US senators question big tech, including Apple, on the reason behind inauguration donation...
Apple may not have donated directly, but CEO Tim Cook joined other big tech companies in donating $1 million to Trump's inauguration fund, and senators have concerns about corruption.

Apple didn't donate to the inauguration directly. Image source: Apple
It's been no secret that tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Meta, and Amazon are concerned about how the incoming administration will view so-called "big tech." Many major tech companies have contributed at least $1 million to the Trump inauguration fund, and many CEOs and billionaires will be present, which is a departure from previous inaugurations.
According to a report from The Verge, the significance of unusually large donations for this presidency isn't lost on US Senator Elizabeth Warren and Michael Bennet. They question the motive behind the donations and worry that it is a sign of corruption.
"You have a clear and direct interest in obtaining favors from the incoming administration: your company and many other Big Tech donors are already the subject of ongoing federal investigations and regulatory actions," the lawmakers write. "These donations raise questions about corruption and the influence of corporate money on the Trump administration, and Congress and the public deserve answers."
Data shows that previous donations were significantly smaller by comparison for the Biden inauguration four years ago. Meta didn't donate at all, Google provided $337,500, and Apple donated only $43,200.
It is worth noting that this scrutiny from senators may be one of the several reasons why Apple CEO Tim Cook donated the $1 million personally from his funds. Apple hasn't contributed any of its finances to the inauguration fund.
There are sure to be conspiracy theories around the sum of $1 million appearing on every big tech donation check. One could even call back to that scene in "Austin Powers" where Dr. Evil is laughed out of the room for asking for such an absurdly low ransom for the world.
However, instead of paying ransoms, big tech appears to be paying for favors from the incoming administration. It's no secret that lawmakers around the world, including in the United States, have been scrutinizing and regulating big tech at an increased rate.
There's no way of knowing how the donations and attendance to the inauguration will affect Trump, if at all. Some have even gone so far as to change their company policy and throw parties to celebrate the incoming administration.
It was learned very quickly during the first Trump term that flattery went a long way. Tim Cook kept that in mind when attending dinners and meetings, or making phone calls directly to Trump.
Flattery and citizen outcries may also be what lead to the TikTok ban enforcement being delayed, and ultimately, overturned.
It isn't clear what the senators intend to do about this. They ask for a response from the tech companies by January 30.
Read on AppleInsider
Comments
Trump must have gotten $10-$20 mil by now. The inauguration will cost a couple, the rest will go in his pocket. Simple as that. He did the same thing for his first inauguration.
Congress needs to legislate the Citizens United vs. FEC decision out of existence. The mutant GOP we have won't do it, though.
In reality, the fact that Tim donated to Trump's inauguration shows how active he is in working with all people to accomplish his and Apple's goals rather than crying about who is in the Executive Branch. Much respect to Tim.
It's not my country but it does make me uneasy seeing how much, money gets invested in 'influence' or whatever you want to call it.
Clearly, something needs to be done on a preventative level and then also, at some point down the road, the situation needs to be investigated to see if the payments (past, present or future) did actually buy favour or not.
Perhaps difficult or impossible to determine.
Looking on from the outside, things look very bleak. Almost the perfect storm forming and everyone only interested in their own potential gains.
Actually ALL of DC won't do that, every politician (right and left) feed off the donation flow coming in. Those who say they do not are lying.
Is it a bribe? Do we really have to answer that, given the transactional nature of the guy ("If you like me, I like you--as long as you make it worth my while, Be a shame what could happen.")?
But that ship has sailed in the minds of 49.8% of the voters.
We all know if you don’t pay favors to Trump, you’re not on his good side. Extortion plain and simple.
I think at this point whether they were bribes, or Trump is running a protection racket is esoteric.