2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumHonesty
If there is nothing wrong with it. If they cannot be corrupted by the act alone. If you cannot prove an explicit, unequivocal quid pro quo, than why can't members of Congress or other government officials and contractors give $200,000, closed door, no transcript, speeches to organizations like Goldman Sachs?
Why won't she, if she becomes president, sign an executive order allowing all executive branch officials and government contractors to give and receive all the money and gifts they want? If it cannot corrupt or influence decisions than why are these laws preventing these honest people from making a little money on the side or a free trip to Disney Land for their family. No harm can come of it, taking millions of dollars from someone, for a 20 minute speech on ethics for example, doesn't mean you won't do your job, right?
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Juicy_Bellows
(2,427 posts)Rebkeh
(2,450 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)onecaliberal
(32,873 posts)rock
(13,218 posts)It's insane to allow the citizenry to give money to politicians. Plainly we do not allow people to give money to cops, so why not include politicians. It's an old concept in ethics: behave as though someone is watching you. Also, don't do anything suspicious even if you're not doing anything wrong: don't give people an excuse to suspect you. Clearly accepting huge sums from someone is NOT evidence of guilt. Unfortunately it is not proof of innocence either. But obviously if you're going to jump to a conclusion, I know which you will pick. Politicians don't have nearly the reputation they image they do (perhaps for this good reason). Sorry if I rambled a bit.