This week on q a, a professor and former federal prosecutor randall allies and who writes a blog called sidebars talks about the federal Corruption Case against u. S. Senator bob menendez new jersey. Eliasson, before i ask us about this case, give some background about how you got into the business of the law and the relationship between the federal prosecutor and somebody in politics . i came to washington for my first job at a private law firm. I worked there as a federal prosecutor for 12 years. Both of the time in that office i was in what they call the public corruption and government fraud section. I was focusing on cases involving public corruption and fraud against the government, both medical both federal and local officials. By the time i left, i was serving as the chief of that section. I was supervising the attorneys focusing on those cases. I left the office in 2000 want to help test so i could start teaching and writing on a parttime basis. Teaching whitecollar criminal law at the George Washington criminal law school here in washington dc. I thought it at american university. I got my law degree from Harvard Law School in 1985. Even before i went to law school and knew that what i wanted to do was be a trial lawyer. Waygured out that the best to get trial experience was to be a im a prosecutor or a defense attorney. Private civil litigation does not get you into court that much. I knew i wanted to be in court all the time. When i was at the private law firm here in town, there were eight number of former assistant u. S. Attorneys working at that form firm talking about the job as the best job they have ever had. After hearing that from a few different people, i decided to give that a try. Who does the u. S. Attorney work for and how do they get their jobs . Whats they are appointed by the president. Each one has a u. S. Attorney in charge of the prosecutions and federal civil cases. There is a u. S. Attorney for each district that is appointed by the president and as part of the department of justice. Does the u. S. Assistant have to be approved by the senate . They are hired by the u. S. Become careerhey employees of the department. Who is the boss of the u. S. Attorney . More immediately, it is the attorney general. The head of the department of justice. There are different steps allow that. There is an executive office of u. S. Attorneys within the department of justice because the department of justice is huge organization with many components. Brian what is the highest profile case you were involved in as a prosecutor . Randall probably the highest i was involved in was the prosecution of dan rostenkowski, the congressman from illionois illinois back in he late 1990s. He was prosecuted for a series of schemes where he was stealing funds from different Government Programs and using them for his personal use. That happened in d. C. He was indicted and what to jail. Brian he is deceased, but we have a video after he was indicted so everyone can remember what he looked like in some way. [begin video clip] today, i pled not guilty to each of the charges before me. I entered these pleas because i am not guilty. I will fight these false charges and will prevail. I will wash away the mud that has been splattered upon my reputation. Some ask, how could you have done these things . The answer is simple. I didnt do them. [end video clip] brian he was the former chairman of the ways and means committee, enormously well liked by republicans and democrats. When you hear him recount that statement about not being guilty, what is your reaction . Randall it is par for the course, common for someone indicted to say they are innocent and they will fight the charges. It doesnt indicate to me that it is anything out of the ordinary. Sort of what you would expect a politician or most highprofile criminals will initially come out and deny the charges, and then it will go from there. Brian he had a lot of power. When you are watching the process, anything about it surprise you that you did not expect . How hard was it to convict him . Randall nothing in particular. One thing notable about the case i was a very junior person, not the lead prosecutor, i was part of the team one thing that was notable was the lack of any perception of political influence in the investigation. In other words, the investigations was began under a republican administration, that after the election, it switched to the Clinton Administration and rostenkowski was a prominent democrat and an important player in Clintons Campaign to get health care passed. There were rumblings that now that clinton was elected, this prosecution would be stifled by the clinton Justice Department. There is not an inkling of this. The case proceeded just as it had been and there was no hint at all within our office that we should do anything differently because there was a Democratic Administration in power. Brian he went to prison for a year and a half . Randall i think it was 17 months. Brian what is your opinion this is a bad way to ask it. How corrupt our politicians from your perspective . You have watched what is going on in this town. You teach white collar crime. Randall i dont think these are the norm by any means. There is a real tension in our system, since we have the system of privately financed campaigns and politicians have a need to raise money and the right to raise money and to fund their campaign, there is a tension between the goal of having politicians who are only working to serve the Public Interest and serve their constituents, and i kind of push and need to raise money, and that can lead to a lot of dangers of corruption. But i dont think like things with the rostenkowski case are the norm. Or the allegations in the menendez case. Brian would you have been able to convict rostenkowski back then if the Supreme Court had already decided the mcdonald decision . Randall i dont think it would have been a factor because it was not primarily a bribery case. Mcdonald deals with the bribery statute. And what the government has to prove in a bribery case. Brian let me clarify, Robert Mcdonnell was the governor of the state of virginia and it went on for a long time. He was convicted of bribery . Randall yes, basically. Brian and the Supreme Court decided, you remember the number . Randall 90. It was unanimous. Brian what was your reaction when they threw it out . Randall i was surprised. They made the wrong decision. The governor, who accepted a the governor, who accepted a series of valuable gifts over time from his is this man, Johnny Williams, who wanted their help in promoting his product within the virginia government. He made a product and he wanted to make virginia universities to do Research Studies and promote his product within the government so it could get fda approval and be a successful product for him. Over a series of a couple years, he gave the mcdonnells things like 10,000 or so in gowns for mrs. Mcdonnell he purchased in new york city. He paid for the caterer at his daughters wedding, 50,000, gave the governor a rolex watch. The biggest thing was 120,000 in loans. No interest, no paperwork, no documentation, just basically gifts of money that total about 120,000. Not sure if they would be called loans if they did not come to light. In exchange, he hoped the governor would help about this product. To promote this product within the government. And the governor did, he arranged meetings and made phone calls. He had a Product Launch event at the governors mansion. The jury found that was a bribe, a quid pro quo, for the gift, the governor was exploding his exploiting his office. These were secret gifts, which was an important factor in a lot of these cases. These were not public the disclosed Campaign Contributions where people can see where this is coming from. These are secret gifts so there is no way to judge whether the governor is acting in the best interest of his constituents or the man that was paying him. The jury found a bribery scheme and the judge agreed, the court of appeals unanimously agreed and unanimously declined to rehear the case with the entire court. Then it went to the Supreme Court and they unanimously reversed. It was a very lawyerly opinion and every sense of the word. It focused on what is an official act . Quote, unquote, and it spends a lot of time parsing this statutory language and concluding, based on this precise definition in the statute, things Bob Mcdonnell did did not amount to official acts. To me, that is missing the forest for the treat, the single tree of what was an official act. Missing the focus on the corruption. They referred to it as routine political currencies for a regular supporter, some of who gives Campaign Contributions, this was in response to secret gifts that the public did not know about. I think the court mistakenly focused on the precise nature of what the governor did and failed to focus on the fact that basically, williams was able to buy access to government power and get actions from the governor get the governor to exercise the power of his office in exchange for secret gifts. That gave him an access and benefit from the governor that regular citizens could not get. Brian before the court, here is governor mcdonnells counsel. Defense council. To hear a little bit of what he was saying during the oral argument. [begin video clip] the government argues that in quid pro quo bribery, official action encompasses any action in official duty. To reach the conclusion, it asks you disregard the nightzero decision of the court. The government is wrong. In order to engage in official action, he must make an official decision or urge someone else to do so. The line is between access to Decision Makers and trying to influence those decisions. [end video clip] brian he was successful. Why . Randall i think the court was concerned about the potential threat of the statute breadth of the statute. They worried about the prosecutors going after politicians as routine political. The flaw in that sphere is that it fails to take into account that this was not an ordinary political relationship. But this was in response to secret, corrupt gifts taking place. And i think its a mistake that mr. Franciscos prevailed. It was a mistake to narrow the scope of what we say could be the subject of a bribery case, this official act. It is not true in every bribery statute. The Virginia State statute prohibits paying officials for any exercise of their discretion, which is far broader and would cover governor mcdonnells behaviors. The problem i had with the courts results is that now we had situation where governor mcdonnell or another could set up a system and say, you want to meet with someone in my cabinet or demonstration to make a pitch administration to make a pitch . I will set up that meeting for you and you pay me 10,000 and that will not be disclosed anywhere. That will go in my pocket. You pay me and i will set up the meeting. I will not tell them how to decide, but i will get you into the room. If you dont pay me, no meeting. In the mcdonnell opinion, that is no longer a bribe. Most would say that his corrupt. Under mcdonald you would have to say, it is not an official act so it is not problem. Thats wrong. Brian heres a moment where the chief justice tipped off where the whole thing went wrong. 35 seconds. [begin audio clip] there is an extra ordinary document in this case, a brief filed by president obama, former white house canceled of president george w. Bush, former white House Counsel of president clinton, former white House Counsel of president george h. W. Bush, former white House Counsel of president ronald reagan. They say, quoting their brief, that it will cripple the ability for elected officials to fill their role in our democracy. Its a store those people agree on anything. Its extra ordinary those people agree on anything. [laughter] [end audio clip] brian they are in a highprofile position thinking prosecutors will come after them. The kind of people that go on the court and have been inside government, nobody expected a 90 decision here. They all thought a prosecutor could easily come after us for the simplest situations. Randall i think there was a sort of parade of horribles paraded out by the defense. The idea that if the decision were upheld, any politician is subject to prosecution. That was the dramatic overstatement and it failed to focus on the fact these were not just routine medical favors for supporters. Those concerns were overblown and exaggerated, but successful in persuading the court that if they did not limit the statute that way, that that was a real risk. Part of it comes down to if you think prosecutors can be trusted to not bring frivolous cases and there are differences of opinion about that. Some say the system we have had has been successful. We have broad bribery statutes, but prosecutors dont indict politicians for routine political favors and go to rotary breakfasts. We can rely on their discretion to bring appropriate cases where there appears to be truly corrupt behavior. But some disagree and think we need to impose more limitations. Otherwise we are giving prosecutors too much power. Power to go after politicians they do not like and that was definitely one of the courts concerns. Brian the reason why we want you to talk about senator robert menendez, who is in a trial in newark right now, something they expect to go on for another couple months, is because one vote matters in the United States senate. Let me show you 15 seconds of senator menendez so everyone knows who we are talking about and then you can explain what is going on in new jersey. [begin video clip] im angry because prosecutors dont know the difference between friendship and corruption and have chosen to twist my duties as a senator and my friendship into something that is improper. They are dead wrong and im confident they will be proven so. [end video clip] brian two years ago, the trial just started. It took two years. Go back to the beginning of this. If you had been in the prosecutors office, how did this start . Randall there were initial allegations about menendezs relationship with this doctor, and there was all those other conduct that led to a broader inquiry and that is not uncommon. You look at one aspect of the case and other doors open up. The twoyear delay was because the senator was claiming the prosecution was barred by the speakers debate clause, they were proficient on Holding Members of congress responsible for anything they say or anything related to that. Brian how did that relate . Randall ultimately it doesnt because the court rejected his claims. He was arguing he was been prosecuted for his official actions as a senator by the steps he took by alleging and indictments on various issues. Protected activity is central to his role as a senator. Courts rejected that, Supreme Court declined to hear the appeals. That is not part of the case now, but it took two years to get that resolved because a member of congress is allowed to appeal before the trial. It is one of those issues that can be decided before you go to trial. That was a big part of the delay. In the course of the investigation into this relationship between senator menendez and his codefendant, the prosecutors discovered what they have charged as an ongoing bribery scheme. It is another bribery case and the allegations are, in exchange for a number of valuable gifts and contributions from dr. Milligan over the years, you have senator menendez on retainer and a senator did take a series of official actions. That is the whole part of the case. It comes down to, why was he doing these things . Because the interesting thing about these cases, there is no dispute about what happened. No one will deny that dr. Milligan gave senator menendez all these trips on his private jet or the Campaign Cost visions Campaign Contributions were made. Nobody will deny senator menendez did lobby with various executive Branch Officials on milligans behalf. The question is, why did it happen . Some say its because of his corrupt relationship and the senator is claiming because it is because he is my friend and i was trying to help him out and doing routine Political Activities that i would do for anybody. Brian the grand jury, was there a grand jury involved in this . Where do they meet . How many are on the jury . How hard is it, i assume youve been on a grand jury trying to get some sort of indictment for this. How difficult is that . Randall the grand jury is definitely involved. Every felony has to be indicted by a grand jury. In this case, they are sitting in new jersey, the senators home state, where the trial is taking place. It is made up of 2022 people, who get jury duty just like everybody gets jury duty. Members of the local Community Sit inside the grand jury to hear evidence. It is a different proceeding than a trial because its purpose is not to decide guilt or innocence. Its purpose is to decide, is there enough here to make it appropriate to file charges and bring this defendant into court . They are only making a probable cause determination, similar to the judge signing an arrest warrant. It is not a guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The hearing usually is only the government side of the case. They dont have the right to come in and present witnesses or present evidence or cross examined. It is close proceeding, there is no judge, no defense attorney, the defendant is not there. Its a prosecutor and the witness and members of the grand jury. It is the primary innocent get a tool that federal prosecutors have as it is the grand jury that gives you the power to issue subpoenas and compel a reluctant witness to come in and testify under oath, compelled institutions to come in. It is the primary investigative tool in federal prosecutions, particularly important in whitecollar cases like this. Brian technical thing, his friend, if the grand jury calls them in, do they have to go . Randall he would have to go, but he could claim the fifth amendment. And he likely would. Brian does he have his lawyer with him . Randall no, but he would be right outside the door. If you are the attorney, you are accustomed to being with your client and object and crossexamine and the grand jury, if you have a client going into the grand jury, you prepare them and try to get them ready for what is happening and they go to the grand jury room and the client goes in and the door closes and you are sitting outside in the chair. Hoping everything is going ok. Brian i want to ask you about the politics of this. Under what government was he indicted, democratic or republican . Randall he was indicted under the Obama Administration. Brian how often is that the case . Were you ever influenced . Randall no. Brian who was president during your 12 years as prosecutor . Randall Senate George bush number one and then it was president clinton for most of the time and then when i left, it was george bush number two. Brian the judge in the case in newark, the judge who nominated was bill clinton. Randall it is the semi retirement status judges can take when they reach a certain stage in their career. It means they are slowing down or taking fewer cases. They are still active, but they are not part of the rotation picking up cases every day. Brian i want to show you one of his attorneys, who was also one of the attorneys for jared kushner. And it was john edwards attorney and others. I want to show you what he looks like this was back in 2016. [begin video clip] as we have seen in so many cases, from former hud secretary mike espey in 1999, to senator ted stevens in 2007, and two years ago in the case of senator john edwards, prosecutors at the Justice Department often get it wrong. These charges are the latest mistakes. [end video clip] brian put it in context, i mentioned john edwards, he got him off. He is resigning jared kushner. Our public and center in nevada he republican senator in nevada he got off. Randall whitecollar defense is different than criminal defense of street crime, robbers, homicide, things like that. They are working very effectively throughout the grand jury state, working with prosecutors and their clients to sort of try to manage the investigation, do their own parallel investigation, talking with prosecutors about why they think charters are not appropriate, what the outcome should be concerning their client. They are actively involved in that stage. If there is an indictment, they will be involved in doing the trial. Or some other kind of disposition. So these highprofile cases attract the highprofile defense lawyers money can buy. Brian i have some of the written material you wrote about the menendez trial. We are to read some of what you wrote so people can hear some specifics. You mentioned the free plane rides earlier, and one of the former pilots testified this week. I have a story from cnn, details of senator bob menendez this menendezs trial wednesday. Prosecutors claim that he accepted rides on private jets and other gifts from his friend and wealthy ophthalmologists in exchange for political favors. I want to run this so you can see what dr. Melvin looks like. He is an ophthalmologist. He has a clinic in florida. Dr. Melvin is on the right with the glasses. He has already been convicted of a crime. Randall a separate case in florida, a Medicare Fraud case related to the same allegations that are now at stake in this trial. One of the allegations in this trial is that senator menendez was trying to help the doctor resolve a dispute he was having with health and Human Services about alleged overbilling for his clinic, two and a half million dollars. That is one of the big areas of this current trial. They claim that in exchange for jet trips, that senator menendez was working, lobbying people within the executive branch to basically make this dispute go away. Brian how good of friends are they . Randall i do not think it is disputed that they have been friends for some time. They have known each other for a long time. Brian but not until he was elected to the senate. Randall i dont think that is right. I think the friendship goes back earlier than that. I thought i read somewhere they were friends for about 20 years. I am not certain about that. It is in contrast to, for example, the bob mcdonald case where, part of his defense was his gifts were around a friendship. He met Johnny Williams when he began running for governor. They did not have a long existing relationship. The stories i read is that senator menendez and dr. Melvin have been friends for a long time and they have gone to family events for a long time. They do have a friendship. That does not necessarily decide the case at all. Friends can engage in corrupt behavior. I can rob a bank with my friend. If i have a friend who is senator, i can bribe him to do things for me. Friendship is not a complete defense, but it was what the senator and the doctor are using to argue in this case. That is the only reason any of this is going on is at a friendship, not out of a corrupt exchange for political favors. Brian if senator menendez is convicted, does he have to resign the senate . Brian he doesnt have to. Randall he does not have to. Senators frequently do resign, but there is no set timetable on when that has to happen. If you refuse to resign been the senate can go to expel him. But he doesnt have to resign. Brian if he were convicted, how long do you think this will go until there is a final decision. Randall it would all depend on what the senator himself chose to do. It would not happen very quickly because it would be arguments that he has a right to appeal, perhaps. The senate would say, assuming he did not resign, they would say we have to have hearings to decide whether to expel him or not. That could take some time. I would not expect it to happen immediately, unless he did resign. Brian i will mention, his one vote is rather significant because governor christie, who leaves office at the end of the year, were able to replace them with a republican who would vote to eliminate the obamacare thing, that one vote would make a big difference. How much tension do you sense there is looking at this case . Randall i think there has certainly been a lot of talk about the points you are making. There are political ramifications and what that would do to the balance of power. I think there is a lot of concern or interest in that issue on both sides of the aisle. I would not expect i think it would be surprising if assuming if he were convicted, that if it were resolved so quickly that governor christie would be the one making the appointments. It would drag on likely more than that. The scenario is being played out about him being convicted and governor christie getting to a point to be replaced. We do not know for certain, but i would be surprised if anything happened that quickly. Brian back to what you have written in, menendez sometimes stayed free of charge at melgens villa in a Luxury Resort on the Dominican Republic. On more than a dozen occasions they flew him and a guest on melgens private jet and his jet was not available, he arrange for other private jet transport for menendez, or purchased a firstclass ticket for him. He wrote into those and 10, he used his American Express points to book a sweet at a paris hotel valued at 5,000 from menendez to use for a threeday vacation. Finally, you list in 2012, melgen made more than 750,000 in Campaign Donations to benefit menendez as well as 20,000 contribution to menendez Legal Defense fund. Both republicans and democrats have given to that fund. Sheldon and have given him 12 grand or more. I think his wife also gave 10 grand. Isnt that just political contribution . Randall if that were the only thing at issue in the case and i dont think you have a case. Standing alone you could say, even some of the packed pac contributions. There is still a claim that even with those, they are so closely linked to suggest a donation being made the same day that senator menendez goes and meets with someone at health and Human Services. Absolutely, the Legal Defense fund this any different category from things like the private jet trips that dont get disclose. At least on their face, contributions are legal and legitimate. Right . If they are directly linked to an additional act, it raises the bar. It raises the bar showing corrupt relationships. Things like that jet trips or a hotel suites in paris, things like that commie talk about the friendship defense and i think the difficulty for the senator claiming that this was at a friendship was difficulty for both defendants. For example, he was flying to the Dominican Republic so he gave the senator a ride. The allegations in the indictment point out, there were times when he was not going, but he suggested to take senator menendez down to the villa. Sometimes he would send the jet from florida down to d. C. To pick the senator up and bring them back down to the Dominican Republic. When his jet was unavailable, he sent another private jet, or bought him a firstclass ticket. Those allegations, those facts take you out of the range of what people would think of as normal friendship. It is one thing to let you tag along when i am taking my jet anyway, it is quite another to send my private jet for you or to pay to send someone elses jet if my jet is out of commission. Brian how important is it that, in court they said he had taken 16 flights, but only accounted for three and his Financial Filings over in the senate . Randall initially he did not disclose any of them. When the investigation began in these came to light, he disposed two of them. He reimbursed him 58,000. At the time he said, there were only two or three flights. That is very important because, as we talked about earlier, the key on a case like this is proving the state of mind. No one will deny that the jet trips happen. The question will be why . Is there corrupt intent . How do you prove corrupt intent . If you dont have either party testifying, dr. Melgen is not going to testify, one of the best ways to prove it is to show that they tried to conceal it. Why do you try to conceal what you did . You did something wrong and that is proving your state of mind with corrupt intent. There was only one count in the end date meant, but it is way at the end and it is much more important than you would think. Charge at the end of the crime called false statements, which is charges that senator menendez failed to report these gifts, the jet trips in the hotel stays in paris. He failed to report them. That is a separate crime, failing to report those is a crime called false statements. But the fact of that crime is critically important to the overall case. The government will argue is that evidence he knew it was wrong. So he was trying to hide it as evidence of corrupt intent. Same is true with the fact that when it first came to let you he said there was only two or three trips when there were 16. Why do you do that . You know what you did is wrong can you are trying to keep it from coming to light. That is the argument. Brian senator menendez is up for election next year if he runs, he is single, divorced back in the mid to thousands. Dr. Melgen is married, but in the mix of all this there is a charge of young women it being involved in this whole thing from europe. Some testified this week. Can you explain that and how significant is that in the whole story . Randall there were three different basic areas of things that the government says senator menendez did for dr. Melvin in for dr. Melgen in exchange for the gifts. The first is this intervention in that medicare billing dispute we talked about where senator menendez repeatedly met with an emailed and talk to people at Medicare Department health and Human Services trying to resolve this dispute in dr. Melgens favor. Brian by the way, dr. Melgen does not live in new jersey. Randall no you does not come he lives in florida. One thing a politician would typically say is i was helping out my constituent. Dr. Melgen does not live in new jersey so they have to rely on the friendship argument. The one area he was working on was medicare billing dispute and dr. Melgen spent half. The second area involved a contract that dr. Melgen had that he had purchased. He purchased a contract to provide port screening in the Dominican Republic. Screening of cargo with xray machines. It was especially worth many millions of dollars if it could be carried out. It had been tied up for a long time in disputes with the dominican government. The second thing that senator menendez is charged with doing his trying to pressure the state department to pressure the Dominican Republic to move forward on a contract to that he get the benefit of that contract. The third area, as you mentioned, there is evidence that on three different occasions there were girlfriends of dr. Melgen who lived overseas who wanted to come to the United States. Senator menendez help them get visas. In one instance they were denied. After the senator intervened bay were able to get the visa. At the tree, that is the least significant by far. Getting a visa is relatively trivial. I think the senator will present evidence that it was routine for him to be involved and it was a long time ago. Some of the earliest activity in the case. It is part of the overall story of the developing exchange for gifts and donations that of the three areas, it is the least significant of my mind. Brian how big is the jury, and can one person withhold and call it a hung jury . Randall absolutely. A unanimous verdict. If there is one holdout the government would have to decide whether to retry the case. Brian the last senator to go to prison was Harrison Williams from new jersey. Here is some video of Harrison William back in 1980. He is deceased, but he went to prison for i think it was for a year and a half. [begin video clip] after the fbi agents left his home, senator williams had this to say about the investigation. Sen. Williams just a few minutes ago, two members of the fbi were here. For the first time i learned about this, really dont know any of the facts of anything. I am in no position to comment about. About what i dont know is happening. You are not the target of the investigation . Right now it appears i am. [end video clip] brian question to you is, how often are we missing these opportunities to bring indictments against members of Congress Based him the fact that people are constantly asking for favors . Randall i think, again, the system that we have of privately financed campaigns leads to these pressures and temptations. The reason it mr. Menendez is getting indicted is outside. There is a fine line of doing what we might call politics as usual and what looks like corruption. If i have a political donor, contributing to my campaign regularly who has a definite interest in some piece of legislation and i vote on that legislation in the way my donor favors, there is the perception there that there might be some kind of link. The reason i am doing get is for that support. When that kind of routine support and Political Action crosses over into an actual corrupt relationship, there is a fine line hard to draw. That is part of the courts concern. Do we trust prosecutors to draw the line. You end up with a case like menendez, it is typically the case with the line is dramatically crossed and the activity looks pretty extreme. Brian heres some video of senator ted stevens convicted in the court right down the street. He was indicted and a republican administration. He was a republican and he lost. Had a major impact on the senate. Here he is in 2008 again. I want you to explain this and the role that eric holder, a democrat, played in it. [begin video clip] in violation of the constitution and ethical standards, the prosecutors withheld evidence that would establish my evidence. They coached their star witness to change the story before the trial. They presented evidence that they knew was false, they prevented my defense team from interviewing witnesses who would have undermined their case. The misconduct of the prosecutors was so pervasive that the court asked this, does the Public Integrity section have any integrity . [end video clip] brian does it . Randall yes that was a great black eye for the department of justice. As he mentioned, eric holder when he came into office ultimately decided to drop this case. There were these allegations of misconduct by the prosecution and the fbi. There are disputes about the extent of the misconduct and whether it was deliberate, reckless or careless. There were several investigations, but the bottom line was it was clearly mishandled, prosecution and violation of rules. As a result, when as you said, it was prosecuted under the Bush Administration when the Obama Administration came in. The new attorney general looked at the case and decided the interest of justice demanded, not that they retry the case but drop it entirely. It was pretty dramatic. Brian how important are the attorneys . Here is senator stevens attorney, many people will remember when he defended, in the iran contra hearing, oliver north, here is Brendan Sullivan he was one of the first attorneys in his town to get thousand dollars an hour. This is in talking back in 2012 so we can see what hes like. [begin video clip] when prosecutors get into the heat of battle, something takes over, there are competitive, they want it to us they want to win at all costs. When that takes over, they cheat to win. It is so easy to do because they are really caught. If they are caught, what happens . Little to nothing. It is rare if ever that anyone is punished. Brian would you think . Randall he is one of the best and he has gotten Great Results from his clients. That kind of a sweeping generalization about all prosecutors, i dont agree with. It does happen that there is misconduct in particular cases. You know, law is a human enterprise. There are flawed actors and bad people in every phase of life. I do not agree that it is nor am and happen to routinely, or prosecutors in general and disregard their ethical obligations and do whatever they can to win. I disagree with that. Brian you see a prosecutor who wants to get out of the government, but i wanted show you video that you may not have ever seen. Talk about eric holder. This goes way back. Pay close attention to someone standing behind eric holder. [begin video clip] the allegations contained in todays indictment represent a per trail of the public trust for personal gain. In essence, this indictment alleges that he used his Elective Office to perpetrate an extensive fraud on the american people. The wrongful expenditure of taxpayers rules and to the hundreds of thousands of dollars. This is not, as some have suggested, a petty matter. [end video clip] brian you couldnt see him closely, but he looked younger. Randall i think that was me standing behind his head. Brian what was eric holder doing there and why were you there . Randall i was announcing the indictment. The Prosecution Team was standing behind him. Brian the biggest question here for the average person watching is, should they trust the system to work . Randall i think if you watch Something Like the menendez trial, it should give people faith in the system. There are individual cases were the system breaks down. My experience, by and large is that the Justice System does work well and people can have confidence with it. When you have the vigorous clash of good advocates on both sides and professional prosecutors who look at the case to determine if there is a case there to put it together. You can rely on what is going on in the courtroom to get at the truth and have the jury make a determination. Brian i cannot resist showing this video. It shows you how close you can get to a situation. This is the deceased former congressman john mercer. It goes back to the 1980 era. Here he is talking to people that he thinks are representing i believe in this case the saudi government or a saudi business person. Here he is, listen closely to what he is willing to do with the money they give him. [begin video clip], there are as that have really done me some favors in the past. Maybe they all moved to one. I dont know. T i think brian he did not get indicted on that. What is going on here other than the obvious . He said he wanted to put money over here and it would help him and his constituency. Is there any way to stop this kind of thing . Hasou know, i think money been influencing politics probably as long as we have had politics, right . I mentioned we had private financing on campaigns that creates a lot of pressure in tensions in that area. I dont think it would solve the problem, but Public Financing would be one step toward reducing the inflows of money in the political system. Brian cory booker, the other senator from new jersey, has ,iven money to the leadership to the defense fund for senator menendez. Sure. Brian have you keep track of all of this . I am not sure i can keep track of all of this, especially after Something Like citizens united. Challenge. L again, the line that you try to draw is between what has become contributions,al like to the defense fund, and relationshiporrupt that is now on trial in new jersey. Brian there are places people can find your writing. Tell them how to get there. Thank you. Called sidebars. You can go to sidebars. Blog. Com. , i am currently a contributing columnist for the washington post. E, you search for my nam you will find some articles. Brian you are also on twitter . Yes. Brian when you are in the classroom, how interested are your students . Class. Is a very popular i have been teaching it for 15 or 16 years. There is a lot of interest. They are in their final year of school, its elective course. Indents are interested criminal law, sometimes defenseors, sometimes attorneys. I get motivated students who are really interested in the topic. The reason that the course is fun for them is the ability to talk about things going on currently in the news in the context of our class, whether it is menendez or what is going on with the special counsel investigation right now. Theres lots of things happening in the real world that we can show what their study is relevant to. He was a federal prosecutor for years. He now teaches the whitecollar crime course at gw. He has these websites where you can read about the menendez case another things. Do you write . On the blog every week or two, and on the washington post, as topics come up. Brian it appears the menendez trial will go on for a while. We appreciate you very much coming in and talking with us. Thank you. I enjoyed it. [captioning performed by the national captioning institute, which is responsible for its caption content and accuracy. Visit ncicap. Org] [captions Copyright National cable satellite corp. 2017] for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at qanda. Org. Cspanlso available as a podcast. Live tonight, Hillary Clinton at theing her book tour warner theatre. In a conversation with former aide and bookstore code coowner linda muscatine. We will have to live conversation at 7 p. M. Here on cspan. Mrs. Clinton we have to make sure we get the best value for the Health Care Dollars we currently spend and reform the system so health care is delivered more efficiently at Higher Quality to all americans. Is americans are spending nearly 1 trillion on health care, and we not getting our moneys worth. For the past 30 years, the Video Library is your free resource for politics, congress, and washington public affairs. Agoher it happened 30 years or 30 minutes ago, find it in cspans Video Library at cspan. Org. Cspan, where history unfolds daily. And a look at the senate floor. In just under an hour the senate is expected to hold a series of votes, including the final passage of the 2018 Defense Authorization bill that covers issues such as Guantanamo Bay and pay raises for service members. That vote is expected in the senate around 530 p. M. Eastern time. You can watch it live over on cspan2. Susan our guest on newsmaker is hakeem jeffries, congressman from new york. As cochair of the democratic committee, he serves on the budget and judiciary committees and is on his third term in congress. Thank you for having me. Susan let me introduce the two reporters who will be asking questions. Cristina marcos of the hill and Heather Caygle of politico. Heather, you are up first. Heather congressman, thank you