101

What Trump promised oil CEOs as he asked them to steer $1 billion to his campaign (www.msn.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by Ranvier@sopuli.xyz to c/politics@lemmy.world

8 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Trump’s response stunned several of the executives in the room overlooking the ocean: You all are wealthy enough, he said, that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House. At the dinner, he vowed to immediately reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental rules and policies and stop new ones from being enacted, according to people with knowledge of the meeting, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe a private conversation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/05/09/trump-oil-industry-campaign-money/

https://archive.is/BquYY

top 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] Boddhisatva@lemmy.world 20 points 2 months ago

Alex Witt, a senior adviser for oil and gas with Climate Power, said Trump’s promise is he will do whatever the oil industry wants if they support him. With Trump, Witt said, “everything has a price.”

Isn't this a quid pro quo? Give my campaign a billion dollars and I'll do this stuff for you? Everything has a price?

In 1976, announcing the Supreme Court's landmark Buckley v. Valeo decision, Chief Justice Warren Burger set this standard for corruption: "the reality & appearance of improper influence stemming from the dependence of candidates on large campaign contributions."

The current chief justice, John Roberts, had led an effort to tighten that broad language. Roberts, delivering the McCutcheon v. FEC ruling last year, defined corruption as "a contribution to a particular candidate in exchange for his agreeing to do a particular act within his official duties."

He was describing a quid pro quo – the donor's money in explicit exchange for the politician's official favor. It's a felony.

Just to be clear, John Roberts, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the USA defined corruption as "a contribution to a particular candidate in exchange for his agreeing to do a particular act within his official duties."

This is a blatant request for them to bribe him. New indictment incoming?

[-] KevonLooney@lemm.ee 9 points 2 months ago

No, because that language refers to "a particular act". Trump is not promising anything except "whatever". It's very non-specific.

Honestly it would be on brand for him to just lie.

[-] Asafum@feddit.nl 4 points 2 months ago

Even still. Trump could be exceptionally precise, mention an exceedingly specific thing, and Roberts would just move the goalposts again.

[-] formergijoe@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

You all are wealthy enough, [Trump] said, that you should raise $1 billion to return me to the White House. At the dinner, he vowed to immediately reverse dozens of President Biden’s environmental rules and policies and stop new ones from being enacted, according to people with knowledge of the meeting...

Sounds specific.

[-] barsquid@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago

Add it to the list of crimes, then. Maybe a judge will give him a $1,000 scolding.

[-] disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

It’s his plan regardless. Now he’s getting paid in advance.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/climate/trump-environment-rollbacks-list.html

[-] Pronell@lemmy.world 18 points 2 months ago

Putin tactic. Give me a percentage so I can become boss and demand a larger percentage.

[-] AlwaysNowNeverNotMe@kbin.social 3 points 2 months ago

Goddamnet if I've ever heard of a room more in need of a half pound brick of c4 covered in a pound of pennies.

this post was submitted on 09 May 2024

101 points (99.0% liked)

politics

18129 readers

3632 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News