Bombshell Report: Wait Until You See How Many Google Employees Donated to Democrats

Personal political donations… as in from individual people that work there, not the corporation itself? We're not talking about Google buying candidates, but rather individual employees donations, right?

This is not a problem. Donating to the political candidate/party of your choice is a first amendment right.

How do you feel about Sinclair Media buying up hundreds of local TV stations and their forced injection of conservative viewpoints via local newscasters reading a corporate script, when it comes to big media and homogenous ideology?

 

Of course nobody bats an eye on the left when #MSM like CNN gives to the Clinton campaign and then holds a debate and gives Hillary Clinton the questions ahead of time.

Donating and media can be a tricky business. Especially when you are "tilting" to one side or the other.

 

STUNNING: Tucker Carlson Reveals Explosive Email from Google Exec on How Company Actively Assisted Hillary in 2016

In-kind Campaign Donation, massively in excess of Campaign Finance Regulations and unreported.

 

ELECTION MEDDLING: ‘Silent Donation’:

Corporate Emails Reveal Google Executives’ Efforts to Turn Out Latino Voters Who They Thought Would Vote for Clinton.

“An email chain among senior Google executives from the day after the 2016 presidential election reveals the company tried to influence the 2016 United States presidential election on behalf of one candidate, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton. . . .

The four page email begins with Murillo claiming she and others at Google were engaged in non-partisan activities not designed to help any one candidate or another—only to undercut her own commentary in later passages in the emails by openly admitting the entire effort to boost Latino turnout using Google products with official company resources was to elect Clinton over Trump.

The critical miscalculation, Murillo wrote in a stunning admission in the email, was that Latino voters backed Trump by higher margins than any experts had forecast in the lead-up to the election. Trump’s 29 percent among Hispanics nationally blew prognosticators away, and he hit even higher numbers—about 31 percent—in the key battleground state of Florida, Murillo admitted.”​

 

Sure, but if they claim to be diverse, aren't they being hypocritical?

 

Breitbart? Meh…

I'm not so sure a Google executive's email, in California, would make any difference on how California's electoral votes would go. California has voted reliably Democratic in Presidential elections for many years. There might be some criticism if Google's corporate regulations say that political emails are not allowed, but then, it would be an HR thing.

My point remains… individual political donations, made by people working for any particular company, are that individual's decision, not a corporate decision, and is considered a "free speech," First Amendment, right. Google also has the right to hire whomever they wish, as long as they don't illegally discriminate. I haven't seen an employment application form for Google, but I'd be willing to bet that political affiliation isn't on it.

Before anyone brags on Trump's Hispanic support, particularly in Florida where lots of Puerto Ricans fled the hurricane aftermath, they might want to wait on the midterm elections to see if it holds. I predict it hasn't.

 

Why?
And what exactly is the claim?
How diverse is diverse?
What % of employees are donating? I am sure it's by choice for those who donate.

And who the heck is this blog doing this report?
https://govpredict.com/blog/

There is nothing on the link stating who/what/where they are. Or an objective.

 

The source is the email.

Not just the CA vote:

An email chain among senior Google executives from the day after the 2016 presidential election reveals the company tried to influence the 2016 United States presidential election on behalf of one candidate, Democrat Hillary Rodham Clinton.​

You are tearing your hair out over Cohen's "in-kind" contribution, because he paid a NDA, which you argue was only paid because of the election, but this Google operation to turn out Hillary voters, bores you?

And they are subject to spending limits.

"... openly admitting the entire effort to boost Latino turnout using Google products with official company resources was to elect Clinton over Trump..."

When managers in a company make a decision, the company has made a decision.

All Campaign Finance infringes on Free Speech rights, which you have previously spoken in agreement with because you view the government as having a compelling interest to regulate campaign spending, but maybe you only want to regulate GOP campaign spending? TWO AMERICAS, one where you are held strictly accountable if you are in the "out" group, and another where you do whatever the hell you want without repercussion if you are in the "in" group. Don't you know that favoritism and unequal treatment sows division, discord and ultimately violence? Do you not give a crap about social cohesion, the rule of law and basic fairness?

And progs wonder why the majority of the US electorate can't stand them.

 

Has it been pointed out that the repeal of net neutrality has the potential a big effect on Google and other tech companies? Since Democrats wanted to keep it and Republicans wanted to remove it, it was in Google's interests to support Democrats.

Right?

 

Then why isn't there a "conservative" or white supremacist counterpart to google? And why is google even an issue? Google is a search engine designed to produce relevant hits based upon algorithms designed to reflect users' desires for relevancy.

You can choose a different search engine.
Or facebook. Citizens United actually makes sense in a way because for the first time since the early 1900's a single person can create political content and disseminate it to many people. If facebook deems some content offensive to its users, then a market to other users must exist .... if there are really that many "other" users.

 

Wrong.

The Left has outsourced censorship to the giant tech firms of Silicon Valley. Conspiring to interfere with the exercise of civil rights is a violation of Federal Law.

That's going to land them in trouble at some point.

That's right.

Google tried to help Hillary win the election this initiative, but fell short.

 

The Google employees apparently wanted to help and donated to her campaign. There's absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Your link is a blog… an opinion, not fact.