The Cleveland Guardians? Yes, It's Official

[BobC]

Originally Posted by carlsonjok

Are you suggesting that the fault lies with the recipient of the (legal) bribe rather than the entity offering it?

I am not suggesting anything, merely raising the question about how others would perceive this issue given that money may be involved. I was asking the question to you to think about it and how you would answer it to yourself and others. In your response, you didn't answer the question, just asked me a question in return, if I was implying something. And no, I am not.

However, you made a comment about a bribe being made. My understanding of the definition of a bribe is that it is a payment in some form to get someone to do something for, or act in one's favor. So if you are suggesting that such a payment may be being made to get the native Americans to stop complaining about Chief Wahoo while the Cleveland team keeps selling images of him for a profit, I think you are technically correct and that could fall under the perceived definition of a bribe. But my further understanding of a bribe, at least in regards to an illegal one, is that both parties are at fault and equally guilty. So if you assume the same logic holds true for a legal bribe as well, wouldn't you assume that both parties are also guilty in that instance/situation as well?