I could use some help, about the foreign companies buying influence in the House and Senate.

A couple guys on a message board claim that foreign-owned corproations cannot donate lots of $$$ to campaigns, even with the Supreme Court ruling.

Is there anyplace on the 'net that refutes them?
Keith Olbermann has refuted them, but I could use some information.

tjeu wpi;d be ab;e to cotribute as a US Corp. I'm sure no atty, let alone a constitutional lawyer, but I have heard that several times.

Turn the tables and ask them to show you evidence, such as written law, that demonstrates foreign-owned corporations cannot donate lots of $$$ to campaigns, even with the Supreme Court ruling.

A corporation is not a living thing that is 'born in America'.
If a Saudi King owns an American company and tells the financial officer where to put the money the financial officer will put the money there, period .

There is no law saying, 'If the corporation is foreign owned it cannot give money to a political entity'.

for foreign owned companies to donate.

This is a disaster foisted on America by John Roberts.

It would be interesting to see Harvard law school and other law entities interpret what this means.

Here are a couple of links but they are left leaning.

http://www.alternet.org/rights/144502/supreme_court's_ruling_would_allow_bin_laden_to_donate_to_sarah_palin's_presidential_campaign

http://rawstory.com/2010/01/critics-destructive-supreme-court-decision-empowers-corruption/

Justice John Paul Stevens focused on the same concerns in his dissenting opinion. The majority's position "would appear to afford the same protection to multinational corporations controlled by foreigners as to individual Americans," he writes.

More at the link:


http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2010/01/22/should-foreign-corporations-spend-money-on-u-s-political-candidates.aspx

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/democrats-bar-foreign-money-us-politics/story?id=9658403

Rep. Chris Van Hollen said Monday that Democrats are crafting legislation to prevent foreign owned corporations from funneling money into American political campaigns, saying the prospect of overseas influence is a "big danger" in the aftermath of a landmark Supreme Court opinion that changed the rules for political fundraising.

"There's a big danger that the decision opens the door to foreign owned corporations indirectly spending millions of dollars to influence the outcome of U.S. elections through their American subsidiaries," Van Hollen, D.-Md., told ABC News. "The American people should be deeply concerned. This decision raises all sorts of questions."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multinational_corporations

24/7 Customer
ABB
ABN-Amro
Accenture
Accor
Activision Blizzard
Aditya Birla Group
Advanced Micro Devices
Affiliated Computer Services
Airbus
Air France-KLM
Akzo Nobel
Alcatel-Lucent
Allianz
Alstom
Altria Group
American Express
ANZ
Apple Inc.
Aquent llc
Arcelor Mittal
Arcor
Assicurazioni Generali
Atari
Activision
AXA
Bacardi
Banco Santander
Bank of Montreal
Barrick Gold Corporation
Barilla Group
BASF
Bayer
BBVA
Bic
Billabong
BMW
BNP Paribas
Boeing
Bombardier Inc.
Bouygues
Bridgestone
BP (British Petroleum)
Cadbury Schweppes
Canon Inc
Capital One
Caterpillar Inc.
Celestica
Centocor
Chevron
Cisco Systems
Citigroup
ConocoPhillips
Coca-Cola
Costco
Creative Labs
Credit Suisse
Crédit Agricole
Cummins
Daimler AG
Dandelion Corporation
Danone
Daud World
Dell
Deutsche Telekom
Dilmah
Dow Chemical
Ejada Systems
EDF
Electronic Arts
Electronic Data Systems
Electrolux
Emerson Electric
Eni
Enel
Embraer
Epson
Ericcson
Ernst & Young
Etisalat
ExxonMobil
Faber-Castell
France Télécom
Ferrero
Fiat
Ficosa
Finmeccanica
Ford Motor Company
Gazprom
General Electric
General Motors
Generali
Gerdau
Gillette
GlaxoSmithKline
Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company
Google
Halliburton
Hearst Corporation
Heineken
Hewlett Packard
Hindustan Computers Limited
Hitachi, Ltd.
Honda
HSBC
Huawei
Hutchison Whampoa Limited
IBM
ICICI
Indesit
Infosys
Ingersoll Rand
ING Group
Intel Corporation
Intesa Sanpaolo
Isuzu
Jardine Matheson
JFPI Corporation
Johnson Controls
Johnson & Johnson
JPMorgan Chase & Co.
Konami
Kingston Technology
KPMG
Krispy Kreme
Kronos Inc
Lagardère
Lactalis
Lear
Leoni AG
Lesaffre
Lexmark
LG
Lockheed Martin
L'Oréal
Lukoil
Luxottica
McDonalds
Maggi
Malaysia Airlines
Manthan Software Services
Martini & Rossi
Masterfoods
Mercedes-AMG
Mercedes-Benz
Michelin
Microsoft
Mobil
Motorola
Millipore Corporation
Mohabbatte Corporation
Monsanto Company
Nestlé
News Corporation
Nike, Inc.
Nintendo
Nissan
Novartis
Oracle Corporation
Panasonic Corporation
Parmalat
PepsiCo
Petronas
Pfizer
Philips
Procter & Gamble
Proton (carmaker)
PSA Peugeot Citroën
Red Bull
Reebok
Regus
Renault
Shell/Royal Dutch
Royal Bank of Canada
Rusal
SABMiller plc
Samsung
SanDisk
Sanofi Aventis
SAP AG
Sasken Communication Technologies Limited
Sasol
Schlumberger
Scotiabank
Sega
Servcorp
Siemens
Société Générale
Sony
Sony Computer Entertainment
Sony Music Entertainment
Sony Pictures Entertainment
Southwest Airlines
Square Enix
Suez
Syntel
Tata Group
Techint (Tenaris/ Ternium)
Telefónica
Tesco
Tetra Laval
Texas Instruments
Time Warner
The Coca-Cola Company
The GAP
The Walt Disney Company
The Toronto Dominion Bank
Toshiba
Total S.A.
Toyota
UBS
Unicredit
Unilever
Veolia
Virgin Group
Vivendi
Vale do Rio Doce
Videocon
Vodafone
Volkswagen
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
Wipro Technologies
Woodbridge Foam
Xerox
Yahoo!
Yakult

Citibank employees were among Obama's largest donors.

Similarly, Prince Alwaleed is the second largest shareholder of Fox News Corp. Think of the influence he bought with that one.

Prince Alwaleed interview with Charlie Rose

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_05/b4165010350026.htm

Read the interview transcript. It opened my eyes even further than they were. Unbelievable. And he claims that terrorism is our biggest threat. No. Dear Prince. There is something worse than terror.