In New Jersey, federal prosecutor Philip Sellinger testified at Senator Bob Menendez’s bribery trial that Menendez sought to discuss a criminal case involving a real estate developer before recommending Sellinger for the post. This revelation indicates a pattern of Menendez attempting to intervene in criminal cases to benefit businessmen who bribed him and his wife with gold bars, cash, and a car. Menendez recommended Sellinger as U.S. attorney believing he could influence him to protect Fred Daibes, a real estate developer and friend facing federal charges. The trial also includes businessmen Wael Hana and Jose Uribe, with Menendez’s wife Nadine’s trial postponed due to health reasons.
Sellinger and Menendez had a long-standing friendship dating back to the early 2000s, with Menendez supporting Sellinger’s campaigns and fundraisers. Menendez had previously indicated he would nominate Sellinger as U.S. attorney if Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election, but the plan changed after Joe Biden’s election in 2020. Menendez brought up Daibes’ case during a meeting with Sellinger, expressing concerns of unfair treatment and hoping Sellinger would review it carefully. Sellinger, on the other hand, acknowledged a potential conflict of interest due to a past lawsuit involving Daibes, leading him to inform the Justice Department and recuse himself from the case.
Despite Menendez initially withdrawing his recommendation for Sellinger as U.S. attorney, Sellinger remained interested in the position and reiterated his potential conflict of interest regarding the Daibes case. Menendez eventually recommended Sellinger for the job, but Sellinger had already referred the conflict to the Justice Department, which advised him to have no involvement in the case. Menendez’s reluctant response to a public event invitation from Sellinger indicated a strained relationship, with menendez expressing concerns about the perception of a relationship with the U.S. attorney. Sellinger maintained that Menendez never asked him to engage in anything improper or unethical over their two-decade friendship.
The trial sheds light on alleged bribery and corruption involving Menendez and businessmen who sought favors in return for financial incentives. The case highlights Menendez’s attempts to influence judicial matters and protect individuals facing criminal charges, raising questions about abuse of power and disregard for legal processes. Sellinger’s testimony provides insights into the complex relationship between public officials and law enforcement, underscoring the importance of maintaining ethical standards and impartiality in legal proceedings. The ongoing trial will further explore the extent of Menendez’s involvement in criminal activities and the consequences for those implicated in the case.
