4 ms·

"Don't spend your money bribing foreign governments, keep that money for lobbying in your own country. Lobbying of course is not bribery."

kortilla 7y ago
Because it’s not. You know that lobbyists can’t pay politicians, right? The meme that “lobbying == bribery” needs to die.
- m0zg 7y ago
  They can set up the politicians' children and relatives with lucrative government contracts and positions on the boards of investment funds and foreign oil and gas companies, though. The meme that this is somehow OK needs to die.
- olliej 7y ago
  If that were the case lobbying would not cost billions of dollars. Lobbying doesn’t have to be bribery, but in America it absolutely is.
  - aj7 7y ago
    The lobbyists are expensive lawyers. Their publically reported fees are the tip of an iceberg, where the bulk of valuable considerations is hidden from view.
    - refurb 7y ago
      Indeed. I work with the government affairs team in my company, of which, many are lobbyists. There are no bribes happening, just very expensive people who know how to time with politicians to argue their side.
- brennanpeterson 7y ago
  Nice dinners, catered events, golf meetings, game.tickets, 'free' staff to work on projects isn't quite bribery. A wink and a nudge showing that politicians and senior staff can have a job making millions isn't quite an offer either..no one would.be so gauche. But it sure gets close. You can also just forgive debt, or anonymously pay it off. There is no bribery, but I guess the practical difference seems pretty tiny.
- epicgiga 7y ago
  Where there's memes there's facts. (smoke -> fire) The Clintons were "never bribed", for instance, they were just getting paid millions of dollars in "speaking fees". You don't need to swap briefcases at a park bench to do bribery. There's plenty of unspoken quid pro quo understandings that the participants are well aware of, and this is far more effective as there'll never be any smoking guns to bring them down.
  - jariel 7y ago
    With the Clintons, the big conflict of interest is the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Foundation. It's a charity (which apparently does pretty good work) but it pays for a lot of things for the Clintons and gives them tremendous status. Hillary Clinton accepted 100's of millions into her charity from officials with whom she, as a rep. of the US was directly doing business. She was caught once, directly conferring titles to an individual who contributed to the fund, and the title had to be removed. Even though I do not generally believe that this is a form of corruption, it's a massive conflict of interest. Just like an exec how owns 90% of a company and takes office has to put said investment in a 'blind trust' - I believe the Clinton Foundation should have effectively been turned into a 'blind trust' as well. But there are 100% cases of soft pay for access going on here. Edit: to be more precise, the Clinton charity accepted money from officials of countries and other orgs that the US was dealing with, wherein Hillary was a rep of the US Gov. Not necessarily individuals she was dealing with directly. I'm not throwing flames here, just saying 'conflict of interest'.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- sn41 7y ago
  Exorbitant "speaking fees" are a questionable practice in the US. The same goes for "book deals" which are too rosy to be later borne out by sales.

kortilla 7y ago

Because it’s not. You know that lobbyists can’t pay politicians, right? The meme that “lobbying == bribery” needs to die.

m0zg 7y ago
They can set up the politicians' children and relatives with lucrative government contracts and positions on the boards of investment funds and foreign oil and gas companies, though. The meme that this is somehow OK needs to die.
olliej 7y ago
If that were the case lobbying would not cost billions of dollars. Lobbying doesn’t have to be bribery, but in America it absolutely is.
- aj7 7y ago
  The lobbyists are expensive lawyers. Their publically reported fees are the tip of an iceberg, where the bulk of valuable considerations is hidden from view.
  - refurb 7y ago
    Indeed. I work with the government affairs team in my company, of which, many are lobbyists. There are no bribes happening, just very expensive people who know how to time with politicians to argue their side.
brennanpeterson 7y ago
Nice dinners, catered events, golf meetings, game.tickets, 'free' staff to work on projects isn't quite bribery. A wink and a nudge showing that politicians and senior staff can have a job making millions isn't quite an offer either..no one would.be so gauche. But it sure gets close. You can also just forgive debt, or anonymously pay it off. There is no bribery, but I guess the practical difference seems pretty tiny.
epicgiga 7y ago
Where there's memes there's facts. (smoke -> fire) The Clintons were "never bribed", for instance, they were just getting paid millions of dollars in "speaking fees". You don't need to swap briefcases at a park bench to do bribery. There's plenty of unspoken quid pro quo understandings that the participants are well aware of, and this is far more effective as there'll never be any smoking guns to bring them down.
- jariel 7y ago
  With the Clintons, the big conflict of interest is the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Foundation. It's a charity (which apparently does pretty good work) but it pays for a lot of things for the Clintons and gives them tremendous status. Hillary Clinton accepted 100's of millions into her charity from officials with whom she, as a rep. of the US was directly doing business. She was caught once, directly conferring titles to an individual who contributed to the fund, and the title had to be removed. Even though I do not generally believe that this is a form of corruption, it's a massive conflict of interest. Just like an exec how owns 90% of a company and takes office has to put said investment in a 'blind trust' - I believe the Clinton Foundation should have effectively been turned into a 'blind trust' as well. But there are 100% cases of soft pay for access going on here. Edit: to be more precise, the Clinton charity accepted money from officials of countries and other orgs that the US was dealing with, wherein Hillary was a rep of the US Gov. Not necessarily individuals she was dealing with directly. I'm not throwing flames here, just saying 'conflict of interest'.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
sn41 7y ago
Exorbitant "speaking fees" are a questionable practice in the US. The same goes for "book deals" which are too rosy to be later borne out by sales.