If campaign contributions never amount to bribery, then why do companies frequently donate to candidates from both parties? If it were for both some policy and

If campaign contributions never amount to bribery, then why do companies frequently donate to candidates from both parties? If it were for both some policy and it's opposite, those donations would cancel each other out. The only reasonable explanation is to have the politician be indebted no mater who it happens to be. And the Kaepernick issue can't be a mere employee-employer issue if the president claims to have gotten him fired by threatening the NFL with brand destruction[1]. And if the same group then calls the press the "enemy of the people" but defends receiving enormous donations as devotion to free speech seems, it seems disingenuous. If, instead of you home country, say Saudi Arabia were doing these things, we would say they making great steps towards freedom. [1]https://youtu.be/ryAxTqyFOwU?t=29 https://youtu.be/ryAxTqyFOwU?t=29