and as Chris pointed out this is not the first time Senator Menendez has faced Federal corruption charges his first indictment ended in mistrial in 2017 and while the cases have a lot of similarities there's a lot more boasting for the prosecution this time around senior correspondent Brenda Flanagan takes a look Porter's cheered Senator Bob Menendez after his first indictment fellow Democrats expressed solidarity when their senior senator faced corruption charges for helping his longtime friend Solomon melgan in exchange for trips and gifts now he's repeating the request he made back in 2015. and I asked my friends my colleagues and the community to hold their judgment and remember all the other times when prosecutors got it wrong remember prosecutors get it wrong sometimes sadly I know that a grim Menendez made that same argument yesterday after the feds indicted him again on corruption charges this time nobody cheered and with top Democrats demanding he resigned including his Senate colleague Cory Booker it's a whole different ball game with an eye-popping pile of alleged bribes from three business acquaintances prosecutors loved to show jurors a splashy stuff you know flashy cars cash flashing around gold bars and from the face of it it doesn't appear that the Friendship argument may be as strong here former Federal prosecutor Brian Whistler says Menendez beat the rap first time around because two out of 12 jurors believed he just did favors for a friend the feds failed to prove a quid pro quo a this for that this indictment includes details like text messages trying to connect the evidentiary dots in a case the feds really don't want to lose when you go after a sitting Senator a senior senator in a prominent position um who's already been mistried and who believes that to be an overzealous agency you have to come back with a head shot the second time around a picture's worth a thousand words and so the government's theory is we show this stuff it looks bad uh it rubs off on the defendant and forces him to try to explain it away but defense expert Stan brand suggests prosecutors could stumble over legal precedence trying to prove Menendez tried to benefit the Egyptian government while acting as chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee courts have shielded lawmakers doing their job the weakest link brand points to charges Menendez tried to disrupt criminal investigations in return for a Mercedes-Benz and other gifts that one's very problematic I think for the government where he's reached outside the scope of his senatorial position on the prosecutions I think that's maybe his weakest leg of his defense brand says the prosecution still has to prove a quid pro quo That's Not Mere innuendo but Whistler notes prosecutors can build a solid case using circumstantial evidence I think the quality of the evidence including the extensive amount of communication texts emails seems to be greater in this case but most prudent prosecutors are are also quick to say it's it's never a layup even a sin pancake has two sides there's pre-trial motions on speech of debate you have to start chipping away at these cases before trial Abby Lowell will again be defending Menendez who has more than seven million in his campaign War chest that's why brand advises elected clients to never resign they'll need to pay legal fees I'm Brenda Flanagan NJ Spotlight news [Music]