Is there a good article anywhere that directly draws the line between cases he has seen and perks he has been given? I know that he should have to declare all of the trips, etc, and that that is a big problem. But I am interested in how he has directly damaged democracy in more obvious quid pro quo. I am especially interested in having an answer to anyone that tries to minimize what he has done.
Is there a good article anywhere that directly draws the line between cases he has seen and perks he has been given? I know that he should have to declare all of the trips, etc, and that that is a big problem. But I am interested in how he has directly damaged democracy in more obvious quid pro quo. I am especially interested in having an answer to anyone that tries to minimize what he has done.
I mean look up every case the heritage foundation has brought to the supreme court.