Eric Adams's Idiot Lawyer Just Undermined His Own Defense
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by Emile (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).
Source: The New Republic
New York City Mayor Eric Adams’s lawyer is trying to get his federal bribery allegations dismissed by arguing that even if the mayor did accept gifts and favors from one Turkish official for years, it didn’t constitute bribery because it happened before Adams was elected mayor.
Alex Spiro, Adams’s attorney with a long list of celebrity clients, argued in a filing Monday that the bribery charge against Adams should be dismissed. He argued that the alleged scheme did not satisfy the definition of bribery because Adams’s agreement to receive free and discounted travel and accommodations from a senior Turkish official was not quid pro quo in exchange for an official act.
Rather, Spiro argued that Adams’s indictment simply alleged that he had “agreed to generally assist with the ‘operation’ or ‘regulation’ of a Turkish consulate building in Manhattan, where he had no authority whatsoever, in exchange for travel benefits.”
Spiro cited the Supreme Court’s ruling in Snyder v. United States in June, which found that it is not illegal under federal anti-bribery law for state and local officials to accept gratuities for acts they have already taken. This decision, which overturned the conviction of a former Indiana mayor, substantially weakened the government’s ability to pursue federal anti-bribery complaints and challenge corruption.
Read more: https://newrepublic.com/post/186518/eric-adams-lawyer-fraud-defense-bribes
The Extremes (The current Supreme Court) has unleashed a whole lot of crap into the legal system. Perhaps intentionally, to undermine the Rule Of Law.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Feds don't move to indict high profile politicians unless they've got them dead to rights. He's trying to soften the blow of something he cannot disprove. "Yea, he did it, but what's wrong with doing it?"
Thanks, SCOTUS, for making bribery legal. All you have to do is Quid after the Pro Quo. And since the majority of SCOTUS members are on various "payrolls", why not? 
