I'd be a little less alarmed if some big corporations that swore off donations to the GOP --in the immediate wake of the Capitol incursion last year-- hadn't predictably enough decided later that a gesture like that in a single quarter of 2021 was sufficient for virtue-signaling to shareholders and activists on social media.
Six months after the Capitol attack, only a small number of powerful corporations have made good on their pledge to suspend PAC donations to the 147 Republican lawmakers who voted against certifyin…
thehill.com
In resuming donations to both of the USA's major political parties since then, such corporations can figure that they have at least purchased "access" to regulators and legislators. Some may even argue that the shareholders' interests require lobbying both Congress and the executive branch agencies in order to reduce risk of thinning profit margins due to "excessively onerous" regulation.
And who the heck knows what private companies and other donors of "dark money" to 501(c)(4) nonprofits have done in the meantime about their donations. They don't fancy anarchy or overthrow of governments, since those tend to roil markets badly, so they may be quite wary of a follow-on Trump administration --expectations of further tax cuts being low to nil-- but their lean is still conservative, so even today's not very progressive Democratic administration does not appeal to them.
Those dark money donors are not disclosed unless they run afoul of some of the few teeth left in the campaign finance laws. So are they still going with the pro-Trump RNC or quietly marching already to some different drummer(s)? No one really knows, so far. Since 2010 and the Citizens United high court ruling on the personhood of corporations, the politicians themselves all do celebrate greater ease in corporate freedom to "buy all the free speech they can afford"... anonymously.
And let's face it, it's not like all the Democrats weep or gnash their teeth when the Rs have managed to carve out yet another loophole through which to drive truckloads of money. The result falls short of bribery only if one turns a blind eye to fine print AND perceived incentives to influence US lawmaking in favor of the status quo. That is a status which keeps edging farther to the right even when the Dems win popular majorities and even as the Rs wail about impending socialism.
Money is not the only influencer in how the US arrives at federal governance, since there are also gerrymandering, the filibuster, and states' rights to control assorted government functions. But money is a traditional sweetener when it comes to drafting federal legislation or agency rules. And in that 2010 high court ruling, SCOTUS essentially went to the dark side and shrugged and said "yeah, so what?"
Losing impartiality of a judicial system is a part of conversion to fascism. It does not usually happen overnight, but the political lean to the right in the USA's judiciary has been accelerating in the past 20 years. Now the Biden admin is proving effective in pushing back, at least in district court appointment confirmations, but on the high court itself, that will be a heavy lift after the appointments that were confirmed during the Trump administration.