—
The Judiciary Impeachment Report charges Trump with "Constitutional Bribery" as one of the many components of his “abuse of power” — including “offenses, both constitutional and criminal in character.”
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6579566-House-Judiciary-Committee-Impeachment-Report
117-118 of Document
123-124 of Reader [Emphasis added]
4. President Trump’s Abuse of Power Encompassed Impeachable “Bribery” and Violations of Federal Criminal Law
The first Article of Impeachment charged President Trump with an abuse of power as that constitutional offense has long been understood. While there is no need for a crime to be proven in order for impeachment to be warranted, here, President Trump’s scheme or course of conduct also encompassed other offenses, both constitutional and criminal in character, and it is appropriate for the Committee to recognize such offenses in assessing the question of impeachment.
a. Constitutional Bribery
“Bribery” under the Impeachment Clause occurs where a President corruptly offers, solicits, or accepts something of personal value to influence his own official actions.[658] In that respect, “Bribery is . . . an especially egregious and specific example of a President abusing his power for private gain.”[659] Based on their lived experience, the Framers had good cause to view such conduct as grounds for impeachment. Bribery was considered “so heinous an Offence, that it was sometimes punished as High Treason.” [660] And it was received wisdom in the late-17th century that nothing can be “a greater Temptation to Officers [than] to abuse their Power by Bribery and Extortion.”[661]
There is a well-documented background discussion on what “Bribery” meant to the Framers ...
41-42 of Document
47-48 of Reader [Emphasis added]
This conclusion draws still more support from a closely related part of the common law. In the late-17 century, “bribery” was a relatively new offense, and was understood as overlapping with the more ancient common law crime of “extortion.”[208] Extortion,” in turn, was defined as the “abuse of public justice, which consists in any officer’s unlawfully taking, by colour of his office, from any man, any money or thing of value, that is not due to him, or more than is due, or before it is due.”[209] Under this definition, both bribery and extortion occurred when an official used his public position to obtain private benefits to which he was not entitled. Conduct which qualified as bribery was therefore “routinely punished as common law extortion.”[210] To the Framers, who would have seen bribery and extortion as virtually coextensive, when a President acted in his official capacity to offer, solicit, or accept an improper personal benefit, he committed “Bribery.”[211] Turning to the nature of the improper personal benefit: because officials can be corrupted in many ways, the benefit at issue in a bribe can be anything of subjective personal value to the President. This is not limited to money.