Sell: To transfer to another for an equivalent; to give up for a valuable consideration; to dispose of in return for something, especially for money.
Selling, even for free, implies demand.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/11/21/books/donald-trump-jr-tri...
i.e. you can't "sell" something when you can't even give it away.
And we see how crypto companies court the Whitehouse through various mechanisms.
How might this factor into "mere" unicorn startups? I think it does but not sure how.
My guess is that if you're an early stage startup that isn't an AI company already worth billions, you can probably ignore this as noise and focus on building product. It's reasonably likely that by the time your startup is sufficiently large, there will be a new administration (because it takes a few years and presumably he will not be president in 2029).
It’s not. And it will probably be investigated by a future administration when we do a Nuremberg-style review of this term.
It's also worth noting that Kelly was unanimous and FEC upheld the ruling of the district court which the FEC had appealed.
"Now isn't the time for recriminations for behavior long in the past, now is the time for forgiveness. Time to reach across the aisle in unity, time to heal the nation." - Democrats
Only because no one can prosecute it without retaliation from petulant man-children.
Sadly, small beer now that nuclear containment has also expired and been cleared from the table.
The Last Nuclear Deal Is Expiring. Does Anyone Care? https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46821225
Nuclear Arms Race 2.0: Ready, Set, Already Go .. You're Late!
emolument clause be dammed.
it turns out all you need to do is 1) blatantly ignore/violate the law, 2) have appointed justices to the court who will provide you will full immunity while in office (Trump vs United States)
No points for guessing which social media company got the bulk of that ad spend.
In a Berlin shopping mall.
The person? „Nicht relevant“.
Melania, in one word, "Egal". In two words, "Völlig egal".
Still, for those that feel that way I can only recommend Klemen Slakonja's First Lady Melania Trump: sLOVEnia biopic that follows her return to the land of both her and Laibach's origin.
https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/melania-trumps-documentar...
Or anywhere else in Europe
Tech CEOs attend Amazon-funded "Melania" screening at White House
Maybe we shift a bit of focus towards Congress, supreme courts and frankly voters who are apparently OK with this.
https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/wife-of-chief-justic...
The people most capable of fighting back, and who ultimately have the most to lose in a kleptocratic, authoritarian state, apparently to be cowards and losers. Bezos and Jassy could tell the administration to pound sand, given how critical AWS is, and that Amazon is part of the like, 4 companies propping up the teetering stack of cards holding up the thing this administration (and its weaponized voters) think represents “the economy”. But they won’t, because they’re a bunch of feckless children, desperate for scraps.
> So, what’s the point? How does this superficial, wilfully deceitful reality readjustment serve the sociopathic ascension of Trump’s will (because everything has to)? Watching Melania get fitted for expensive clothes in gaudy rooms, or talk up how extravagantly staged she demands her balls be - and both happen a lot in Brett Ratner’s unrelentingly boring feature doc debut - only strengthen perceptions of her as a chilly, lifeless socialite wannabe.
Ok, ice burn mostly so far. Expected. But:
> And I realised then what the point was - Trump is tightening his family business’ grip on the White House beyond his years and before our eyes. MELANIA is not the story of the First Lady of American politics, but the imagining of the first homeland monarch in U.S. history. This is not a film concerned at all with the America of today; it is propaganda that serves the formation of a future non-democracy.
I'm all too afraid that there is something truly wicked this boring dry flop of a movie will accomplish, over time, for some incredibly infernal anti-Democracy forces in the world. That one of the top 3 richest men in the world would give a messely couple million bucks for an anti-Democracy pro-Regal pro-Imperial project like this is perhaps unsurprising, beyond the simple dimension of grift it obviously presents.
https://screenspace.substack.com/p/the-animated-pics-vying-f... via the lovely https://bsky.app/profile/numb.comfortab.ly/post/3mdncqwyuks2...
you can't be serious, right?
those were made _after_ the Obamas had left office (and Harry/Megan had left the royal family)
Michelle Obama didn't personally get paid $28 million to do a film about her _while she was First Lady_
When Obama, Harry & Megan made their documentaries, they were private citizens.
Nobody whos word is that worthless, is suited for any position of power. This is indefensible.
> I learned decades ago to ignore politicians.
Then why do you know about obamas corruption and how bad it is?
You are just biased. Most right wingers go silent when pointed to their contradictions.
No one is arguing that the US has never been a corrupt nation, that's always been a given.
Many are just making the simple observation that the great grifter, some say the greatest of all time, has really taken the US bribery game up to the highest levels, easily a magnitude, if not two, beyond anything seen before.
It's truly impressive stuff. It's made a big impression on many about the globe.
1) Obama was not in office when this advance was given. What favors could Penguin Random House have been trying to bribe him for?
2) The Obamas were paid a $65M advance on their books, which while a huge sum it was actually seen as a reasonable investment at the time given the expected popularity of those books[1]. Both books were insane hits and sold like crazy. "A Promised Land" sold ~900k copies _on the first day_[2]. They almost certainly earned out on advance and are probably continuing to rake in more from sales.
3) This Melania movie is widely expected to have very poor sales. While making unpopular movies isn't in itself a crime, the amount paid in royalties to her does not look to any reasonable person like a sound investment. At least, not if you expect your return to be in ticket sales or streaming fees.
[1] https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/3/2/14779892/barack-michell... [2] https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/526599-bar...
That said, Trump also investigated Obama for the Netflix deal. Will he investigate Melania now?
As far as I can tell no executive branch agency investigated the Netflix deal.
On TV and Reddit. In the real world you’re not getting policy outcomes today for a handshake of a payout tomorrow without someone in office to guarantee your end.
Regardless, the revolving door is well known. It's been talked about since the 1800s. There's a wikipedia page for it. Pretending it doesn't happen doesn't change the fact that it happens and is quite common.
If someone is stupid enough to go running their mouth on a bribery gone bad, or one willing to give on policy in exchange for promises, you either didn't need to bribe them or are wasting your time and money.
These deals don't happen that way because they can't. It's why e.g. Bob Menendez winds up with gold bars, Melania is being paid now and Trump's crypto is being purchased and sold.
> the revolving door is well known. It's been talked about since the 1800s
Sure. But not in the way you describe. You hire the ex politician not to pay them back for a favour earlier but to curry favour with the folks still in power.
> Pretending it doesn't happen doesn't change the fact that it happens and is quite common
Straw man. Nobody said it doesn't happen. Just that the way you're describig it is wrong.
https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-ho...
https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/ceo-captured https://daringfireball.net/linked/2026/01/27/mg-cook-melania
1. Assume that Amazon knows the future
2. Then spending $250M on Rings of Power is a bad decision
3. Therefore paying $28M to Trump is also just a bad decision, and not a bribery