‘These Cases Are Not Slam Dunks’: Andy McCarthy Lays Out Why Menendez Might Avoid Jail Time

Former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andy McCarthy laid out Tuesday on Fox News how Democratic New Jersey Sen. Bob Menendez could avoid jail time given current laws.

The Southern District of New York charged Menendez and his wife, Nadine, with three counts relating to an alleged bribery scheme Sept. 22. Authorities found nearly $500,000 in cash and roughly $100,000 in gold bars inside Menendez’s home, according to the indictment. Authorities allege Menendez received the money as a bribe to wield political power to benefit the Egyptian government.

Despite growing calls for Menendez to step down, the senator has defended his actions by citing his Cuban family history for why he keeps money in his house.

“[Menendez] just referred to Cuba and taking money from his own personal account. There is nothing illegal about that. Is that a defense on its face?” Fox’s Bill Hemmer asked McCarthy. (RELATED: ‘You Didn’t Even Try’: Famous Comedian Blasts Bob Menendez As ‘Felony Stupid’)

“No, it’s not a defense, but look, they’re going to have to prove corrupt intent,” McCarthy said. “So anything that he can plausibly show that cuts against that would count in his favor. The problem is, Bill, it sounds like a preposterous explanation, and this is always the problem in these political cases.”

“In a normal case not involving a politician, the defense lawyers would tell their client, ‘Don’t say anything until we at least get a look at the government’s discovery and get some understanding of what the case is, and let’s not be making statements that they can use against us at trial,'” McCarthy said.

McCarthy went on to say that as a political defendant in the public eye, Menendez has to “try to put as much cloud over the government’s case as you can and hope that you convince a juror or two that the government hasn’t proved its case.”

“I should also point out, Bill, that the Supreme Court has made these corruption cases very difficult to prove,” McCarthy continued. “So even if you show that Menendez may have done some things in the favor of people who were paying him money, unless the things he’s done actually arise to what the Supreme Court and the statute call an ‘official act,’ it is simply not going to be sufficient to convict him. So, I don’t want to suggest that it’s a slam dunk case. These cases are not slam dunks, mainly because the people who these laws are being enforced against are the people who write the laws, and it’s in their interest to keep them ambiguous.”

Menendez has maintained his innocence.