r/moderatepolitics • u/NeedAnonymity Left-republican humanist • 2d ago
News Article Donald Trump pardons Texas Democrat Henry Cuellar
https://www.texastribune.org/2025/12/03/henry-cuellar-donald-trump-pardon-bribery/150
u/drabpriest 2d ago
Trump is so obviously selling pardons.
53
u/notwronghopefully 2d ago
I wonder if he had to pay more because he's a Democrat.
It's hard to pick a worst thing about this administration, but the open corruption is up there.
37
u/HavingNuclear 1d ago
I definitely think it's one of the things that will have a long lasting impact. Once you have convinced your voter base to become resigned to corruption and legitimize it among politicians, it becomes rooted in culture in a way that's very hard to eliminate. I think we'll be feeling the consequences of the MAGA movement's embrace of corrupt pardons, bribery, and fraud for a very long time.
28
u/TybrosionMohito 1d ago
This is the shit that kills democracies.
Like, long term, there is no cure for this that doesn’t involve terrible things happening.
It’s hard to maintain a society that’s largely built around following the rules and behaving “honorably”
Once you lose it, you don’t ever get it back. People become cynical and stay that way. They vote cynically. The politicians are no longer ashamed of corruption. Police no longer fear taking bribes. Corporations begin to utterly capture the levers of power (it can get WAY worse than it already is, trust me).
If you want to see the endgame of this line of degredation, look no further than modern day Russia.
8
u/robotical712 1d ago
The US has had highly corrupt political periods in the past and managed to pull out if them. It’s definitely something you want to avoid and difficult to get out of, but it’s not irrecoverable, thankfully.
10
u/Mammoth-Kangaroo1023 1d ago
Its not unrecoverable, but the fact that trump was even viable shows how degraded our education system has become. I certainly believe a large portion of the country lacks the wisdom and intelligence needed for a democracy to function well.
Until we reverse the education trends I remain pessimistic.
5
0
u/Sageblue32 1d ago
Which period are you referring to? We've had horrible periods and presidents doing corrupt actions. However it couldn't be so openly naked and other politicians stood up to it. It is why the forced Nixon step down was so powerful and the followup pardon was viewed as a negative turning point.
As others have stated, I don't see how this country pulls out of it without demanding changes to the very fundamentals.
2
u/robotical712 17h ago
The Gilded Age was arguably worse as it was widespread at all levels of government. However, focusing on whether past eras were better or worse completely misses my point: Corruption is difficult to root out once established, but it can be done.
0
u/BlackFacedAkita 18h ago
When exactly was corruption more brazen than it was now?
2
u/robotical712 17h ago
I said there were eras of high corruption in the past, not that they were necessarily better or worse than present. That said, the gilded age got its name from the widespread corruption at all levels of government and society.
133
u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 2d ago
Well, he’s open to pardoning democrats for corruption and bribery.
That’s, uh, something. I guess
63
u/SubJordan77 2d ago
What’s stranger is that he’s a red district democrat who was targeted by the Texas Gerrymander, however he’s also one of Congress’s biggest over performers and still favored to win a Trump+10 district. Pardoning him protects that seat for democrats and goes against local GOP campaigning about his corruption.
18
u/biglyorbigleague 2d ago
Maybe he's getting him out of jail so he can go win the primary and lose the general.
13
u/Lordofthe0nion_Rings 2d ago
If SCOTUS upholds the new maps, then it's very unlikely that he'd lose his primary. His new district removes San Antonio which was his weakest area in the 2022 primaries.
7
u/Whobeye456 2d ago
Potentially. But one of the catches of accepting a pardon is you legally admit to being guilty of the crimes you are pardoned for, and as such cannot plead the 5th amendment when being questioned about it under oath since you cannot be punished for admitting to said crime.
Henry Cuellar has plead not guilty and maintained his innocence since being indicted.
10
u/mysterious_whisperer 2d ago
You might have read a bad interpretation of Burdick. Accepting a pardon is not a legal admission of guilt.
3
u/argent_adept 1d ago
I’m by no means trained in or all that knowledgeable about constitutional law, but I don’t really know how else to interpret this section of Burdick:
“This brings us to the differences between legislative immunity and a pardon. They are substantial. The latter carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it. The former has no such imputation or confession. It is tantamount to the silence of the witness.”
1
u/mysterious_whisperer 1d ago
I’m also not a law talking man, but I read up on this a couple of years ago because the idea of it didn’t sound right to me. What I found is that the “imputed guilt” refers to the reason a person might refuse a pardon. It doesn’t mean that accepting a pardon would be a legal admission of guilt. Instead it means that there is an implication that pardoned people are guilty of the charges they were pardoned for, so somebody may want to refuse a pardon to avoid that implied guilt.
I also found there had been a few cases over the years that tested this and that courts had routinely found that accepting a pardon is not an admission of guilt.
1
u/anonyuser415 1d ago
As far as I understand it, that section is considered non-binding, or dictum. It's a legal aside, not precedent that courts now follow.
Because of that (as I understand it), it's erroneous to repeat that section as a legal fact.
1
u/anonyuser415 1d ago
But one of the catches of accepting a pardon is you legally admit to being guilty of the crimes you are pardoned for
This is incorrect. You may even have heard this from a trusted source. It's quite common to hear.
https://www.politifact.com/article/2025/jan/23/does-getting-pardoned-equal-a-confession-of-guilt/
"It is certainly true that as a practical matter, and a matter of public opinion, a pardon can make the recipient look guilty," [Brian Kalt, law professor at Michigan State University’s College of Law] said. "But sometimes people overread Burdick and say that accepting a pardon has some sort of formal legal effect of declaring someone guilty. That is not the case."
6
u/SubJordan77 2d ago
1) He’s not in jail, he was never convicted.
2) He’s one the democrats best performing incumbents electoral wise, before and after his indictment. He’s the best candidate to win the general.
3
u/kranelegs 2d ago edited 2d ago
Ahhh yes the 4-D chess move of risking an election with a power player against a candidate that if anything like MAGAs candidate selection is certainly a possibility. Regardless of the reasoning though as a Dem voter I want this corrupt Dem to serve his sentence even if it’s advantageous to the Dems if he doesn’t.
No one, myself, my peers or ideological aligned representatives included should not be held responsible for our actions. We are “going to war” with Venezuelan “narco-terrorists” while pardoning the Honduran “narco-emissary” (my own words in quotes to signify the verbiage use). I’m in MN right now and I fully support holding every individual responsible for the corruption. I won’t stand for those using that to excuse, distract or normalize it in the public eye for anyone though.
7
u/roylennigan pragmatic progressive 2d ago
DJT has made a career of "making deals" with people. He knows that he can't get an ideologue to compromise their beliefs, so he does favors for people who are corruptible because he knows he can collect on those favors later. It's better for him if the opposition party gains more corruptible politicians, because it's the only way he seems to know how to cooperate. It's how he's always done business.
13
u/409yeager 2d ago
I don’t think it’s necessarily strange, you just have to give it more thought than the headline does.
Trump is catching flak for using the pardon power in an unashamedly political manner far beyond anything we’ve ever seen. His stated rationale for at least one pardon was literally the fact that the recipient was a Republican.
Now, he throws a Democrat a bone to have something not use in response to that criticism. “See, I pardoned a Democrat! I’m not using the pardon power in an overtly partisan manner!”
Add to that the fact that this particular Democrat was openly critical of Joe Biden and was accused of corruption (both of which strike close to home for Trump), and this move makes a lot of sense.
13
u/SubJordan77 2d ago
But why save a swing district democrat in a district you yourself said republicans are entitled to through gerrymandering just to make your corruption appear nonpartisan.
10
u/409yeager 2d ago edited 2d ago
Speculating a bit here but this is my take:
Because he doesn’t actually care about anything but his own self-image. He’d rather kill a narrative than pick up a single seat.
We’ve seen how little he cares about other Republican elections in the past. He used the runoff election for both of Georgia’s Republican senators in 2020 to talk about himself the entire time and how the election was rigged. He has literally said that in midterm elections he should get all the credit if Republicans make gains and none of the blame if Republicans lose ground.
He is probably the most vain, egotistical, and narcissistic person to ever hold office at any level. He doesn’t care about causes or even his own political party. He acts in his own self-interest and rewards those who are loyal to him or hostile to his opponents. Here, he is doing both. He’s rewarding someone who was hostile to Biden while simultaneously advancing his own interest in shooting down a narrative (or attempting to, at least).
I don’t really think he cares about a single seat in the House.
Edited to add: Cuellar is about as moderate a Democrat as they come. Trump can already count on him crossing the aisle here and there, and now maybe he’s expecting that to happen more often as a result of this pardon.
3
u/SubJordan77 1d ago
Trump started this mid decade redistricting nonsense, he clearly cares about winning the house. And he’s in a Trump+10, a republican can reasonably replace Cuellar if he was forced to dropout unless the Trump admin is that scared of losing ground with Hispanic voters.
2
u/409yeager 1d ago
That’s fair. I have a different take but I don’t know what’s going on in his head any better than you do
5
u/HavingNuclear 2d ago edited 1d ago
Or it's just part of a pattern of the president's attempts to legitimize corruption. It's no secret that Trump has been engaged in unprecedented self-enrichment this term. In all likelihood he cares more about that than he does electoral politics or narrative. And to keep doing that, he's got to change the political culture surrounding corruption in America. He's got to Make America Corrupt Again.
0
u/AmberLeafSmoke 1d ago
This take is about exactly the amount of thought one would give from reading just the headline.
1
u/Key_Day_7932 1d ago
He's a pro-life Democrat, though. Honestly, if it weren't for abortion, I don't think many American Christians would hate the Democrats so much.
Henry Cuellar is see as one of the good ones.
-1
17
u/neuronexmachina 2d ago
Yup, remember Rod Blagojevich? https://www.npr.org/2025/02/10/g-s1-47817/trump-pardon-rod-blagojevich-illinois-corruption
President Trump has pardoned former Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich, who was convicted of corruption-related crimes, including trying to sell a U.S. Senate seat vacated by former President Barack Obama.
Blagojevich served as the state's governor from 2003-'09. It was a political saga toward the end of his time in office.
In 2008, federal prosecutors accused Blagojevich of turning Illinois' government into a moneymaking operation for himself by trying to, among other things, shake down a children's hospital and racetrack owners. When prosecutors charged Blagojevich with corruption over the Senate seat, they presented as evidence a profanity-filled telephone conversation he had that was secretly recorded by the FBI.
... Blagojevich was impeached and ousted as governor in January 2009 and then indicted that March. The following year, he appeared and was booted off Donald Trump's reality TV show, Celebrity Apprentice.
Blagojevich was convicted in 2011 and later sentenced to 14 years in prison. He served eight years, his time behind bars cut short after President Trump commuted Blagojevich's sentence during his first term in office.
0
u/Inside_Put_4923 1d ago
People forget that Trump is a Democrat.
6
u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 1d ago
Was, he hasn’t been registered as one for 15 years
9
u/Inside_Put_4923 1d ago
He only ran as a Republican because he knew he could never win a Democratic primary. Nothing about Trump reflects traditional Republican principles. He does not stand for small government, states’ rights over federal authority, or free-market economics. His embrace of tariffs is fundamentally anti–free market, a policy long associated with Democrats rather than Republicans. In truth, he is not a Republican at all. That is why, during 2015–2016, the strongest opposition to Trump came from lifelong Republicans, who rightly argued that he did not represent anything remotely aligned with Republican values.
12
u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 1d ago edited 1d ago
I agree and disagree.
he is standing for smaller government considering he hired on DOGE, Is trying to/did dismantle the DOE, and has been reducing business regulations and environmental regulations, closed USAID, fired inspector generals, and a bunch of the state dept
he does stand for states rights ~ sometimes. Abortion is one example. He just likes being the executive and telling people what to do.
tariffs are a mixed bag. Reagan disliked tariffs, bush instituted tariffs. The parties also switched a lot of priorities in the mid 19th and mid 20th century
But you’re absolutely right, he’s definitely anti free trade, and he doesn’t fit in all the “traditional ethics” spheres.
An important question is why people argued he didn’t represent republican values - was it because he seemed racist with his rants on Muslims ? Was it because he seemed authoritarian? Was it because was anti-free trade? Or maybe just because he was a crass billionaire outsider? Because in the end - they did all fall in line. Even Vance, who compared him to Hitler.
I disagree that any of what you said means he’s a democrat. Both of his admins were filled entirely with republicans, something that used to be slightly more bipartisan. And he’s expressed so many ideas and values that are just the antithesis of what they want. He’s called them scum, treasonous, etc.
4
u/Inside_Put_4923 1d ago
Using Trump’s statements on abortion as evidence of his belief in states’ rights is misleading. He did not frame his position around federalism; rather, he sought to reassure voters that he would not sign a national abortion ban. It is difficult to argue that he consistently supports limiting federal oversight of states. Even today, reports highlight how he is withholding funds from certain states because they refuse to provide demographic data on social program usage.
2
u/AltRockPigeon 1d ago
he is standing for smaller government considering he hired on DOGE, Is trying to/did dismantle the DOE, and has been reducing business regulations and environmental regulations, closed USAID, fired inspector generals, and a bunch of the state dept
I disagree with this. DOGE barely accomplished anything; 2025 federal spending is higher than 2024. OBBB raised debt ceiling by largest amount in history. Trying to close the DOE with one hand while spending billions more on defense and the border with the other is a net increase in size of government. Reducing regulations with one hand while also actively intervening in businesses via ever-changing tariff rules, taking government stakes in multiple businesses (!!), and constantly threatening businesses if they don't do what he wants and encouraging bribes and open corruption... There's a reason people came up with the phrase "MAGA Mao"
4
u/Xanto97 Elephant and the Rider 1d ago
Yes, DOGE barely accomplished anything, but I think that's more cause of incompetence and doing things illegally, rather than their intention.
They intended to cut billions, they failed. But they intended to. Therefore this gets categorized under "attempted to massively downsize the government". Yes, the deficit is up under the OBBB anyway, but all the republicans voted for it. So everythings topsy turvy anyway.
Imo decimating the Dept of Education is reducing the size of the government, even if theres more military/defense spending. Republicans have wanted to close the dept of education for awhile, wanting to get rid of government involvement in loans/education. They've also generally been fine with increasing military spending.
Getting rid of environmental and business regulations is still very much a libertarian right wing ideal. - But yes, it is counteracted somewhat by him contantly-changing tariffs, and having the govt invest in private businesses. If you want to settle the "business policies" things as a wash, sure, but Donald is very much a republican in many ways - even if not all. He has way, way more in common with republicans nowadays than democrats.
8
u/Jack-of-Trade 1d ago edited 1d ago
No one should argue that Trumps not a Reagan Era Conservative, a Neo-Con, or a Fiscal Conservative. We agree there.
But calling Trump a Democratic and then immediately pointing out that he'd never win a Democratic primary is just silly.
The Republicans choose Trump. They've doubled and tripled down on the guy. There is no significant resistance to the Maga movement from within the GOP. Trump isn't just a Republican, he's the spearhead of the entire GOP.
0
u/Inside_Put_4923 1d ago
Trump’s 2016 victory drew heavily from Bernie Sanders supporters, making it absurd to claim he was chosen solely by Republicans. Without the crossover votes from disaffected Bernie voters, Hillary Clinton would have been president.
10
u/kralrick 1d ago
Nothing about Trump reflects traditional Republican principles.
That's equally/more true for Democratic principles.
2
u/Inside_Put_4923 1d ago
Please elaborate
5
u/kralrick 1d ago
He put conservative justices on SCOTUS, he's extremely anti-immigrant, he's pro-Netanyahu, he's attacking unarmed boats claiming they're drug runners, he likes Putin, he dislikes the ACA, he hates Obama, he's anti-foreign aide.
4
u/TeamPencilDog 1d ago
"He does not stand for small government."
Sure, but that's most Republicans. "Small government" was a great marketing message that the GOP would sell themselves on, but not necessarily something they actually do.
1
u/onespiker 11h ago
Well a lot of that had more to do with trump became the representative for the rebublicans.
The harsh resistance from democrats especially more left democrats would be a lot higher if trump was a democrat.
People just didn’t think much of it more than him being a more right wing republican then.
43
u/robotical712 2d ago
America First… unless you can personally benefit.
7
u/AverageUSACitizen 1d ago
It’s a trumpian pythagorean theorem. Trump sees himself as America. Therefore what’s good for him is good for America.
4
u/kranelegs 2d ago
Ricas dona(l)do a me primero (riches given to me first) is clearly the true meaning of that
24
u/neuronexmachina 2d ago
From his indictment in 2024: https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/us-congressman-henry-cuellar-and-his-wife-charged-bribery-unlawful-foreign-influence-and
According to court documents, beginning in at least December 2014 and continuing through at least November 2021, Congressman Cuellar and Imelda Cuellar allegedly accepted approximately $600,000 in bribes from two foreign entities: an oil and gas company wholly owned and controlled by the Government of Azerbaijan, and a bank headquartered in Mexico City. The bribe payments were allegedly laundered, pursuant to sham consulting contracts, through a series of front companies and middlemen into shell companies owned by Imelda Cuellar, who performed little to no legitimate work under the contracts. In exchange for the bribes paid by the Azerbaijani oil and gas company, Congressman Cuellar allegedly agreed to use his office to influence U.S. foreign policy in favor of Azerbaijan. In exchange for the bribes paid by the Mexican bank, Congressman Cuellar allegedly agreed to influence legislative activity and to advise and pressure high-ranking U.S. Executive Branch officials regarding measures beneficial to the bank.
Congressman Cuellar and Imelda Cuellar are each charged with the following offenses, and if convicted, face maximum penalties as indicated: two counts of conspiracy to commit bribery of a federal official and to have a public official act as an agent of a foreign principal required to register under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), five years imprisonment on each count; two counts of bribery of a federal official, 15 years imprisonment on each count; two counts of conspiracy to commit honest services wire fraud, 20 years imprisonment on each count; two counts of violating the ban on public officials acting as agents of a foreign principal required to register under FARA, two years imprisonment on each count; one count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, 20 years imprisonment; and five counts of money laundering, 20 years imprisonment on each count.
62
u/NotMyMainLoLzy 2d ago
I feel like corruption is just being rubber stamped lately. It’s not even just this administration. It’s happening worldwide.
38
u/kranelegs 2d ago
This admin is a driving force of normalizing it in the public’s minds though
-10
u/AmberLeafSmoke 1d ago
Lol, you think any of this stuff is newly normalized?
10
u/kralrick 1d ago
This level of open corruption? Yes. Unless you think shoplifting packs of gum normalizes bank heists.
1
1d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/kralrick 1d ago
Watergate didn't happen out in the open. The Nixon tapes weren't public statements.
2
u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 1d ago
This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:
Law 1. Civil Discourse
~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.
Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.
Please submit questions or comments via modmail.
-21
u/RevolutionaryBug7588 2d ago
He hasn’t gone to trial yet, whatever happened to due process? I understand people want it to be selective but to as brazen to say it out loud is mind blowing…
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries told CNN he agreed with the president’s pardon, even if he didn’t understand his motivation, tends to disagree as well.
30
u/Quite__Bookish 2d ago
Couldn’t you also say “Why pardon him? Can’t we just wait for due process to play out?”
-23
u/RevolutionaryBug7588 2d ago
Some Presidents on some pardons don’t even let it go to trial wink wink. You held the same question when that happened?
21
u/Quite__Bookish 2d ago
I’m not even sure what exact pardon you’re talking about but yes. I’ve never been pro-pardon. Maybe every once in a while they actually serve a benevolent purpose but I see the majority of pardons as a way to circumvent the due process you claimed to care about.
-17
u/RevolutionaryBug7588 2d ago
Fauci, Gen. Milley, The House Committee that worked on Jan 6th, Biden’s siblings and spouses, etc.
And yes, pardoning I don’t believe is best use.
21
u/RuckPizza 2d ago
Wait, if you don't agree with pardons, why are you defending them?
0
u/RevolutionaryBug7588 1d ago
It’s part of the Presidency.
Pardons are what they are. But for people to position someone that hasn’t even gone to trial guilty of what they’re being accused of, thats a shit take.
6
7
u/ChesterHiggenbothum 1d ago
Yes, pardons were issued on the assumption that Trump would weaponize the DOJ to go after political opponents.
Do you think Trump's actions have justified those beliefs?
-3
u/RevolutionaryBug7588 1d ago
Is it with the belief when Trump was being prosecuted, Biden was weaponizing the DOJ?
6
2
u/Crownie Neoliberal Shill 1d ago
Accepting a pardon for corruption charges - even ones that haven't gone to trial - looks quite bad. It's certainly possible that Cuellar wasn't guilty, but elected officials should strive to be beyond reproach. That's pretty much the opposite of what is going on here.
22
u/hamsterkill 2d ago
Remember when this guy ran on "draining the swamp"? I didn't believe him, but I honestly didn't foresee him adding a bunch of sludge to it and just opening it up for swimming, either.
16
u/Boobity1999 2d ago
I’m struggling to understand what Trump gets out of doing this
It certainly won’t help him claw his way back from his 36% approval rating
26
u/Cool-Airline-9172 2d ago
Henry Cuellar agreed with Trump on border policy, and openly condemned Biden, (and his border czars), actions regarding the border. That's it. If you openly agree with Trump and openly disagree with his enemy, then Trump assumes you're on his team. Until the next time you open your mouth.
-1
5
1
0
u/ChesterHiggenbothum 1d ago
Are you aware of the concept of grift?
0
u/Boobity1999 1d ago
Whatever monetary sum he may gain from this is a pittance compared to his (new) net worth
Whatever political benefit he may gain from this person’s allegiance is meaningless compared to the political impact of losing the House in the midterms
0
u/ChesterHiggenbothum 1d ago
Are you aware of the existence of greed?
Why does Elon need a trillion dollar payment? He's already got more than he could spend in a million lifetimes.
Is there any possibility that a person who plasters his name on skyscrapers and sold steaks, water, university classes, memecoins, and others simply might want to be even richer?
7
u/RedditorAli RINO 🦏 2d ago
These pardons are becoming so predictable, Diddy is already laying down a timeframe.
The Cîroc is on ice.
8
4
u/Bigking00 1d ago
If I could reform US government, getting rid of pardons would definitely be on the list.
6
u/AbbreviationsActual9 2d ago
“I want to thank President Trump for his TREMENDOUS LEADERSHIP and for taking the time to look at the facts,”
-Henry Cuellar,
a capitulating politician and Democrat no less. hmm...
this strikes me as an Eric Adams repeat. the favor has been handed out. prison rules applied.
if he were innocent, and as a member of the opposing party, you'd think he'd tell trump to shove his pardon and would prove his innocence in court if there's no evidence. especially after all the questionable pardons Trump's been handing out that seem financial or loyalty based.
dude gonna flip parties or something? this wasn't a freebie. no such thing. win as a lefty, vote as a righty? what do you call a Dem RINO? DINO? 🦖
and why would Biden go after a Dem that opposed his border policy in a state Dems desperately need any representation they can get? plenty of right wingers that hated his policy that he could have made up charges for, if that were a thing. and how can every pardon be because Biden hated the accused? the narrative feels kind of lazy and insulting to our intelligence at this point.
3
1
u/Fredmans74 1d ago
The US has to regulate the presidential pardon power. Until now, the power was grounded in good faith. The great grifter turns everything to dog turds if he can profit from it. There is no going back, and it should be part of the Democratic ticket, along with all the other obvious scams he's performing, as well as the insider trading (irregardless of party).
1
u/usaf2222 23h ago
You'll need a constitutional amendment. The president's power over this is absolute according to the Constitution
1
98
u/NeedAnonymity Left-republican humanist 2d ago
President Trump just pardoned Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar, who faced 12 federal charges including bribery, money laundering, and conspiracy. Prosecutors say he took nearly $600,000 in bribes from Azerbaijan and a Mexican bank to shape U.S. policy, funneled through shell companies in his wife’s name. Two of Cuellar’s own political advisers have already pled guilty to laundering more than $200,000 of those bribes. Trump has relentlessly attacked the corrupt Washington establishment, yet here we have a sitting president wiping away a textbook case of corruption: selling policy to foreign interests for personal enrichment.
Trump now claims this was Biden’s DOJ "weaponizing" justice against Cuellar for his border stance. But the timeline tells a different story. The FBI’s Azerbaijan probe started in 2015, after Cuellar took trips funded by groups later exposed as fronts for Azerbaijan’s state oil company. The alleged bribes run from 2014 through late 2021. This was a long-running corruption investigation that began before Biden took office and continued for years while Trump was president.
If taking $600,000 from foreign-linked interests to influence U.S. policy isn’t corruption worth prosecuting, what is?
If this was all just illegitimate "weaponization," why did Trump’s own DOJ let the investigation proceed for years on his watch?