5 ms·

Are you seriously asking how revealing corruption in politics is in the public interest? https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/135225 https://wikileaks.org

by tete 12y ago

Are you seriously asking how revealing corruption in politics is in the public interest? https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/135225 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/135225

eli 12y ago
You needed leaked emails to tell you that companies donate to political candidates they like? https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00282038 https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00282038
- task_queue 12y ago
  If you read a follow up email here: https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 You will be aware of the damning evidence. They intended to donate $50k. They are subject to a $5k donation limitation. They are deliberately skirting the law.
  - cm2187 12y ago
    What I don't understand is how is that different from any fund raising effort for a candidate? You look for people who have a reason to support a given candidate (race, religion, profession, etc) and invite them to give them money. How is this a proof of corruption? Yes, the money will come with a message: we like you because you vote xxx on yyy. But I don't see how this is illegal (or even immoral). And I don't see how this is information you couldn't get from public data.
  - eli 12y ago
    Are you saying it's illegal to email coworkers and ask them to donate to a campaign? Or that it should be?
    - yellowapple 12y ago
      The email implies a specific intent of soliciting individual donations toward a cause (in this case, a politician) which is directly beneficial to the interests of the organization as a whole. It would be one thing if the emails amounted to "hey, you should donate to this guy because he's a cool dude". That's not the case here, though; it's instead a case of "hey, you should donate to this guy because the company you work for wants to donate $50k but can't because of legal restrictions, and this guy's been really good to us", which - legal or not - is (in my opinion at least) morally deplorable and certainly skirting around the intent of the existing law.
      - eli 12y ago
        Sorry, I'm not really seeing why asking people to donate for one reason is ok but another is morally deplorable. > The email implies a specific intent of soliciting individual donations toward a cause (in this case, a politician) which is directly beneficial to the interests of the organization as a whole. Sure, agreed. Makes sense to me. Why is this "deplorable"? I founded a startup. Is it wrong to email my employees and ask them to support tax breaks for startups? Or to contribute directly to the politicians who implement those tax breaks?
        fragmede 12y ago
        > I founded a startup. Is it wrong to email my employees and ask them to support tax breaks for startups? It's not wrong, per se, but since you're the founder it does skirts rather close to this statue in the California Labor Code, so be very careful how you word that email. (Many other states have similar laws if you are not in California.) California Labor Code § 1102: No employer shall coerce or influence or attempt to coerce or influence his employees through or by means of threat of discharge or loss of employment to adopt or follow or refrain from adopting or following any particular course or line of political action or political activity.
        cm2187 12y ago
        In the Sony case, it seems to be an employee inviting the executives to make a donation.
  - orbitur 12y ago
    I'm not sure I understand your point. The email is asking for personal donations from the execs. I can see using Sony's email addresses for these execs as a potential issue, but honestly, the writer of the email could have just used other personal email addresses.
    - yellowapple 12y ago
      Personal donations implicitly on behalf of their employer. That's the nuance that's critical to consider here, since the line between "personal" and "corporate" is significantly blurred.
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
joopxiv 12y ago
As these contributions were already made public, nothing has been revealed.
- task_queue 12y ago
  And then connecting it with this email reveals the damning evidence: https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 Publicly they were individual donations. This shows the intent of the group to donate a sum of $50k along with detailing how they were going break their donation up to skirt the law. They deliberately structured their donations to sidestep the $5k limitation to campaigns they're subject to.
  - RobertKerans 12y ago
    That's fine. What about the rest of the documents?
  - waterlesscloud 12y ago
    This isn't even close to being damning evidence. There's no "structuring" here to "sidestep" anything. There's no breaking up donations. This is someone asking individuals to contribute to a campaign. Contributions which, by the way, are a matter of public record for all to see, no hacking needed.
    - mentat 12y ago
      Asking for contributions to make a corporate goal as a kickback for services received.

by tete 12y ago

Are you seriously asking how revealing corruption in politics is in the public interest? https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/135225 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/135225

eli 12y ago

You needed leaked emails to tell you that companies donate to political candidates they like? https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00282038 https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00282038

task_queue 12y ago
If you read a follow up email here: https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 You will be aware of the damning evidence. They intended to donate $50k. They are subject to a $5k donation limitation. They are deliberately skirting the law.
- cm2187 12y ago
  What I don't understand is how is that different from any fund raising effort for a candidate? You look for people who have a reason to support a given candidate (race, religion, profession, etc) and invite them to give them money. How is this a proof of corruption? Yes, the money will come with a message: we like you because you vote xxx on yyy. But I don't see how this is illegal (or even immoral). And I don't see how this is information you couldn't get from public data.
- eli 12y ago
  Are you saying it's illegal to email coworkers and ask them to donate to a campaign? Or that it should be?
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    The email implies a specific intent of soliciting individual donations toward a cause (in this case, a politician) which is directly beneficial to the interests of the organization as a whole. It would be one thing if the emails amounted to "hey, you should donate to this guy because he's a cool dude". That's not the case here, though; it's instead a case of "hey, you should donate to this guy because the company you work for wants to donate $50k but can't because of legal restrictions, and this guy's been really good to us", which - legal or not - is (in my opinion at least) morally deplorable and certainly skirting around the intent of the existing law.
    - eli 12y ago
      Sorry, I'm not really seeing why asking people to donate for one reason is ok but another is morally deplorable. > The email implies a specific intent of soliciting individual donations toward a cause (in this case, a politician) which is directly beneficial to the interests of the organization as a whole. Sure, agreed. Makes sense to me. Why is this "deplorable"? I founded a startup. Is it wrong to email my employees and ask them to support tax breaks for startups? Or to contribute directly to the politicians who implement those tax breaks?
      - fragmede 12y ago
        > I founded a startup. Is it wrong to email my employees and ask them to support tax breaks for startups? It's not wrong, per se, but since you're the founder it does skirts rather close to this statue in the California Labor Code, so be very careful how you word that email. (Many other states have similar laws if you are not in California.) California Labor Code § 1102: No employer shall coerce or influence or attempt to coerce or influence his employees through or by means of threat of discharge or loss of employment to adopt or follow or refrain from adopting or following any particular course or line of political action or political activity.
        cm2187 12y ago
        In the Sony case, it seems to be an employee inviting the executives to make a donation.
- orbitur 12y ago
  I'm not sure I understand your point. The email is asking for personal donations from the execs. I can see using Sony's email addresses for these execs as a potential issue, but honestly, the writer of the email could have just used other personal email addresses.
  - yellowapple 12y ago
    Personal donations implicitly on behalf of their employer. That's the nuance that's critical to consider here, since the line between "personal" and "corporate" is significantly blurred.
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]

joopxiv 12y ago

As these contributions were already made public, nothing has been revealed.

task_queue 12y ago
And then connecting it with this email reveals the damning evidence: https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 https://wikileaks.org/sony/emails/emailid/49813 Publicly they were individual donations. This shows the intent of the group to donate a sum of $50k along with detailing how they were going break their donation up to skirt the law. They deliberately structured their donations to sidestep the $5k limitation to campaigns they're subject to.
- RobertKerans 12y ago
  That's fine. What about the rest of the documents?
- waterlesscloud 12y ago
  This isn't even close to being damning evidence. There's no "structuring" here to "sidestep" anything. There's no breaking up donations. This is someone asking individuals to contribute to a campaign. Contributions which, by the way, are a matter of public record for all to see, no hacking needed.
  - mentat 12y ago
    Asking for contributions to make a corporate goal as a kickback for services received.