Systemic Corruption and Influence Networks (2010–Present)
Since Citizens United v. FEC (2010), U.S. policy has been increasingly shaped by opaque money flows, weakened oversight, and revolving-door ties between regulators and the industries they oversee. Ineach sector, watchdog agencies and ethical rules have eroded while corporate and wealthy actorsramped up lobbying, donations and creative legal schemes to sway policy.
| Engaged especially on student loans, charter laws | | Tech Giants (Facebook etc.) | $20–30M/
year | on data/privacy, antitrust |
• Example: Koch Network (2012 Election): The Koch/Dark-Money Network is often mapped as
a sprawling web of nonprofits. In 2012, researchers identified ~17 non‐profits, PACs and LLCs
(including Americans for Prosperity, Donors Trust, Freedom Partners, etc.) exchanging funds to
conceal donors. Total spending: at least $407M 15 on conservative campaigns, an amount
rivaling union spending for Democrats 36 . (A Washington Post “flow chart” showed money
moving through dozens of entities to gas conservative turnout operations.) Similar network
maps can be drawn for other sectors (e.g. Big Pharma funding multiple university and think tank
programs, or crypto PACs funding both parties).
• Examples of Regulatory Capture Deals: In the last decade, several back-room arrangements
exemplify the “rules-for-sale” syndrome:
• Opioids: Purdue Pharma’s owners (the Sacklers) not only evaded strong federal penalties for
their role in the opioid crisis, but Purdue’s lobbyists helped pass state laws in many states
shielding distributors from lawsuits.
6• Tax Breaks: Corporate donors have gotten special tax breaks (e.g. 100% bonus depreciation for
equipment, which is set to phase out but was repeatedly extended in must-pass bills).
• Trade Legislation: Lobbyists working behind the scenes often insert provisions into trade bills
that benefit their clients (e.g. sugar quotas or film subsidy treats).
Each of these is documented in news reports or official investigations as benefiting corporate donors.
All illustrate that without strong transparency and enforcement, legislation and regulation can be
quietly bent toward those with the deepest pockets.
Sources and Citations
All claims above are backed by investigative reporting and data: for example, ProPublica’s IRS funding analysis 3 20 , OpenSecrets industry profiles 21 22 , watchdog reports on revolving doors 7 13 , and major news investigations into spending networks 15 27 .
We have cited each sourced fact in square brackets.
These include government and NGO reports, reputable news outlets, and data portals (IRS, Treasury, OpenSecrets) to ensure verifiability.
This presentation is purely factual, with no partisan spin:
It documents systemic patterns of influence, not individual political arguments
It's just now being reported that prior to the attack, Iran had removed the bulk of its HEU to an unknown location.
We need to be careful of such reports at this early stage. And of course we have sigint and perhaps humint on the identified sites, making it more difficult to avoid detection of any movement.
However, I'd hardly be surprised if Iran's game of whack-a-mole is real and could succeed.
you forgot to list the multimillion dollar 747 the regime asked for from Qatar.
this was a grim roundup.
😂guess i have some reading to catch up on! my bad
I Added All His Shady Shit Just Scroll Down...
But Wait, Here Is Everything I Found...
Systemic Corruption and Influence Networks (2010–Present)
Since Citizens United v. FEC (2010), U.S. policy has been increasingly shaped by opaque money flows, weakened oversight, and revolving-door ties between regulators and the industries they oversee. Ineach sector, watchdog agencies and ethical rules have eroded while corporate and wealthy actorsramped up lobbying, donations and creative legal schemes to sway policy.
Below we document key facts (with sources)
Sector/Group
|
Lobbying
(recent
year)
|
Notable
Notes
|
|--------------------------|---------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
|
Pharmaceutical/
Health | ~$300M/year (2018) | PhRMA, biotech trade associations | | Cryptocurrency | ~$22M
(2022) doubled (2023~$19M Q1-3) 22 | Coinbase, Binance, Blockchain Assoc. | | Defense/
Aerospace | ~$200M/year (top 5 firms) | Lockheed, Boeing, Raytheon, etc. | | Energy (Oil & Gas)
| ~$65M (2024*) | Koch Industries, API, ExxonMobil, etc. | | Private Prisons | ~$3M/year | GEO
Group, CoreCivic (including immigration detention clients) | | For-Profit Education | ~$1M+/year
| Engaged especially on student loans, charter laws | | Tech Giants (Facebook etc.) | $20–30M/
year | on data/privacy, antitrust |
• Example: Koch Network (2012 Election): The Koch/Dark-Money Network is often mapped as
a sprawling web of nonprofits. In 2012, researchers identified ~17 non‐profits, PACs and LLCs
(including Americans for Prosperity, Donors Trust, Freedom Partners, etc.) exchanging funds to
conceal donors. Total spending: at least $407M 15 on conservative campaigns, an amount
rivaling union spending for Democrats 36 . (A Washington Post “flow chart” showed money
moving through dozens of entities to gas conservative turnout operations.) Similar network
maps can be drawn for other sectors (e.g. Big Pharma funding multiple university and think tank
programs, or crypto PACs funding both parties).
• Examples of Regulatory Capture Deals: In the last decade, several back-room arrangements
exemplify the “rules-for-sale” syndrome:
• Opioids: Purdue Pharma’s owners (the Sacklers) not only evaded strong federal penalties for
their role in the opioid crisis, but Purdue’s lobbyists helped pass state laws in many states
shielding distributors from lawsuits.
6• Tax Breaks: Corporate donors have gotten special tax breaks (e.g. 100% bonus depreciation for
equipment, which is set to phase out but was repeatedly extended in must-pass bills).
• Trade Legislation: Lobbyists working behind the scenes often insert provisions into trade bills
that benefit their clients (e.g. sugar quotas or film subsidy treats).
Each of these is documented in news reports or official investigations as benefiting corporate donors.
All illustrate that without strong transparency and enforcement, legislation and regulation can be
quietly bent toward those with the deepest pockets.
Sources and Citations
All claims above are backed by investigative reporting and data: for example, ProPublica’s IRS funding analysis 3 20 , OpenSecrets industry profiles 21 22 , watchdog reports on revolving doors 7 13 , and major news investigations into spending networks 15 27 .
We have cited each sourced fact in square brackets.
These include government and NGO reports, reputable news outlets, and data portals (IRS, Treasury, OpenSecrets) to ensure verifiability.
This presentation is purely factual, with no partisan spin:
It documents systemic patterns of influence, not individual political arguments
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JAz9Qk_9Uho1iFPid6Tp0Pb91M0yLNCiv8lNtdVTuvg/edit?tab=t.0
idk if this is a "false flag" op https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
or as USAF personnel have told snopes it's a "pre scheduled mission". https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/06/20/iran-israel-doomsday-plane/
https://substack.com/@sugarrhi/note/c-127909291
George Washington's Farewell Address was tragically prescient.
https://hejon07.substack.com/p/the-universes-magic-trick-quantum
It's just now being reported that prior to the attack, Iran had removed the bulk of its HEU to an unknown location.
We need to be careful of such reports at this early stage. And of course we have sigint and perhaps humint on the identified sites, making it more difficult to avoid detection of any movement.
However, I'd hardly be surprised if Iran's game of whack-a-mole is real and could succeed.