise by a series of decisions: Citizens United, Shelby County and others. (See the detailed report of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center.
The federal government has a duty to assure safe and fair elections. Given the last four years, it should undertake to ensure vote counting can be watched from a segregated area. While the Associated Press and its stringers are likely to be witnesses to the counting of the ballots, where is the U.S. government? Why not have the FBI, DEA, AFT, Secret Service and other federal agencies assign their own witnesses to watch the counting so that they, with their credibility, may be called as witnesses in cases that do go to court.
Such an effort by federal agencies to assign observers, without authority to act, would not require congressional approval. It is not unusual for such agents, as it is for police officers everywhere, to observe an event where they may be troubling behavior. Were an incident to occur, the federal agent would not have any authority to act; but their observations as a witness in a courtroom would be like those of any other citizen, though likely to carry a degree of integrity that would be welcome.
Sixty some cases were filed in 2020. We can expect even more this year given the prominence of election deniers. These respected officials' testimony may be helpful for the courts and juries to make better decisions.
None of these individuals should, of course, be present during the actual voting process itself. Most states permit representatives of both parties to be in the voting rooms, both to watch the process and to assist voters where questions arise before ballots are cast.
I have served over the years in such a capacity. In one egregious case, I had to call a state emergency number to have white uniformed police officers removed for standing on the steps to the precinct voting room in a completely Black neighborhood in complete violation of voter intimidation regulations.
Every step we can take to protect the right to vote should be considered, especially given the temperature of this year’s election.
Keep ReadingShow less
Pat Greenhouse/The Boston Globe via Getty Images
Ask Rich: An ex-Trump supporter and MAGA activist answers your questions
Jan 25, 2024
Logis, a former member of the Republican Party and conservative pundit, is the founder of Perfect Our Union, an organization dedicated to healing political traumatization and building diverse, pro-democracy alliances. This is the first in a series of articles titled “Ask Rich.”
I left MAGA in the summer of 2022. As we get to know each other, I'll get into more specifics as to why I left. Yes, I did agree with some of former President Donald Trump's policies; and, I assure you, most Trump voters are good, decent people who had some valid reasons for supporting him. However, I feel I was led astray, but accept full responsibility for my decisions.
When my doubts about supporting Trump and the MAGA movement commenced in summer 2021, I began diversifying my news, opinion and information sources; this dramatically bettered my understanding of the nuances of complex political, cultural and social issues.
With that in mind, here’s what readers can expect from "Ask Rich":
- Candid answers, with minimal partisanship. I'm registered to vote, but with no party.
- Thoughtful and challenging content, drawing upon my experiences and political maturation, that will hopefully stand out amongst other political punditry you may be regularly consuming.
I want “Ask Rich" to engage both those who oppose MAGA and Trump as well as those who offer support. It is this type of dialogue — with those of strongly divergent views, respectively exchanging ideas — that will result in perfecting our Union and democracy.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
“Ask Rich” will allow citizens with varying views to express their opinions, share experiences and learn from each other. By doing so, We the People (myself included) will come to understand that, despite our differences, we all love our country and that we agree more than we disagree. Acknowledging this will make us more invested in our democratic (lowercase d), republican (lowercase r) self-government.
Dating back to the earliest years of our republic, unlikely but necessary alliances were formed when unity was non-negotiable. It is time for us to, again, forge those alliances.
The history of our nation has often been accompanied by struggle. But we have endured nearly a quarter of a millenium, during which time other democracies collapsed. With the help of good Americans from all sides of the political spectrum, we can meet today’s challenge.
You, the readers, deserve solutions that rise above the usual tribalistic frays. Each week, I’ll ask you to offer thoughts on a few questions. I’m excited to get started, and certain to be humbled by all the lovers of the country I’ll meet.
I’ll conclude with quote from Thomas Jefferson:
“... difference of opinion leads to enquiry, and enquiry to truth.”
That is my goal.
Have a question for Rich? Send an email to AskRich@thefulcrum.us.
Keep ReadingShow less
Why was it so easy for Santos to lie throughout his campaign? As it turns out, it’s pretty easy to scam a broken system.
Mandel Ngan/Getty Images
George Santos and a system built for corruption
Dec 29, 2023
Nate is a communications consultant for RepresentUs, a nonpartisan organization focused on minimizing corruption in the U.S. political system.
In 2009, comedian Robin Williams quipped, “Politicians should wear sponsor jackets like NASCAR drivers.” Just one year later, the Supreme Court decided to drive in a different direction. Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission opened the floodgates to dark money, exacerbating our existing political corruption problem.
George Santos was expelled from the House of Representatives on Dec. 1 for defrauding campaign donors and members of his district, but the entire saga should be seen as a broader indictment of a broken system that enables (and seemingly encourages) political corruption. Santos was enabled by insufficient reporting laws and ineffective federal oversight. As the Campaign Legal Center reported, “Dysfunction at the FEC has reduced transparency in our elections and faith in our political system.”
In its 56-page report, the House ethics committee concluded, "Representative Santos sought to fraudulently exploit every aspect of his House candidacy for his own personal financial profit.” Santos is accused of utilizing campaign funds for Botox treatments, luxurious clothing and even an OnlyFans subscription.
Santos’ alleged pattern of fraud and corruption only came to light after his election in early 2023, when local media discovered Santos had fabricated virtually his entire resume. Despite the breadth of his lies, he might have gotten away with it if he'd just been a bit more careful.
Sign up for The Fulcrum newsletter
Why was it so easy for Santos to “fraudulently exploit every aspect” of his campaign? As it turns out, it’s pretty easy to scam a broken system.
The system is so broken that members of Congress routinely get away with legalized insider trading. The existing system also encourages members of Congress to spend more time raising money than serving their constituents. And we’ve seen numerous examples of other lawmakers “gaming the system” for personal gain thanks to campaign finance loopholes. We shouldn't be surprised that someone saw our broken system as ripe for exploitation.
We must see Santos’ fraud for what it is — the natural byproduct of a broken system in desperate need of reform.
Fortunately, there is hope! Grassroots anti-corruption groups like RepresentUs are fighting to strengthen campaign finance laws and put strict limits on special-interest campaign funding. The problem is so much bigger than any one politician. To uproot corruption, we must fix the broken system that encourages it to flourish.
Keep ReadingShow less
Load More