Skip to main content

Did corporate donors corrupt Jill Stein?

Still with Jill
And the Green Party.

Jill Stein’s 2016 campaign  was on he level folks. 

Including donations from  a large corporation.

A devastating and dishonest Daily Kos article earlier this year accused Jill Stein of fraud because of alleged ties to the corporate world, with donations from corporations, the largest of which was $44,013 from  Alphabet Inc. But wait until you find out who Alphabet Inc. was.

Jill’s top donor, “Alphabet Inc,” was the parent company of Google, and gave, roughly, $40,000.00 to Stein’s campaign during the 2016 campaign cycle. So was this an example of corrupting, corporate influence as implied by Daily Kos and others?

Here is what I think you should know:

Google strongly supported net neutrality

It would be hard to overstate the importance of this fact.

According to Investopedia:  “In 2014, (Google sent out) a message to all of its "Take Action" subscribers strongly supporting net neutrality and advocating that the FCC enforce net neutrality rules. The company's statement went so far as to contradict, or reverse, its 2010 position, saying that net neutrality should extend to wireless carriers.”

Background: In general, we progressives not only support net neutrality, we view it as essential to our survival in the  current state of  corporate feudalism. If our voices are to be heard, we must have access to high-speed internet. We do not want the extraction industries and their allies to be able to throttle down or black out our messages. 

While it may seem odd that the Green Party accepted money from Google, I think it is entirely understandable. To the extent that Google continues to support net neutrality, the company is an ally and friend of the Green Party and of all progressives everywhere. This does not mean that we will never run into a conflict with this company, but during the election cycle, Google was supporting the free flow of information, information that means life, or death to our movement. So far as I am aware, that is still the case. 

In other words, Google, for the time being at least, is an ally of the Green Party, of information-sharing, of truth and seemingly of the well-being of planet earth. It makes sense that this would be an exception to the rule. What you will not see, and will never see, are large donations from oil lobbies, from the military-industrial complex, from coal interests, from oil pipelines, from large, international banks,  or any other environmentally harmful destructive companies. The fact is, Jill Stein and the national Green Party of the US have meticulously avoided questionable entanglements with purveyors of illnesses, death and destruction that are supported by both the Democrats and Republicans. 

In contrast, Hillary Clinton’s top donors included the likes of Citigroup Inc; Goldman Sachs; MetLife, Inc.,; JP Morgon Chase & Company; New York Life Insurance and others. Some readers may recognize among them anti-progressive supporters of (already leaking) oil pipelines, human rights violations, privatizers, for-profit health-providers,  wars financiers, and other forms of worldwide suppression.

Arguably, Google is a Green company 

It seems that Google supports the green revolution that the Green Party is trying to bring about. As indicated in the Forbes article below, Google thinks the future looks very Green (my interpolation). It seems that Google  wants to be part the inevitable, global transformation that is going to spread around the world in the coming years, decades and generations, due in no small part to climate change but also to world awareness. 

While Stein's competitors might as well plead guilty to corporate corruption. in my view at least, she gets a clean bill of health at least for now.  


#jillstein #isjillsteincorrupt #isjillsteinafraud #greenpartycorruption


Popular posts from this blog

8 Facts About the Circle of Fifths that you May Not Already Know

I love all child refugees but … where will the money come from? Part III

Quote from a Facebook friend: “Much as my heart breaks for the children who want to come here because circumstances are better … circumstances will not be better here if we allow more people to live here than we can afford to support.” So says one of my Facebook friends.

Green Party is not red, is not blue, is not the oligarchy.

Green  (Is not  Red   is not   Blue ) Kennewick, Washington  Political Opinion By Frank Ellsworth Lockwood Some people have been pushing the notion that if you are a member of the Green Party you should vote for a Democratic, but there is another side to this argument. If you are a Green, then you are no more a Democrat than a Republican is. Green is for things that the Red and Blue oppose: While Green Party is for peaceful coexistence, Republicans and Democrats have supported wars-for-profit for all of my life. (I am 75; they will not be changing any time soon.) Green is for live and let live, while Red and Blue are about greed and conniving, and this is no exaggeration when both of the above have always supported the overthrow of democratically elected socialist governments, replacing them with puppet governments, dictators and tyrants who practiced suppression-for-profit. Green is for racial and economic equality as well as for recognition of tribal rights. Our 2016 Pre