11–20 of 100 posts
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
It's not corruption if he didn't personally benefited from it. The problem is that if your only source of information is biased, you take the wrong decisions.
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not corruption if he didn't personally benefited from it. The problem is that if your only source of information is biased, you take the wrong decisions.
It depends what is considered a benefit. There is something like elections in the next months...
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
It's not corruption if he didn't personally benefited from it. The problem is that if your only source of information is biased, you take the wrong decisions.
On first glance at the headline, I really thought Kim Dotcom had gone off the deep end, but the evidence really does make it sound plausible. Sigh. We definitely have the best politicians money can buy...
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
I don't think what you described is corruption. That sounds like protecting the interests of US businesses from overseas criminals.
Just because someone is or is not guilty, that does not make corruption OK.
MPAA "lobbying" the VP of US, and then the VP ordering the shutdown of a company from another country on behalf of MPAA (illegally it seems, from recent news). I think this would be called "corruption" in any other country but US.
It's not corruption if he didn't personally benefited from it. The problem is that if your only source of information is biased, you take the wrong decisions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think what you described is corruption. That sounds like protecting the interests of US businesses from overseas criminals.
So if I pay a cop $1mil to kill the guy that was convicted of raping my child, is that cool too? Just because someone is or is not guilty, that does not make corruption OK.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not corruption if he didn't personally benefited from it. The problem is that if your only source of information is biased, you take the wrong decisions.
From the article: Noteworthy is also the MPAA's lobbying disclosure statement of last year which includes money spent on lobbying the office of Vice President Joe Biden.