Trading favors is the name of the game. One may argue that lobiying dollars are the favor Google is offering. But one may not realize that dollars are merely the cost of a ticket to participate. It is not the sole price.
There are many examples throughout history that this is the way things work. There are two possibilities. Either Google's and governments relationship works the way Assange has described OR US governments in the last fifteen years are completely different (more honorable?) than all the governments throughout the world before that.
What do you think is more probable?
The way things typically work here is that you hire a bunch of lobbyists and put money in the pockets of various government officials in exchange for favors. So the quid is generally just $$$.
But from the tone of your post it would appear that you have participated in these deals yourself. So tell me are you a lobbyist, someone who hired a lobbyist or a government official?
Oh, you are no different than me - you have no data beyond your faith.
Saying otherwise is a bold claim.
I'd offer anti-trust action as one of those things. Thus far Google has been let off very lightly in most cases involving the DoJ or FTC, in most cases with fines that wouldn't amount to a few days of revenue for it.
In contrast, the European Commission is adopting a much stricter approach towards it's market dominance.
your TL;DR doesn't match the article, seems you didn't read to the point there Stratfor docs mentioned.
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/03/wikileaks-mossad-and-google-ca...