Everything There Is To Know About Eric Adams' Corruption Charges
Eric Adams is hot water — here’s everything you need to know.
Part of my Substack mission is to keep you informed and rooted in facts. I watch a multi-view look at the news (Fox, CNN, MSNBC, & BBC) while I work, and the facts about the Eric Adams corruption case seem to differ from network to network. Here’s a one-stop shop for all the facts.
If you like this post, please share it with a friend who will enjoy it!
Let’s start with the corruption charges. In September of 2024, New York City Mayor Eric Adams was charged with conspiracy. He allegedly accepted campaign contributions from foreign nationals, namely Turkish officials. According to an indictment from the Biden DOJ, Adams solicited benefits from foreign governments, including money and luxury travel, and then used his connections with the New York Fire Department to expedite the opening of a Manhattan skyscraper belonging to foreign nations.
Adams allegedly attempted to conceal his conduct and hide the receipts of his alleged wrongdoings from the public and law enforcement.
Adams was charged with one count of wire fraud, two counts of soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals, and one count of soliciting and accepting a bribe.
These accusations date back to 2014. The alleged “official act” in the indictment, took place before Adams was elected Mayor.
When these accusations were initially revealed, it was presumed in conservative media circles that the DOJ’s indictment was, at least partially, politically motivated. Adams was a vocal critic of the Biden Administration’s handling of the migrant crisis in New York City — arguably one of the biggest campaign issues for voters in the 2024 election — though, Adams was still an ardent supporter of the former President.
On February 10, acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove ordered the Department of Justice to drop the charges against Adams. The charges were set to be prosecuted in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) office.
At the time of the announcement, the DOJ did not say they were dropping the case because the evidence against Eric Adams was nonexistent. They said they were dropping the case because it was hindering the election process.
On February 19, Chad Mizelle, the Chief of Staff for the DOJ under the Trump administration, elaborated on the DOJ’s rationale for dropping the case. He said that upon reading the case against Adams, the SDNY’s legal theory of public corruption appears to be a stretch.
He said in a thread, “EVERY TIME DOJ has pursued expansive theories of public corruption, the Department has been rebuked by the Supreme Court. Put simply, DOJ’s track record of public corruption cases at the Supreme Court is abysmal.”
“Additionally, the amount of resources it takes to bring a prosecution like this is incredible — thousands and thousands of man hours. Those resources could be better used arresting violent criminals to keep New York safe or prosecuting gang and cartel members.”
Long story short — the DOJ has different priorities as they believe their chances are statistically slim.
There is firm opposition to these charges being brought, overwhelming from New York Democrats. Gov. Kathy Hochul is considering the removal of Eric Adams after repeatedly calling for his resignation.
On February 18, Hochul met with prominent leaders including Rep. Hakeem Jeffries and City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams about utilizing the city’s charter to remove Adams from his position.
Procedurally, the New York City charter outlines a court-like process for the Governor to remove the Mayor. The Governor would bring charges against Adams, he would respond, and a body would decide whether the Governor had standing to remove Adams. These removal powers have never been used in the city’s history so it’s unprecedented territory.
Hochul is certainly not the only Democrat vocally opposed to Adams. To no surprise, nearly every primary opponent of Adams in the upcoming Mayoral election has called for his ousting. Alongside Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez who claimed that Adams should have resigned when the corruption charges were initially brought.
It’s a fair question to ask — why did the protests against Adams and the resignation calls get distinctly louder after the DOJ dropped the case as opposed to when the DOJ unveiled its case? Well, there’s a belief that the Trump administration and Eric Adams engaged in a quid pro quo.
The belief is that the Trump administration offered Adams a deal wherein the DOJ would drop the charges if Adams would cooperate with the government’s immigration policies, despite the city’s sanctuary status. Adams, the White House, and border czar Tom Homan deny these allegations.
On February 14, Adams went on Fox & Friends with Tom Homan. Those who believe there’s a quid pro quo feel the segment included proof of their beliefs. In the video, Homan references an “agreement we came to.”
Some people believe Homan’s reference was a reference to a quid pro quo. Others believe this isn’t out of character as Adams has long been in favor of federal assistance in the migrant crisis in New York City.
In light of this narrative, which has yet to be proven true or false, seven federal prosecutors assigned to this case resigned in defiance of the DOJ’s decision. Shortly thereafter, four deputy mayors for Adams resigned as well.
People on the right, including myself, have questioned why the resignations of Adams staff members happened after the case was dropped. It’s confusing that deputy mayors wouldn’t resign when the corruption charges were unveiled against him back in September if they believed Adams wasn’t innocent.
On February 19, a federal judge heard from the DOJ why it believes the SDNY should not prosecute Adams. Judge Dale Ho must decide whether to grant the DOJ’s request to dismiss the case.
Most legal analysts seem to believe that Judge Ho will grant the government’s motion to toss out the charges. Others believe that if the quid pro quo between Adams and the Trump administration exists, it would be in Adams’s best interest for Ho to dismiss the government’s motion and force the case to proceed.
Common Clause, a nonpartisan organization focused on US election integrity, filed a motion urging Judge Ho to appoint a special prosecutor to investigate and charge Adams if he chooses to grant the federal government’s motion.
Judge Ho appears to have a political bias. He was appointed to the SDNY district court in 2021 by Joe Biden and has argued that the Republican Party is infected by an “anti-democratic virus.” He was the former director of the left-wing ACLU. People on the right suggest that the judge’s vocal opposition to the Trump administration may play a role in his decision.
For more on this story and other Underreported Stories check out today’s show: