Amazon's Spending on 'Melania' Is a Barely Concealed Bribe(daringfireball.net)
159 pointsby lateforwork3 hours ago13 comments
  • mkw50533 hours ago
    The $28M to Melania personally is the tell. Amazon could've made this documentary for $5M and marketed it for $10M and still gotten whatever political cover they wanted. Instead they structured a deal where most of the money flows directly to the president's wife. That's not sloppy negotiating, that's the point. Someone at Amazon legal signed off on creating a paper trail that looks exactly like what it is.
    • selimthegrim3 hours ago
      Wait until they buy her book and sell it for free on Amazon
      • willturman3 hours ago
        From Webster's 1913:

        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.

  • MisterTea3 hours ago
    109 points and [flagged].
    • huyae7484an hour ago
      Yeah, the mods usually hide behind “light moderation actions” while letting the “special” subset of audience they have cultivated run rampant and unchecked with quasi moderator abilities.
  • JumpCrisscross3 hours ago
    “They’re spending $35 million now, to promote it”

    No points for guessing which social media company got the bulk of that ad spend.

  • axus3 hours ago
    A good reminder to check your AWS bill
  • Blackstrat2 hours ago
    And Netflix and the Obama? Or Harry & Megan. No difference, merely colored by your political leanings.
    • pan692 hours ago
      The difference here is Melania Trump currently represents the Office of the First Lady of the United States, an official government position in the White House.

      When Obama, Harry & Megan made their documentaries, they were private citizens.

      • throwawayqqq11an hour ago
        Obama also never 'joked' about a third term or diverted funds into private accounts or accepted a gifted 747 plane. How can one think that trumps corruption is just about the same level as others...
        • Blackstrat2 minutes ago
          Allegations without facts. Simple political posturing. Ilhan Omar? Hillary Clinton? Mitch McConnell? The list is endless.
  • mcphage3 hours ago
    I would say there’s no concealment at all. It’s a naked bribe and flattery. But bribery is legal now.
    • JumpCrisscross3 hours ago
      > bribery is legal now

      It’s not. And it will probably be investigated by a future administration when we do a Nuremberg-style review of this term.

      • Analemma_3 hours ago
        In the last decade, the Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that bribery is de facto legal and impossible to prosecute (Kelly v. United States, McDonnell v. United States, FEC vs. Ted Cruz). And those were against relative nobodies, they certainly aren't going to permit charges against anyone in this administration.
        • akramachamarei2 hours ago
          None of those three cases have to do with bribery, at least not receiving bribes for official action. Here's some nuance: Kelly concerns retaliation, McDonnell concerns whether hosting meetings and events amounts to official action, and FEC concern the limit (was $250,000) on the amount of post-election contributions which may be used to repay campaign debts.

          It's also worth noting that Kelly was unanimous and FEC upheld the ruling of the district court which the FEC had appealed.

          • JumpCrisscross2 hours ago
            It’s also worth noting that Bob Menende is in jail.
      • CamperBob23 hours ago
        Here, I'll save you the trouble:

        "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

      • dttzean hour ago
        [dead]
    • kenjackson3 hours ago
      I've heard that one of the advantages of this administration is that you don't need data or convincing arguments -- just bribery and flattery. If you're OK with bribery and flattery then you'll find this administration much easier to work with. Getting your way is a simpler path.
    • zdp72 hours ago
      Even if it was, there are other ways to go. The emoluments clause would be my guess. This term is the auction off America plan. Go read the NPR article on the gutting of nuclear safety rules. https://www.npr.org/2026/01/28/g-s1-107650/up-first-newslett... Who needs easy access to nuclear reactors? Tech billionaires possibly... Would you want to live next to a Grok data center? Iterate quickly and fail fast is not really compatible with nuclear reactor design. At least rocket debris a relatively short window of danger.
    • MisterTea3 hours ago
      > But bribery is legal now.

      Only because no one can prosecute it without retaliation from petulant man-children.

    • wat100003 hours ago
      There's enough to allow their followers to pretend it's all on the level, and for people who aren't paying much attention to ignore it. A direct bribe would make that quite a bit harder.
  • pwarner3 hours ago
    I mostly don't blame Amazon. If the mob boss demands $10M in protection money in order to allow your $2.5T business to operate, you pay, especially if that mob boss happens to be the head of federal law enforcement.

    Maybe we shift a bit of focus towards Congress, supreme courts and frankly voters who are apparently OK with this.

  • ChrisArchitect3 hours ago
    Previously:

    Tech CEOs attend Amazon-funded "Melania" screening at White House

    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46761370

  • jauntywundrkindan hour ago
    Beyond a bribe it's just wicked propoganda at that. Was just stunned at this review,

    > 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...

  • wang_li3 hours ago
    This is a surprise to you? Do you not find it odd that every single presidential candidate gets a ghostwriter for their multimillion dollar autobiography? Paid against royalties. How presidential libraries and foundations get hundreds of millions of dollars post presidency? The Obama's $65 million book deal for their memoires? Their $100 million netflix deal?
    • rcv3 hours ago
      Do you really not see the difference here? It's amazing how hard people will try to bOtH sIdEs this administration.

      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...

    • Aunche3 hours ago
      Michelle's Becoming sold 14 million copies. I don't see any recent figures for Barack's A Promised Land, but the initial 3.3 million print run sold within a month, and there is another volume in progress.
    • kenjackson3 hours ago
      Big difference is being out of office. I expect Trump to get a ton of money after leaving office, because people like proximity to fame, but I don't like the stench when he's in office and has direct political influence.

      That said, Trump also investigated Obama for the Netflix deal. Will he investigate Melania now?

      • wang_li2 hours ago
        Being out of office is irrelevant. "Do this for me now, I'll make sure you're taken care of when you retire." This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope.

        As far as I can tell no executive branch agency investigated the Netflix deal.

        • JumpCrisscross2 hours ago
          > This is so common the revolving door in government is a well worn trope

          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.

          • kenjackson2 hours ago
            Exactly. Anyone willing to bribe you is more than willing to rescind when you have no real power.
            • wang_lian hour ago
              Except if they back out of the deal after getting what they want, they'll never be able to make this kind of deal ever again.

              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.

  • politelemon3 hours ago
    Author has conveniently ignored that the screenings were attended by the Apple CEO as well.

    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/movies/movie-news/white-ho...

  • sys327683 hours ago
    Amazon burned $250M just for the rights to produce the goofy and embarrassing "Rings of Power" series. I wonder who was bribed in that deal?
    • dispersed3 hours ago
      There is a universe where Amazon can be both incompetent and corrupt, and we're living in it.
    • relativeadv3 hours ago
      ???