US senators question big tech, including Apple, on the reason behind inauguration donation...

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 51
    hmlongco said:
    You have to ask? Everyone's donating more to Donald because they know Donald is corruptible.
    You are so right! Like the time Donald and his son raked in millions for influence peddling. Oh, wait.
    ronnkiowawaB-Mc-Cdewmewatto_cobratiredskillsjSnively
     4Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 51
    Wesley Hilliardwesley hilliard Posts: 436member, administrator, moderator, editor
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    lol, Meanwhile $$$millions went to Biden 4 years ago from many of the SAME donors contributing to Trump, don't recall the outrage then... what short memories we have. So when Biden similarly got money it was not "possible corruption"? Give me a break. You do have to appreciate the hypocrisy though, it's great entertainment.

    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.
    Read the story again. It's a question because the same entities didn't donate, or donated a significant fraction less for Biden's inauguration. It's not equal, not even close.
    Lol, I only need to read it once but thank you. Pretty interesting how the same companies donated to both campaigns but now it's a concern? As for the amount, the FEC does not have limitations on inauguration contributions so the amount does not matter. But if companies and individuals are contributing more to Trump maybe it is because of inflation and not corruption! lololol... Senators (and maybe you) implying that high contributions indicate corruption is laughable, perhaps one should look at the discrepancy between Trump and Kamala's campaign contributions as an example of this hypocrisy.
    $43,200 vs $1,000,000 isn't inflation.
    lol, yep! Thanks for the fact check, I appreciate your ability to field a joke. Now use your sleuthing to do the Kamala vs. Trump campaign $$ discrepancy, seems like a lot of "corruption" going on there too.
    Ah yes, a troll. As fun as this is I don't think there's any point in explaining why so much money was contributed so quickly to the Harris campaign. Here's a hint: hope to prevent the darkness that is coming with the new administration and the joy we felt in seeing someone so qualified and personable run for president. But she lost because people's prejudice and fear won. They were told a lie so good they wanted to believe it. So they did and voted for a corrupt baby wannabe tyrant.

    We'll see how it goes.
    DAalsethroundaboutnowronnmuthuk_vanalingamdewmemacxpresswatto_cobratmay
     8Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 51
    Wesley Hilliardwesley hilliard Posts: 436member, administrator, moderator, editor
    hmlongco said:
    You have to ask? Everyone's donating more to Donald because they know Donald is corruptible.
    You are so right! Like the time Donald and his son raked in millions for influence peddling. Oh, wait.
    Selling bibles? Crypto? Merch? Only one party is doing that.
    DAalsethroundaboutnowronnilarynxwatto_cobracharlesntiredskills
     7Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 51
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    lol, Meanwhile $$$millions went to Biden 4 years ago from many of the SAME donors contributing to Trump, don't recall the outrage then... what short memories we have. So when Biden similarly got money it was not "possible corruption"? Give me a break. You do have to appreciate the hypocrisy though, it's great entertainment.

    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.
    Read the story again. It's a question because the same entities didn't donate, or donated a significant fraction less for Biden's inauguration. It's not equal, not even close.
    Lol, I only need to read it once but thank you. Pretty interesting how the same companies donated to both campaigns but now it's a concern? As for the amount, the FEC does not have limitations on inauguration contributions so the amount does not matter. But if companies and individuals are contributing more to Trump maybe it is because of inflation and not corruption! lololol... Senators (and maybe you) implying that high contributions indicate corruption is laughable, perhaps one should look at the discrepancy between Trump and Kamala's campaign contributions as an example of this hypocrisy.
    $43,200 vs $1,000,000 isn't inflation.
    lol, yep! Thanks for the fact check, I appreciate your ability to field a joke. Now use your sleuthing to do the Kamala vs. Trump campaign $$ discrepancy, seems like a lot of "corruption" going on there too.
    Ah yes, a troll. As fun as this is I don't think there's any point in explaining why so much money was contributed so quickly to the Harris campaign. Here's a hint: hope to prevent the darkness that is coming with the new administration and the joy we felt in seeing someone so qualified and personable run for president. But she lost because people's prejudice and fear won. They were told a lie so good they wanted to believe it. So they did and voted for a corrupt baby wannabe tyrant.

    We'll see how it goes.
    And there it is... bias... I do appreciate the banter between us, even though you believe I am trolling. I do think Tim is making a good move contributing as I am taking it as him saying we need to move on from the hateful rhetoric toward Trump, but to each his own. Please know dark times are not coming, we will be fine, just like the last 250 years, USA is going to live on.

    And a little pro tip, source your data, it's more convincing. Cheers!
    zeus423ronnJanNLwatto_cobra
     2Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 51
    Wesley Hilliardwesley hilliard Posts: 436member, administrator, moderator, editor
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    MacPack4 said:
    lol, Meanwhile $$$millions went to Biden 4 years ago from many of the SAME donors contributing to Trump, don't recall the outrage then... what short memories we have. So when Biden similarly got money it was not "possible corruption"? Give me a break. You do have to appreciate the hypocrisy though, it's great entertainment.

    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.
    Read the story again. It's a question because the same entities didn't donate, or donated a significant fraction less for Biden's inauguration. It's not equal, not even close.
    Lol, I only need to read it once but thank you. Pretty interesting how the same companies donated to both campaigns but now it's a concern? As for the amount, the FEC does not have limitations on inauguration contributions so the amount does not matter. But if companies and individuals are contributing more to Trump maybe it is because of inflation and not corruption! lololol... Senators (and maybe you) implying that high contributions indicate corruption is laughable, perhaps one should look at the discrepancy between Trump and Kamala's campaign contributions as an example of this hypocrisy.
    $43,200 vs $1,000,000 isn't inflation.
    lol, yep! Thanks for the fact check, I appreciate your ability to field a joke. Now use your sleuthing to do the Kamala vs. Trump campaign $$ discrepancy, seems like a lot of "corruption" going on there too.
    Ah yes, a troll. As fun as this is I don't think there's any point in explaining why so much money was contributed so quickly to the Harris campaign. Here's a hint: hope to prevent the darkness that is coming with the new administration and the joy we felt in seeing someone so qualified and personable run for president. But she lost because people's prejudice and fear won. They were told a lie so good they wanted to believe it. So they did and voted for a corrupt baby wannabe tyrant.

    We'll see how it goes.
    And there it is... bias... I do appreciate the banter between us, even though you believe I am trolling. I do think Tim is making a good move contributing as I am taking it as him saying we need to move on from the hateful rhetoric toward Trump, but to each his own. Please know dark times are not coming, we will be fine, just like the last 250 years, USA is going to live on.

    And a little pro tip, source your data, it's more convincing. Cheers!
    Do human beings generally engage in conversations that lack bias or opinion?

    Sources? Try the article I wrote which is sourced back to multiple other stories and the original source which contains the donation numbers derived from legal filings. I'm not trying to convince anyone, just stating the data that exists. What you do with it is up to you.

    I guess you'll be fine as long as you're a straight white man. Things are already in motion to take away more rights from women, children, trans people, and LGBTQ+ people. But sure, Cheers I suppose.
    DAalsethronnmuthuk_vanalingamdewmemacxpressilarynxwatto_cobramattinoz
     8Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 51
    And how would be call when politicians… ask you to ‘contributions’ for their reelections?

    ronnwatto_cobraneoncat
     1Like 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 51
    Repeat after me, kids: Pay to play. That's the name of the new game. As one of the ~49.9% who didn't vote for the orange arsehole, let me just say "Enjoy! You got what you signed up for."
    zeus423ronnJanNLForumPostwatto_cobratiredskills
     4Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 51
    The donations are plainly to buy favours.  With Trump being deeply unpleasant, unpredictable and dishonest, it is unsurprising everyone wants to curry favour, whether they are leaders of countries or leaders of businesses.  It’s utterly disgusting but that is the world the West has created.  Everyone, with Trump as president, is in for a very unpleasant time.

    As for MAGA, the US never was, so it can’t be again and won’t be this time, except in Trump’s and his followers eyes.
    ronnmuthuk_vanalingamdewmewatto_cobra
     4Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 51
    Why does everyone immediately jump to the conclusion that these are bribes or payments to curry favor.  Seriously, look at who the money is going to!  Who exactly is the convicted felon here?  It is just as likely to be protection money.  

    "Nice business you have there... It would be a shame if something happened to it."
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobramattinoz
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 51
    zeus423zeus423 Posts: 280member
    DAalseth said:
    9blu said:
    DAalseth said:
    They’re called bribes. 
    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. 

    Try $170m and it's expected to go to $200m when it's all counted, according to the AP. Supposedly leftover funds will be used for his presidential library but we'll see how that pans out. Should be noted that he raised $107m for his first term while Biden raised $62m for his.

    Also I suspect these are less bribes and more ransoms to keep Trump from targeting them.
    Yeah I was being very conservative on my estimate. Ironic no? 
    I think at this point whether they were bribes, or Trump is running a protection racket is esoteric. 

    Inflation, obviously. =)
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 51
    DAalseth said:
    They’re called bribes. 
    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. 
    And I suspect the CEOs know that and that’s why they’re making the donations. They know the president elect is a crook. They know he’s corrupt and they’re seeking to curry favor within him because that’s how things are gonna be for the next four years.
    edited January 18
    ronnwatto_cobratmay
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 51
    m4m40m4m40 Posts: 36member
    We don’t need an investigation.. we know why. What we need is public shaming, since our shitty laws allow this kind of corruption. This applies to both sides!
    retrogustoronnwatto_cobra
     2Likes 1Dislike 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 51
    retrogustoretrogusto Posts: 1,153member
    We should have much stricter limits on money going to politicians in every case, but there’s also a huge difference between supporting a campaign to help the person you want to see elected, and giving money to the person who has already won the election. I could argue there is also a difference, if perhaps less important, between giving money to someone who could just as easily spend their own but doesn’t see the value, and supporting someone who doesn’t have the same resources at their disposal.
    watto_cobra
     1Like 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 51
    eriamjheriamjh Posts: 1,817member
    Pay to play.  
    dewmewatto_cobra
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 51
    flydogflydog Posts: 1,145member
    Why don't they question all the lobby money they get?

    Bunch of hypocrites. The reckoning its coming.
    Fake news. It's illegal for a lobbyist to give direct payments or any kind of financial compensation to a legislator or government official.  Lobbyists can make campaign contributions via a PAC.  However, payments to inauguration committees are NOT campaign contributions, and are therefore not regulated with respect to who can make the contributions, how much can be donated, or the purpose of the contribution.  In addition, money can be funneled via intermediaries to the inauguration committee since there are no laws restricting foreign contributions.  

    Another issue is that while campaign donations cannot be coordinated with a campaign, there are no such restrictions on funding an inaugural committee. A quid pro quo could be established so long as it doesn't cross the line into bribery, which requires payment for an official act. If the understanding is that the administration will "go easy" on the company donating, that is not a bribe or a violation of campaign laws.  This is called a "soft" quid pro quo.

    Finally, in this case, the circumstances surrounding the contributions are sketchy at best given the timing, who is receiving the funds, the amount of money (especially compared to campaign contributions and prior funding of inaugural committees), and the existence of pending legal and regulatory action against these companies.  There really isn't any reason for these companies, some of which have been ardent opponents of the new administration to donate these sums short of looking to curry favor. 
    edited January 18
    dewmeronn
     2Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 51
    hexclockhexclock Posts: 1,345member
    What is everyone crying about? Kamala raised (and wasted) over a billion. The dems get so much dark money from Act blue and Soros and so what? That’s how this game is played. 
    Also, so one seems to care that Biden just declared a new imaginary 28th amendment is law. Talk about a dictator. 
    edited January 18
    danoxronnWesley Hilliard
     0Likes 3Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 51
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 1,390member
    Why don't they question all the lobby money they get?

    Bunch of hypocrites. The reckoning its coming.
    You're on point about the hypocrisy. I despise Trump, but I'll say this for him: he isn't secretive about his corruption. He puts it right out there. We all know the quid pro quo here. If you don't bend the knee and show fealty to Trump through financial largesse, he will (mis)use the power of the Presidency and federal government to make life miserable for your company. He pulls no punches about going after his perceived enemies. The Senate and the House both pretend to be operating in good, uncorrupted faith, but we know that's a lie. There are countless millions (billions?) in lobbyist money flowing to Senators and Representatives in different ways, all of it to influence their positions on legislation, but that's kept in the background as if it's not happening. With Trump, who needs lobbyists? People are literally and publicly just sending him a million or millions of dollars "for his inauguration," like money in an envelope at a mafia wedding, and it's just to stay on his good side. 
    thtdanoxronnWesley Hilliardwatto_cobramuthuk_vanalingam
     4Likes 2Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 51
    MacPack4 said:
    lol, Meanwhile $$$millions went to Biden 4 years ago from many of the SAME donors contributing to Trump, don't recall the outrage then... what short memories we have. So when Biden similarly got money it was not "possible corruption"? Give me a break. You do have to appreciate the hypocrisy though, it's great entertainment.

    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.
    Hypocrisy? Short memories? What cognitive issues would compel someone to shovel such outright, and highly biased, BS?

    Via DF - 

    By the way, a reader pointed my way to Biden’s Presidential Inaugural Committee FEC filing from four years ago:
    • Microsoft gave $500,000.
    • Google gave $337,500.
    • Amazon gave $326,509.85.
    • Apple gave $43,200; Tim Cook gave nothing.
    • Neither Facebook (pre-name-change) nor Zuckerberg gave a cent.
    Via CBC - 

    https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/corporate-donors-trump-inauguration-1.7430028

    And a little pro tip, source your data, it's more convincing... and by actually doing a little research, you're less likely to embarrass yourself by spreading falsehoods. Cheers!
    ronncharlesnwatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 51
    kmareikmarei Posts: 216member
    "concerns about corruption."

    Corruption is the name of the game the next 4 years
    you wanna get things done? Then you better bribe the president.
    simple as that
    reminds me of back home, in 3rd world countries :)

    ronncharlesnwatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 51
    AppleZuluapplezulu Posts: 2,346member
    hmlongco said:
    You have to ask? Everyone's donating more to Donald because they know Donald is corruptible.
    You are so right! Like the time Donald and his son raked in millions for influence peddling. Oh, wait.
    Millions is Trump change. Let’s not forget how Donald’s son-in-law brought home $2 billion from the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund by order of Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, over the objections of the fund’s governing board. Remember Kushner missed out on most of the Jan 6th festivities because he was en route home from hanging out with the Crown Prince as an official White House employee. Then, miraculously, a few months later, as a private citizen managing a brand, spanking new private equity fund, he gets a cheque from the Crown Prince. Weird, huh?
    ronnelijahgwatto_cobra
     3Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.