In the absence of proof of an express quid pro quo deal, such conflicted persons will predictably defend, as Clinton herself defends her enormous legalized bribes from special interests, on the ground that he or she personally has superhuman resistance to ordinary human venality and no one can prove their subjective intentions to be otherwise. But conflict of interest recusal does not rely on either proof of quid pro quo deals or of subjective intentions, nor disproof of such superhuman powers of resistance to temptation. "The reason for disqualifying a whole class on the ground of bias is the law's recognition that, if the circumstances of that class, in the run of instances, are likely to generate bias, consciously or unconsciously, it would be a hopeless endeavor to search out the impact of these circumstances on the mind and judgment of a particular individual." See Dennis v. United States, 339 U.S. 162, 181 (1950) (Frankfurter, J.).
Therefore if, like Ickes, any RBC member or Superdelegate has been on the Clintons' payroll or objectively a beneficiary of their corrupt political network -- the quintessential Tammany Hall operation of the Second Gilded Age -- then they must recuse without further evidence. For this purpose each member of the RBC and Superdelegate must be required to file disclosure forms detailing all direct or indirect financial dealings with the candidates, their family members and associates.
In response to just such overt Democratic Party corruption the Republican National Committee Chairman has publicized his party's rejection of the undemocratic practice of Superdelegates. He could accurately characterize his Party to be, in this regard, "unlike on the Democratic side where they have Superdelegates and could give a darn about what the grassroots are telling the party. That's not how we operate our party on our side."
This idea that the Republican Party presidential nomination apparatus is more democratic and less corrupt than the Democratic Party apparatus will make a powerful message to Independents looking for the least corrupt party in 2016, if Clinton wins the nomination based on the anti-democratic rules discussed here. Of course Republicans can afford to maintain a fairer process because whoever it selects will either be a celebrity plutocrat promoted by a plutocratic mass media, or a corrupt politician owned by plutocrats. The Republican process does not need to deceive and cheat, like Democrats do, to prevent democracy from breaking out inside their Party from an anti-plutocratic base. Plutocracy is built-in for Republicans.
----
Rob Hager, a Harvard Law graduate, is a public interest litigator who filed amicus briefs in the Montana sequel to Citizens United and has worked as an international consultant on anti-corruption policy. He is currently writing a three-part book assessing proposals for ending the political influence of special interest money. The current eLibrary draft of the first part, Hillary Clinton's Dark Money Disclosure "Pillar," is available online.
(Original versions of this article were published by Counterpunch, HuffPost , NoC, and Egberto.)
(Article changed on March 7, 2016 at 20:15)
(Article changed on March 7, 2016 at 20:28)
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
1
1
