comment: >
  
  Just going by the article. However, do you know of an article or even a youtube vid that kinda breaks some of this stuff down? Stuff hurts my brain. I do know there is one watchdog group that pretty much ever day either sues or submits complaints to the FEC. I think it was campaignlegal.org.
context: They have money for this, but not taxes. >
  
  This is the money they spend to not pay taxes. >
  
  Corporations don’t pay for this unless it’s a super pac. Even then, it’s 99% more likely that this was the doing of a non-connected PAC, which the employees contribute to and which is the only way a PAC can directly support the campaigns of the election deniers/members. >
  
  The article says different. For example, corporations paused donations from their PACs then started up again. >
  
  Corporate PACs are also known as non-connected PACs, and are regulated differently. Corporations cannot donate under any circumstances to non-connected PACs. And, non-connected PACs contributed differently to candidates.