Senator Menendez indicted: Why no one in Congress is cheering

Democrats could rally behind a colleague under fire, but a Democratic administration indicted him. Republicans could rejoice that a high-ranking Democrat is in trouble, but he's also a key critic of White House policy on Iran and Cuba.

|
Julio Cortez/AP
US Sen. Bob Menendez (D) of New Jersey speaks during a news conference, Wednesday, in Newark, N.J. Senator Menendez, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, was indicted on corruption charges, accused of using his office to improperly benefit an eye doctor and political donor.

The corruption indictment of Sen. Robert Menendez (D) of New Jersey presents dilemmas for his colleagues.

Consider the Democrats. Like all politicians, they instinctively rally behind a party colleague who comes under fire. If the indictment had occurred under a Republican administration, they would undoubtedly be complaining about partisan witch-hunting and politically motivated prosecution. But since their party controls the Justice Department, those talking points are not available to them. 

They also have to think about the case’s potential outcome. Suppose they give him their unqualified support. If a high-profile trial ends in a conviction, their opponents will run television ads morphing their faces into his. That prospect must give them pause: In Washington, self-preservation always trumps friendship.

But suppose they shun him, and then he beats the rap. In that case, they will have made an enemy who will probably be around for a very long time. 

A couple of rules of thumb can guide them through this difficult situation. 

First, when substance is tricky, talk process. Emphasize due process, the presumption of innocence, and equality before the law.

Second, change the subject. When reporters ask about the indictment, talk about his list of legislative accomplishments and long record of service to New Jersey.

For Republicans, the dilemma is different. On the one hand, Menendez is a high-ranking member of the other party, so his indictment offers an opportunity to allege a Democratic culture of corruption. On the other hand, he has broken ranks with the Obama administration on Iran and Cuba, thus giving the GOP some bipartisan cover. (“Even the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee says that Obama is wrong.”) In other words, Republicans find him handy to have around.

In their case, I would recommend the “furrowed brow” approach. Instead of offering a definitive opinion on his guilt or innocence, they should say that the indictment is “troubling” and that it “raises serious questions.” They should urge him to make full disclosure of all relevant information – a line that has the added advantage of reminding people about Hillary Clinton’s e-mail controversy.

If this advice sounds cynical, it is. During Washington scandals, cynicism and realism are pretty much the same thing.

Jack Pitney writes his Looking for Trouble blog exclusively for the Monitor.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Senator Menendez indicted: Why no one in Congress is cheering
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2015/0402/Senator-Menendez-indicted-Why-no-one-in-Congress-is-cheering
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe