7 ms·

Amazon's Spending on 'Melania' Is a Barely Concealed Bribe

264 points by lateforwork 8mo ago

mkw5053 8mo ago
The $28M to Melania personally is the tell. Amazon could've made this documentary for $5M and marketed it for $10M and still gotten whatever political cover they wanted. Instead they structured a deal where most of the money flows directly to the president's wife. That's not sloppy negotiating, that's the point. Someone at Amazon legal signed off on creating a paper trail that looks exactly like what it is.
- selimthegrim 8mo ago
  Wait until they buy her book and sell it for free on Amazon
  - willturman 8mo ago
    From Webster's 1913: Sell: To transfer to another for an equivalent; to give up for a valuable consideration; to dispose of in return for something, especially for money. Selling, even for free, implies demand.
    - ceejayoz 8mo ago
      Implies, but doesn't prove. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/books/donald-trump-jr-triggered-sales.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/books/donald-trump-jr-tri...
      - willturman 8mo ago
        I was attempting to say that it's impossible to sell something that has zero demand. i.e. you can't "sell" something when you can't even give it away.
JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
“They’re spending $35 million now, to promote it” No points for guessing which social media company got the bulk of that ad spend.
- ben_w 8mo ago
  To my huge surprise, I saw an ad for it in person. In a Berlin shopping mall.
  - lagniappe 8mo ago
    What is the general perception of Melania in Berlin?
    - NicoJuicy 8mo ago
      Probably similar as in the Londen première https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/melania-trumps-documentary-flops-in-uk-only-one-ticket-sold-at-london-premiere-report-10907001 https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/melania-trumps-documentar... Or anywhere else in Europe
    - ben_w 8mo ago
      The film? „Lächerlich floppt“, „Propaganda-Gag“, „Ironisch lächerlich“. The person? „Nicht relevant“.
      - defrost 8mo ago
        Sad :/ Still, for those that feel that way I can only recommend Klemen Slakonja's First Lady Melania Trump: sLOVEnia biopic that follows her return to the land of both her and Laibach's origin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHEPzEKTcss https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHEPzEKTcss
        AlexeyBelov 8mo ago
        What is sad?
mcphage 8mo ago
I would say there’s no concealment at all. It’s a naked bribe and flattery. But bribery is legal now.
- MisterTea 8mo ago
  > But bribery is legal now. Only because no one can prosecute it without retaliation from petulant man-children.
- kenjackson 8mo ago
  I've heard that one of the advantages of this administration is that you don't need data or convincing arguments -- just bribery and flattery. If you're OK with bribery and flattery then you'll find this administration much easier to work with. Getting your way is a simpler path.
- JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
  > bribery is legal now It’s not. And it will probably be investigated by a future administration when we do a Nuremberg-style review of this term.
  - Analemma_ 8mo ago
    In the last decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that bribery is de facto legal and impossible to prosecute (Kelly v. United States, McDonnell v. United States, FEC vs. Ted Cruz). And those were against relative nobodies, they certainly aren't going to permit charges against anyone in this administration.
    - akramachamarei 8mo ago
      None of those three cases have to do with bribery, at least not receiving bribes for official action. Here's some nuance: Kelly concerns retaliation, McDonnell concerns whether hosting meetings and events amounts to official action, and FEC concern the limit (was $250,000) on the amount of post-election contributions which may be used to repay campaign debts. It's also worth noting that Kelly was unanimous and FEC upheld the ruling of the district court which the FEC had appealed.
axus 8mo ago
A good reminder to check your AWS bill
- zerodollars 8mo ago
  [dead]
wang_li 8mo ago
[flagged]
- kenjackson 8mo ago
  Big difference is being out of office. I expect Trump to get a ton of money after leaving office, because people like proximity to fame, but I don't like the stench when he's in office and has direct political influence. That said, Trump also investigated Obama for the Netflix deal. Will he investigate Melania now?
  - wang_li 8mo ago
    Being out of office is irrelevant. "Do this for me now, I'll make sure you're taken care of when you retire." This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope. As far as I can tell no executive branch agency investigated the Netflix deal.
    - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
      > This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope On TV and Reddit. In the real world you’re not getting policy outcomes today for a handshake of a payout tomorrow without someone in office to guarantee your end.
      - kenjackson 8mo ago
        Exactly. Anyone willing to bribe you is more than willing to rescind when you have no real power.
        wang_li 8mo ago
        Except if they back out of the deal after getting what they want, they'll never be able to make this kind of deal ever again. Regardless, the revolving door is well known. It's been talked about since the 1800s. There's a wikipedia page for it. Pretending it doesn't happen doesn't change the fact that it happens and is quite common.
sys32768 8mo ago
Amazon burned $250M just for the rights to produce the goofy and embarrassing "Rings of Power" series. I wonder who was bribed in that deal?
- relativeadv 8mo ago
  ???
  - bmacho 8mo ago
    I think they implied the following argument, or something along the lines 1. Assume that Amazon knows the future 2. Then spending $250M on Rings of Power is a bad decision 3. Therefore paying $28M to Trump is also just a bad decision, and not a bribery I personally don't think that 1 holds, or that 2 implies 3.
- dispersed 8mo ago
  There is a universe where Amazon can be both incompetent and corrupt, and we're living in it.
  - MeetingsBrowser 8mo ago
    Some might argue the two traits go hand in hand
ChrisArchitect 8mo ago
Previously: Tech CEOs attend Amazon-funded "Melania" screening at White House https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46761370 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46761370
ChrisArchitect 8mo ago
Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/business/media/amazon-melania-trump-film-critics.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/business/media/amazon-mel... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46813657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46813657)
pwarner 8mo ago
I mostly don't blame Amazon. If the mob boss demands $10M in protection money in order to allow your $2.5T business to operate, you pay, especially if that mob boss happens to be the head of federal law enforcement. Maybe we shift a bit of focus towards Congress, supreme courts and frankly voters who are apparently OK with this.
- lateforwork 8mo ago
  Speaking of the Supreme Court, Justice Robert’s wife earned $10 million as a “consultant.” The compensation made her one of the highest-paid legal recruiters. That's another "Melania movie". https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wife-of-chief-justice-roberts-generated-10m-in-commissions-in-this-job-whistleblower-says https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wife-of-chief-justic...
- fireflash38 8mo ago
  Nah. You really think they are powerless?
- drcongo 8mo ago
  Most of HN seems to be more than OK with it judging by the flagging and your downvotes.
  - insane_dreamer 8mo ago
    yeah, it's honestly been surprising to me to discover that; I expected higher cognitive reasoning
- jmye 8mo ago
  I agree that we should be blaming the voters who decided that naked bribery and corruption is an American value (moreso than, say, their bleating about gun rights), but… The people most capable of fighting back, and who ultimately have the most to lose in a kleptocratic, authoritarian state, apparently to be cowards and losers. Bezos and Jassy could tell the administration to pound sand, given how critical AWS is, and that Amazon is part of the like, 4 companies propping up the teetering stack of cards holding up the thing this administration (and its weaponized voters) think represents “the economy”. But they won’t, because they’re a bunch of feckless children, desperate for scraps.
politelemon 8mo ago
Author has conveniently ignored that the screenings were attended by the Apple CEO as well. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-house-vip-melania-screening-mike-tyson-tim-cook-1236484037/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-ho...
- throw-away_42 8mo ago
  You've conveniently ignored not just one but two prior posts referencing it. https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/ceo-captured https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/ceo-captured https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/mg-cook-melania https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/mg-cook-melania
MisterTea 8mo ago
109 points and [flagged].
- huyae7484 8mo ago
  Yeah, the mods usually hide behind “light moderation actions” while letting the “special” subset of audience they have cultivated run rampant and unchecked with quasi moderator abilities.
  - whamlastxmas 8mo ago
    It takes extremely little to get the ability to flag content on HN accounts. It's not a subset, it's most anyone who contributes basically at all
Blackstrat 8mo ago
[flagged]
- pan69 8mo ago
  The difference here is Melania Trump currently represents the Office of the First Lady of the United States, an official government position in the White House. When Obama, Harry & Megan made their documentaries, they were private citizens.
  - throwawayqqq11 8mo ago
    Obama also never 'joked' about a third term or diverted funds into private accounts or accepted a gifted 747 plane. How can one think that trumps corruption is just about the same level as others...
    - Blackstrat 8mo ago
      [flagged]
      - malfist 8mo ago
        Are you really trying to argue that A) Trump never advocated for a third term B) (simultaneously) Trump advocating for a third term is no different than any other politician's posturing.
        Blackstrat 8mo ago
        [flagged]
        Paradigma11 8mo ago
        Trump always says crazy shit. Its all trolling till he does it and then its " What are you upset about. He has always said that he would do that."
jauntywundrkind 8mo ago
Beyond a bribe it's just wicked propoganda at that. Was just stunned at this review, > So, what’s the point? How does this superficial, wilfully deceitful reality readjustment serve the sociopathic ascension of Trump’s will (because everything has to)? Watching Melania get fitted for expensive clothes in gaudy rooms, or talk up how extravagantly staged she demands her balls be - and both happen a lot in Brett Ratner’s unrelentingly boring feature doc debut - only strengthen perceptions of her as a chilly, lifeless socialite wannabe. Ok, ice burn mostly so far. Expected. But: > And I realised then what the point was - Trump is tightening his family business’ grip on the White House beyond his years and before our eyes. MELANIA is not the story of the First Lady of American politics, but the imagining of the first homeland monarch in U.S. history. This is not a film concerned at all with the America of today; it is propaganda that serves the formation of a future non-democracy. I'm all too afraid that there is something truly wicked this boring dry flop of a movie will accomplish, over time, for some incredibly infernal anti-Democracy forces in the world. That one of the top 3 richest men in the world would give a messely couple million bucks for an anti-Democracy pro-Regal pro-Imperial project like this is perhaps unsurprising, beyond the simple dimension of grift it obviously presents. https://screenspace.substack.com/p/the-animated-pics-vying-for-your https://screenspace.substack.com/p/the-animated-pics-vying-f... via the lovely https://bsky.app/profile/numb.comfortab.ly/post/3mdncqwyuks2t https://bsky.app/profile/numb.comfortab.ly/post/3mdncqwyuks2...
smugma 8mo ago
As this is HN, I wonder what this implies for technology companies as a whole. It's easy to see how the Trillion dollar companies are engaged in this e.g. Tim Cook attended the premiere. And we see how crypto companies court the Whitehouse through various mechanisms. How might this factor into "mere" unicorn startups? I think it does but not sure how. My guess is that if you're an early stage startup that isn't an AI company already worth billions, you can probably ignore this as noise and focus on building product. It's reasonably likely that by the time your startup is sufficiently large, there will be a new administration (because it takes a few years and presumably he will not be president in 2029).
- jfil 8mo ago
  I think one implication is that ad-driven tech companies are at great risk. In a political system where National Champion businesses are selected/assisted on the basis of bribery, advertising becomes irrelevant. Why spend money advertising Widget X when this widget is already the only one that's officially sanctioned?
- deleted 8mo ago
  [deleted]
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

264 points by lateforwork 8mo ago

The $28M to Melania personally is the tell. Amazon could've made this documentary for $5M and marketed it for $10M and still gotten whatever political cover they wanted. Instead they structured a deal where most of the money flows directly to the president's wife. That's not sloppy negotiating, that's the point. Someone at Amazon legal signed off on creating a paper trail that looks exactly like what it is.

selimthegrim 8mo ago
Wait until they buy her book and sell it for free on Amazon
- willturman 8mo ago
  From Webster's 1913: Sell: To transfer to another for an equivalent; to give up for a valuable consideration; to dispose of in return for something, especially for money. Selling, even for free, implies demand.
  - ceejayoz 8mo ago
    Implies, but doesn't prove. https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/books/donald-trump-jr-triggered-sales.html https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/books/donald-trump-jr-tri...
    - willturman 8mo ago
      I was attempting to say that it's impossible to sell something that has zero demand. i.e. you can't "sell" something when you can't even give it away.

JumpCrisscross 8mo ago

“They’re spending $35 million now, to promote it” No points for guessing which social media company got the bulk of that ad spend.

ben_w 8mo ago
To my huge surprise, I saw an ad for it in person. In a Berlin shopping mall.
- lagniappe 8mo ago
  What is the general perception of Melania in Berlin?
  - NicoJuicy 8mo ago
    Probably similar as in the Londen première https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/melania-trumps-documentary-flops-in-uk-only-one-ticket-sold-at-london-premiere-report-10907001 https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/melania-trumps-documentar... Or anywhere else in Europe
  - ben_w 8mo ago
    The film? „Lächerlich floppt“, „Propaganda-Gag“, „Ironisch lächerlich“. The person? „Nicht relevant“.
    - defrost 8mo ago
      Sad :/ Still, for those that feel that way I can only recommend Klemen Slakonja's First Lady Melania Trump: sLOVEnia biopic that follows her return to the land of both her and Laibach's origin. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHEPzEKTcss https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHEPzEKTcss
      - AlexeyBelov 8mo ago
        What is sad?

mcphage 8mo ago

I would say there’s no concealment at all. It’s a naked bribe and flattery. But bribery is legal now.

MisterTea 8mo ago
> But bribery is legal now. Only because no one can prosecute it without retaliation from petulant man-children.
kenjackson 8mo ago
I've heard that one of the advantages of this administration is that you don't need data or convincing arguments -- just bribery and flattery. If you're OK with bribery and flattery then you'll find this administration much easier to work with. Getting your way is a simpler path.
JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
> bribery is legal now It’s not. And it will probably be investigated by a future administration when we do a Nuremberg-style review of this term.
- Analemma_ 8mo ago
  In the last decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that bribery is de facto legal and impossible to prosecute (Kelly v. United States, McDonnell v. United States, FEC vs. Ted Cruz). And those were against relative nobodies, they certainly aren't going to permit charges against anyone in this administration.
  - akramachamarei 8mo ago
    None of those three cases have to do with bribery, at least not receiving bribes for official action. Here's some nuance: Kelly concerns retaliation, McDonnell concerns whether hosting meetings and events amounts to official action, and FEC concern the limit (was $250,000) on the amount of post-election contributions which may be used to repay campaign debts. It's also worth noting that Kelly was unanimous and FEC upheld the ruling of the district court which the FEC had appealed.

axus 8mo ago

A good reminder to check your AWS bill

zerodollars 8mo ago
[dead]

wang_li 8mo ago

[flagged]

kenjackson 8mo ago
Big difference is being out of office. I expect Trump to get a ton of money after leaving office, because people like proximity to fame, but I don't like the stench when he's in office and has direct political influence. That said, Trump also investigated Obama for the Netflix deal. Will he investigate Melania now?
- wang_li 8mo ago
  Being out of office is irrelevant. "Do this for me now, I'll make sure you're taken care of when you retire." This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope. As far as I can tell no executive branch agency investigated the Netflix deal.
  - JumpCrisscross 8mo ago
    > This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope On TV and Reddit. In the real world you’re not getting policy outcomes today for a handshake of a payout tomorrow without someone in office to guarantee your end.
    - kenjackson 8mo ago
      Exactly. Anyone willing to bribe you is more than willing to rescind when you have no real power.
      - wang_li 8mo ago
        Except if they back out of the deal after getting what they want, they'll never be able to make this kind of deal ever again. Regardless, the revolving door is well known. It's been talked about since the 1800s. There's a wikipedia page for it. Pretending it doesn't happen doesn't change the fact that it happens and is quite common.

sys32768 8mo ago

Amazon burned $250M just for the rights to produce the goofy and embarrassing "Rings of Power" series. I wonder who was bribed in that deal?

relativeadv 8mo ago
???
- bmacho 8mo ago
  I think they implied the following argument, or something along the lines 1. Assume that Amazon knows the future 2. Then spending $250M on Rings of Power is a bad decision 3. Therefore paying $28M to Trump is also just a bad decision, and not a bribery I personally don't think that 1 holds, or that 2 implies 3.
dispersed 8mo ago
There is a universe where Amazon can be both incompetent and corrupt, and we're living in it.
- MeetingsBrowser 8mo ago
  Some might argue the two traits go hand in hand

ChrisArchitect 8mo ago

Previously: Tech CEOs attend Amazon-funded "Melania" screening at White House https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46761370 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46761370

ChrisArchitect 8mo ago

Source: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/business/media/amazon-melania-trump-film-critics.html https://www.nytimes.com/2026/01/28/business/media/amazon-mel... (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46813657 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46813657)

pwarner 8mo ago

I mostly don't blame Amazon. If the mob boss demands $10M in protection money in order to allow your $2.5T business to operate, you pay, especially if that mob boss happens to be the head of federal law enforcement. Maybe we shift a bit of focus towards Congress, supreme courts and frankly voters who are apparently OK with this.

lateforwork 8mo ago
Speaking of the Supreme Court, Justice Robert’s wife earned $10 million as a “consultant.” The compensation made her one of the highest-paid legal recruiters. That's another "Melania movie". https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wife-of-chief-justice-roberts-generated-10m-in-commissions-in-this-job-whistleblower-says https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wife-of-chief-justic...
fireflash38 8mo ago
Nah. You really think they are powerless?
drcongo 8mo ago
Most of HN seems to be more than OK with it judging by the flagging and your downvotes.
- insane_dreamer 8mo ago
  yeah, it's honestly been surprising to me to discover that; I expected higher cognitive reasoning
jmye 8mo ago
I agree that we should be blaming the voters who decided that naked bribery and corruption is an American value (moreso than, say, their bleating about gun rights), but… The people most capable of fighting back, and who ultimately have the most to lose in a kleptocratic, authoritarian state, apparently to be cowards and losers. Bezos and Jassy could tell the administration to pound sand, given how critical AWS is, and that Amazon is part of the like, 4 companies propping up the teetering stack of cards holding up the thing this administration (and its weaponized voters) think represents “the economy”. But they won’t, because they’re a bunch of feckless children, desperate for scraps.

politelemon 8mo ago

Author has conveniently ignored that the screenings were attended by the Apple CEO as well. https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-house-vip-melania-screening-mike-tyson-tim-cook-1236484037/ https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-ho...

throw-away_42 8mo ago
You've conveniently ignored not just one but two prior posts referencing it. https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/ceo-captured https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/ceo-captured https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/mg-cook-melania https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/mg-cook-melania

MisterTea 8mo ago

109 points and [flagged].

huyae7484 8mo ago
Yeah, the mods usually hide behind “light moderation actions” while letting the “special” subset of audience they have cultivated run rampant and unchecked with quasi moderator abilities.
- whamlastxmas 8mo ago
  It takes extremely little to get the ability to flag content on HN accounts. It's not a subset, it's most anyone who contributes basically at all

Blackstrat 8mo ago

[flagged]

pan69 8mo ago
The difference here is Melania Trump currently represents the Office of the First Lady of the United States, an official government position in the White House. When Obama, Harry & Megan made their documentaries, they were private citizens.
- throwawayqqq11 8mo ago
  Obama also never 'joked' about a third term or diverted funds into private accounts or accepted a gifted 747 plane. How can one think that trumps corruption is just about the same level as others...
  - Blackstrat 8mo ago
    [flagged]
    - malfist 8mo ago
      Are you really trying to argue that A) Trump never advocated for a third term B) (simultaneously) Trump advocating for a third term is no different than any other politician's posturing.
      - Blackstrat 8mo ago
        [flagged]
        Paradigma11 8mo ago
        Trump always says crazy shit. Its all trolling till he does it and then its " What are you upset about. He has always said that he would do that."

jauntywundrkind 8mo ago

Beyond a bribe it's just wicked propoganda at that. Was just stunned at this review, > So, what’s the point? How does this superficial, wilfully deceitful reality readjustment serve the sociopathic ascension of Trump’s will (because everything has to)? Watching Melania get fitted for expensive clothes in gaudy rooms, or talk up how extravagantly staged she demands her balls be - and both happen a lot in Brett Ratner’s unrelentingly boring feature doc debut - only strengthen perceptions of her as a chilly, lifeless socialite wannabe. Ok, ice burn mostly so far. Expected. But: > And I realised then what the point was - Trump is tightening his family business’ grip on the White House beyond his years and before our eyes. MELANIA is not the story of the First Lady of American politics, but the imagining of the first homeland monarch in U.S. history. This is not a film concerned at all with the America of today; it is propaganda that serves the formation of a future non-democracy. I'm all too afraid that there is something truly wicked this boring dry flop of a movie will accomplish, over time, for some incredibly infernal anti-Democracy forces in the world. That one of the top 3 richest men in the world would give a messely couple million bucks for an anti-Democracy pro-Regal pro-Imperial project like this is perhaps unsurprising, beyond the simple dimension of grift it obviously presents. https://screenspace.substack.com/p/the-animated-pics-vying-for-your https://screenspace.substack.com/p/the-animated-pics-vying-f... via the lovely https://bsky.app/profile/numb.comfortab.ly/post/3mdncqwyuks2t https://bsky.app/profile/numb.comfortab.ly/post/3mdncqwyuks2...

smugma 8mo ago

As this is HN, I wonder what this implies for technology companies as a whole. It's easy to see how the Trillion dollar companies are engaged in this e.g. Tim Cook attended the premiere. And we see how crypto companies court the Whitehouse through various mechanisms. How might this factor into "mere" unicorn startups? I think it does but not sure how. My guess is that if you're an early stage startup that isn't an AI company already worth billions, you can probably ignore this as noise and focus on building product. It's reasonably likely that by the time your startup is sufficiently large, there will be a new administration (because it takes a few years and presumably he will not be president in 2029).

jfil 8mo ago
I think one implication is that ad-driven tech companies are at great risk. In a political system where National Champion businesses are selected/assisted on the basis of bribery, advertising becomes irrelevant. Why spend money advertising Widget X when this widget is already the only one that's officially sanctioned?
deleted 8mo ago
[deleted]

deleted 8mo ago

[deleted]