Biden-Harris campaign statement on new report that TFG is asking oil executives to contribute $1 billion to his campaign

[LetMyPeopleVote]

Link to tweet

[Lovie777]

1. K & R.......................

more tax cuts for the rich.........................

[Bristlecone]

2. Wonder what Rex Tillerson's advice to Big Oil would be

[erronis]

17. I doubt we'll ever know - but it won't be in favor of the American public.

Tillerson has about 50 IQ points more than trump and knows how to not stick both feet in his mouth at the same time.

[Omnipresent]

3. Now that's election interference, to say the least!

[Hermit-The-Prog]

4. Republicans and oligarchs have been in a symbiotic relationship since the Powell memo of 1971.

See also:
Nobel laureate James Buchanan is the intellectual linchpin of the Koch-funded attack on democratic institutions, argues Duke historian Nancy MacLean

[StClone]

20. And since bribery is quasi-legal now aka buying politicians.

For Senators the SCOTUS 2022 ruling: https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/the-supreme-court-just-streamlined-the-process-for-bribing-senators/

Greasing the skids was Citizens United v. FEC, https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/01/citizens-united-campaign-finance-legalized-bribery-102366/

[AllaN01Bear]

5. also pay his leagel bills .

[Delmette2.0]

9. We will need to have a complete audit of his

Campaign income and expenditures.

How much does he use for personal expenses?

[70sEraVet]

6. Oil companies can play havok with the election simply by raising gas prices.

That's what I've been fearing all along.

[erronis]

18. Yup - they can influence elections pretty handily. Along with Saudi Arabia and the rest of OPEC.

Shit, even the locked-in distributors in the northeast play with prices at will. Virtually no competitions.

[Dave Bowman]

7. He's doing a hell of a job draining the swamp.

[Raven123]

8. I would like to see more of these statements phrased a little differently

For example, TFG traded campaign contributions from oil Execs for a promise to increase their wealth by cutting taxes and endangering our climate through deregulation, followed immediately by the Biden-Harris efforts/measures to make the billionaires pay their fair share and protecting the environment.

I think an immediate contrast is more memorable than a simple criticism. They do this sometimes. More would be better.

[CaptainTruth]

10. I'm glad to see agressive messaging like this!

We need more of it!

[BComplex]

11. They need to add that this is exactly what led to the supreme court being so corrupt.

Citizens United.

[90-percent]

16. Yup

Money is speech and the morbidly wealthy are entitled to a helluva lot more speech than all of us in the bottom 98% income bracket. 90 % jimmy

[NBachers]

12. That's the way you do it! I endorse this message.

[brer cat]

13. K&R

[Quanto Magnus]

14. Quid pro quo

He's openly asking for bribes....

[Grins]

15. Need ANOTHER reason to get the money out of politics?

Here ya' go!!!

Been saying since the Bush II administration, the government should fund ALL political campaigns from State governors to U.S. presidents. ALL of them. And it would be a bargain at $30 billion.

[HUAJIAO]

19. TOO MANY WORDS !!!

Who , of the people they need to reach, do they think is actually going to read it all?

Keep it short and sweet !!

[hay rick]

21. It isn't a working people problem, it's the entire human race put at risk.

This response trivializes the scale of the evil. It's way worse than just another sell out to the rich and should not be buried under that worn out label.

[HUAJIAO]

23. Absolutely right.

The Democrats have just terrible campaign/political communication departments. Just terrible. They live in a world apart. Hell, put Jamie Raskin, or any one of another great congressional members in charge !! Or , even McDonald's advertising firms!! Or Honda !!! Heck even Popeye's!!!!!

[LetMyPeopleVote]

22. TFG is asking to be bribed

[Tickle]

24. I think the working families

think this will lower gas prices so I doubt they will react negatively.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

25. Trump's pitch to Big Oil execs sparks Senate Democrats' attention

Will Senate Democrats hold hearings into Donald Trump's controversial pitch to oil industry executives? It's “highly likely,” one key member said.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trumps-pitch-big-oil-execs-sparks-senate-democrats-attention-rcna151943

The New York Times’ Jamelle Bouie responded soon after, “I’m obviously angered by the blatant disregard for the planet and its inhabitants. But I’m also struck by the in-your-face brazenness of Trump’s reported quid pro quo. This is more than the hint of corruption; it is the overpowering scent of the rotting corpse of corruption. It is influence trading of the sort that would embarrass a Boss Tweed or a Roscoe Conkling, whose 'honest graft' came with at least the pretense of pursuing the public good.”.....

Have the revelations opened the door to possible scrutiny on Capitol Hill? In the Republican-led House, no. In the Democratic-led Senate, maybe. The New Republic’s Greg Sargent reported:

For starters, the revelations seem to cry out for more scrutiny from Congress. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has been presiding over hearings into the oil industry as chair of the Budget Committee, says it’s “highly likely” that the committee will examine the new revelations.

“This is practically an invitation to ask more questions,” the Rhode Island Democrat told Greg, describing this as a “natural extension of the investigation already underway.”

The New York Times’ Jamelle Bouie responded soon after, “I’m obviously angered by the blatant disregard for the planet and its inhabitants. But I’m also struck by the in-your-face brazenness of Trump’s reported quid pro quo. This is more than the hint of corruption; it is the overpowering scent of the rotting corpse of corruption. It is influence trading of the sort that would embarrass a Boss Tweed or a Roscoe Conkling, whose 'honest graft' came with at least the pretense of pursuing the public good.”

Have the revelations opened the door to possible scrutiny on Capitol Hill? In the Republican-led House, no. In the Democratic-led Senate, maybe. The New Republic’s Greg Sargent reported:

For starters, the revelations seem to cry out for more scrutiny from Congress. Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who has been presiding over hearings into the oil industry as chair of the Budget Committee, says it’s “highly likely” that the committee will examine the new revelations.

“This is practically an invitation to ask more questions,” the Rhode Island Democrat told Greg, describing this as a “natural extension of the investigation already underway.”

Whitehouse added, “The phrase that instantly came to mind as I was reading the story was ‘quid pro quo.’” Referencing both the Post’s report and the aforementioned Politico article, the senator concluded, “Put those things together and it starts to look mighty damn corrupt.”

All things considered, I think it’s fair to say that Senate Democrats have exercised extraordinary restraint — by some measures, too much — in not holding committee hearings in response to every episodic development surrounding the former president. While the likes of House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan have reached for their gavel in response to meaningless Fox News segments, Democrats in the upper chamber have been far more measured about chasing assorted Trump scandals.