Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert did a lovely series about this.
But in short, Donating millions to Trump. Illegal. Donating millions to Trump PAC. Legal. Trump can not spend Trump PAC money directly. Trump can say “boy I wish I had millions of dollars in political ads in a specific states at specific times about these specific topics.” Trump can also get pretty specific about the details.
Trump can also get pretty specific about the details.
I want the Big Macs to be wrapped in 100 dollar bills for the commercial. After the commercial send them to my room to make sure they were wrapped correctly. Do it even if we cut the Big Macs out of the commercial as well.
The Supreme Court declared money to be “free speech” and therefore protected by the first amendment. Therefore, if you are a billionaire and wish to throw elections to a fascist of your choice, that is protected speech.
The case is referred to as Citizens United. It’s also the source of the phrase “corporations are people, my friend” as it affords first amendment protections to corporations which are not people. Except in the crooked eyes of the fascist Supreme Court majority.
Short version: strategically place judges at all levels of jurisdiction, bring cases in front of them that upend protections aimed at preventing exactly that type of oligarchic power buying and thus rewrite the laws through these hoops until Freedom of Speech is conflated with buying elections.
You see, despite appearances, companies are actually people. Not in a real, people kind of way. Specifically, in a “the best of both for them” kind of way.
Then was have to remember that paying to circumvent and unduly influence democracy is, we’re to beleive, “free speech ^^^^tm” and, contrary to any and all logic, is actually very democratic. Then you have to remember that there aint no limit on freedom in America, baby!
If that doesn’t make sense to you then you’re a freedom hating commie.
The distinction is that a Super PAC, is explicitly NOT for the direct benefit of a candidate: it’s for the donors to use their free speech to publish messages of their choice.
I’m not American. Can someone explain how they are ‘allowed’ to do this? Similarly, how is the war chest created?
Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert did a lovely series about this.
But in short, Donating millions to Trump. Illegal. Donating millions to Trump PAC. Legal. Trump can not spend Trump PAC money directly. Trump can say “boy I wish I had millions of dollars in political ads in a specific states at specific times about these specific topics.” Trump can also get pretty specific about the details.
What a racket.
Thank the corrupt supreme court.
You spelt democracy wrong. /s
Cleptocracy oligarchs. Yay!
You spelt Oligarchy wrong (absolutelly not /s).
I want the Big Macs to be wrapped in 100 dollar bills for the commercial. After the commercial send them to my room to make sure they were wrapped correctly. Do it even if we cut the Big Macs out of the commercial as well.
The Supreme Court declared money to be “free speech” and therefore protected by the first amendment. Therefore, if you are a billionaire and wish to throw elections to a fascist of your choice, that is protected speech.
The case is referred to as Citizens United. It’s also the source of the phrase “corporations are people, my friend” as it affords first amendment protections to corporations which are not people. Except in the crooked eyes of the fascist Supreme Court majority.
Short version: strategically place judges at all levels of jurisdiction, bring cases in front of them that upend protections aimed at preventing exactly that type of oligarchic power buying and thus rewrite the laws through these hoops until Freedom of Speech is conflated with buying elections.
You see, despite appearances, companies are actually people. Not in a real, people kind of way. Specifically, in a “the best of both for them” kind of way.
Then was have to remember that paying to circumvent and unduly influence democracy is, we’re to beleive, “free speech ^^^^tm” and, contrary to any and all logic, is actually very democratic. Then you have to remember that there aint no limit on freedom in America, baby!
If that doesn’t make sense to you then you’re a freedom hating commie.
The distinction is that a Super PAC, is explicitly NOT for the direct benefit of a candidate: it’s for the donors to use their free speech to publish messages of their choice.
It’s legal hair-splitting