Funny how because these are "donation" and "lobbying" but not "bribe" there is no consequence for the receiving party and also no recuperation of the money.
Sometimes because the law requires it, but also if they don't, the attack ad for their opponent writes itself.
Although obviously it depends on how much time has passed and whether the money should already be considered "spent". Because even if the politician wants to repay it, new donors want their money going to re-election activities, not going to repay FTX. After a period of time, you might as well be asking the television stations to return the money they received for running the campaign ads, which... isn't gonna happen.
Politicians should be made to pay out of their own pockets or have an insurance for this type of situation.
We don't want to create a system where only the rich can afford to be politicians ... or at least we don't want to make that any worse than it already is
But I would be all for labelling the entire crypto industry as illegal and ensuring any donations are immediately returned. Maybe just to be safe we should add anything AI related to the list as well.
Why stop at politicians, though? Shouldn't everyone who accepts large sums of money be held accountable if it turns out the money was stolen? At least to some degree?
The sums sure are substantial. You can argue they know their employer was no angel, too. OK to claw back paychecks, or do we draw the line somewhere closer to actually participating in a criminal act?
As a straightforward instance that arises periodically, if a bank were to erroneously deposit funds into your account you’re under obligation to return the funds.
Unless there's compelling evidence to definitively demonstrate their awareness of the funds' misappropriated source, it seems challenging to establish grounds for substantial punitive action in this situation.
Does this even matter anymore? Seems like people are so tribal that they'll vote for their party no matter what, combined with lots of voter apathy makes it seem like it doesn't matter.
If that was true, there would be no such thing as swing states.
The PACs should have to return it and if they can't they're declared bankrupt and everyone associated with running them should be barred for 10 years from involvement in political donations in all forms.
Why are PACs lawless relative to the rest of us, do you think?
I was surprised how many returned the checks.
100M isn't that much money for political campaigns in 2023.
If their guilt is glaringly apparent and your stance is interpreted as supportive, the blowback could be even more detrimental compared to promptly creating distance and professing unawareness of their wrongdoing, genuine or not.
The level of risk seems considerably high for an amount of money that, in the realm of campaign contributions, isn't substantial.
I was expecting wheelbarrows of cash not having to set up a foundation!
Absolutely, I lived in E. Europe for a significant amount of time; and I almost respect them more for making it as obvious as they do. At least there isn't an air of goaded legitimacy, and everyone knows that if you just pay the bribe you can just go and live your life on as normal. Whereas in the US you are pressured to pretend it's not all that, and that questioning such a system makes you a heretic of the best system ever devised.
Seriously, it's pathetic and I just don't have the patience anymore; this is exactly what happens when Corps, Banks and Wall Street lobby to create legislation that favors them.
Lobbying/donations are a fundamental part of governance in almost all countries.
Bribery is illegal in almost all countries but enforcement is mixed.
You give someone with political power money in order to buy their support and/or influence the way they spend government money/efforts. That's what bribery is. That's what lobbying is.
That technically would be lobbying but you define that was also bribery.
That's lobbying.
Jon Stewart supporting politician X with $1M for his re-election campaign in exchange for a 9/11 bill... that would be bribery. But in the US, this bribery is called lobbying.
Then one day the bribe money is under scruteny, this hits the news and within less than a day he's in actual jail for the first time.
Are you suggesting that They made him leak a witness’s diary so they could arrest him for witness tampering?
Sad to see this conspiracy stuff leaking into HN. Unfortunately I need to make fun of this wildly misinformed cruft to help prevent it taking root here.