[vlovich123]

It wasn’t just implicit. There was explicit acknowledgment of the problem and turning a blind eye precisely because they were getting paid by the banks. I don’t know how else to categorize that except as bribery - you’re literally paying money to influence the outcome which is the very definition of bribery.

[specialist]

IIRC, SCOTUS recently ruled that only an explicit quid pro quo is considered a bribe. So laundering monies thru multiple parties is a-okay and mutual backscratching, such as a gifting someone an RV and then coincidentally getting preferential lucrative judgements, is reciprocal altruism. Or something. Because vibes.

I know, I know. Requiring conspirators to say "this is a bribe" for there to be legal jeopardy is sort of nuts.