Home | About | Donate

Trump Inauguration Bankrolled by Firms Seeking Government Favor


#1

Trump Inauguration Bankrolled by Firms Seeking Government Favor

Nadia Prupis, staff writer

Companies seeking favor from the government wrote big checks for President Donald Trump's inauguration, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings (pdf) released this week.

In one notable instance, the agrochemical giant Dow—which is trying to kill a federal risk study on its pesticides—gave $1 million for the festivities. Dow's chairman and CEO Andrew Liveris is a close adviser to Trump and heads a White House manufacturing working group.


#2

Lol, it's not just Trump. This is how all politics works now.


#3

This has be going on with accelerating speed since the Reagan years. Our government has been put out for sale by careerist Republican politicians and many of their comrades on the Democratic side. There is no place for the people in this and I am sometimes amused at how people talk about writing your congressperson about something. The vast majority don't care but when they start getting massive mailings, phone calls and emails I would think they would start to get frightened. Now they own the thing - our government - lock, stock and barrel. The American electorate needs to put them out to pasture but how many americans vote over and over for these same crooks? If people really, really understood what has gone on I would think they would be repulsed but the republicans have basically controlled all of the messages. While they are mostly interested in the interests of their wealthy friends and could care less about social issues - they use social issues like abortion, gay rights, capital punishment, religion as a tool to manipulate many ignorant folks in the masses. And I'm sure the republicans will deliver but we all know that is not their real agenda. It is all about pigging out a taxpayer expense.


#4

This is not government, it was the private party of a narcissist. And it turned a profit of literally uncounted millions. The donations were reported to the FEC, but the spending did not have to be, and that was cut back and cut back. I understand there are no laws about what becomes of the leftovers, but I can guess.


#5

AHA! That's what happened to our retard-in-chief -- he was exposed to too much chlorpyrifos as a child!


#6

That's ok, his 'crowd' was as big as his tiny, miniature, miniscule hands [read: intellect]!


#7

The "crowd that counts" for the Trump Trash Tribe forked up the funds for his "American Carnage" conflagration, a colossal failure when compared to the two turnouts for President Obama (when far less was spent and FAR MORE attended...my son included who was invited as a result of working tirelessly on both campaigns. He also received eight Christmas cards from the Obama's during his time in office. Now that is class and caring!)


#8

Oh, in the end the non billionaire or millionaire taxpayers will pay because you know these people all want something for their contributions and it will always involve less costs (regulation) or less taxes or more profits (government contracts & outsourcing). Who pays for the lost taxes based on these companies and their lobbyists lowering their tax contribution or the waste incurred when there contract performance is basically fraud? They are all looking for the next big tragedy to cash in on at our expense. In the end, the public at large pays for all of this.


#9

Gee, I wonder if any of these donors to President Obama's 2013 inauguration wanted anything for their millions...

https://www.opensecrets.org/obama/inaug.php


#10

Irrelevant unless you can show they did get something. If they didn't, it's too late. And nobody has ever raised as big an inaugural fund as djt did.

Anyway, this argument is getting very old and tired.


#11

Yeah, I guess only one half of the duopoly can be bought.


#12

Only one half of your "duopoly" is currently in power. Let's focus there, but watch our backs.


#13

I'll focus on both halves of the duopoly at once, but thanks nonetheless.


#14

I'd rather focus on building a system with more than two choices, but this topic is about one of the old ones.


#15

I'll still insist it's about both, but I'm right there with you on building that selection of political options.


#16

really,what's/the/law/on/the/leftovers?he/raised/most/ever/by/double/if/i/recall.


#17

Rachel Maddow (spare me your eye-rolls and look into the information; she cited the same Politico report as this story) has an interesting report tonight about another donor to the inaug, the state-run oil company of Venezuela and an individual who afterward did in fact get meetings with the NSC and Bannon to present a proposed new foreign policy for Venezuela. Indeed, pretty clearly pay. to. play.


#18

My bad. Watching the beginning of the rebroadcast of TRMS (cat was on my chest), I discover I conflated 2 half-mil-$$-each Venezuelan-connected donations to the djt inauguration that should have been distinct.