I always found it odd that foreign governments and assets are allowed to fund ideological zealot groups in other countries that in turn fund political candidates.
Like, sure, let's say China isn't bribing Biden directly (though they totally are). But they can give to a superpac which in turn sends it to Biden, and that's perfectly fine? It's just weird.
PAC: "Oh, our pac doesn't give any foreign money to the government, it uses the foreign donations to pay for overhead, while the domestic ones go 100% to the government"
Sane: "What would you do if you have no foreign ones, forgo your own paycheques?"
PAC: "God no, we'd use domestic donations."
Sane: "So without the foreign money, less money would go to your target."
PAC: "Yes."
Sane: "But no foreign money goes to your target."
PAC: "That is correct."
Sane: "But if foreigners stopped donating, your target would go bankrupt, even with the exact same number of domestic donators going through you to your target."
PAC: "Indeed."
Sane: "Then you're giving foreign money to politicians!"
If that was the case, why are they still progressing?
They make good foot soldiers. Anyone who has seen history of USSR can instantly catch a short term benefit of USSRing a country. It's short term because it only lasts a single lifetime, but guess what, that's all average crook cares about.
I always found it odd that foreign governments and assets are allowed to fund ideological zealot groups in other countries that in turn fund political candidates.
Like, sure, let's say China isn't bribing Biden directly (though they totally are). But they can give to a superpac which in turn sends it to Biden, and that's perfectly fine? It's just weird.
PAC: "Oh, our pac doesn't give any foreign money to the government, it uses the foreign donations to pay for overhead, while the domestic ones go 100% to the government"
Sane: "What would you do if you have no foreign ones, forgo your own paycheques?"
PAC: "God no, we'd use domestic donations."
Sane: "So without the foreign money, less money would go to your target."
PAC: "Yes."
Sane: "But no foreign money goes to your target."
PAC: "That is correct."
Sane: "But if foreigners stopped donating, your target would go bankrupt, even with the exact same number of domestic donators going through you to your target."
PAC: "Indeed."
Sane: "Then you're giving foreign money to politicians!"
PAC: "Of course not!"
If that was the case, why are they still progressing? The USSR collapsed. Did the CCP pick up the tab?
If that's the case, why are they being weakened by it?
They make good foot soldiers. Anyone who has seen history of USSR can instantly catch a short term benefit of USSRing a country. It's short term because it only lasts a single lifetime, but guess what, that's all average crook cares about.