Reblogged:Air Farce One

[Gus Van Horn blog]

Over the weekend, Donald Trump showed his true colors regarding "the swamp" by announcing his acceptance of a bribe from Qatar:

In what may be the most valuable gift ever extended to the United States from a foreign government, the Trump administration is preparing to accept a super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet from the royal family of Qatar -- a gift that is to be available for use by President Donald Trump as the new Air Force One until shortly before he leaves office, at which time ownership of the plane will be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation, sources familiar with the proposed arrangement told ABC News.

...

... [L]awyers for the White House counsel's office and the Department of Justice drafted an analysis for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concluding that [it] is legal for the Department of Defense to accept the aircraft as a gift and later turn it over to the Trump library, and that it does not violate laws against bribery or the Constitution's prohibition (the emoluments clause) of any U.S. government official accepting gifts "from any King, Prince or foreign State." [link omitted, bold added]

On top of the legal fiction that the plane isn't being given-given to Trump, we have the following:

Both the White House and DOJ concluded that because the gift is not conditioned on any official act, it does not constitute bribery, the sources said.

I am not an attorney: Perhaps this is literally legal, but it so blatantly ignores the whole point of the Foreign Emoluments Clause as to insult the intelligence of any halfway intelligent, semi-conscious adult.

What practical difference does it make that Trump himself does not hold legal title to the plane if he still owns it for all practical purposes, even after he leaves office?

And so what if it isn't being given in exchange for any (past? specific?) official act?

This is not a gift in the same way a tariff isn't a tax, and it is likewise easy to argue that it is worse: The pretense that it isn't a gift shows that the President -- far from prioritizing his oath to uphold the Constitution -- is eager to find or create loopholes for the mean purpose of getting stuff.

And the fact that this gift isn't "conditioned on any official act" is not just open to the same very loose interpretation of the law: It suggests an open-ended spigot of favors this foreign power can now demand of Trump.

-- CAV

Link to Original

[tadmjones]

The practical difference is he can’t sell it if he doesn’t t have title , there is no monetary gain for DJT , may even represent a cost in the future. 
It is not illegal , just awesome lol and TDS sufferers are gonna suffer some more, cherries on top .

[Jon C]

3 hours ago, tadmjones said:

The practical difference is he can’t sell it if he doesn’t t have title , there is no monetary gain for DJT , may even represent a cost in the future. 
It is not illegal , just awesome lol and TDS sufferers are gonna suffer some more, cherries on top .

If T tells the trump presidential library foundation “sell it and put the cash somewhere accessible to me…” what exactly prevents that from happening? 

[Jon C]

Also, setting aside the fact that it’s the most obvious bribe that ever bribed, it’s a comically huge security risk to take a plane from a terrorist-funding Islamic-run state.

[Jon C]

Also, maybe you can direct me to the Rand essay where she says “oh also another legitimate role of govt is trolling people that you personally hate. Protecting rights is cool but that’s the real deal.” Might have missed that one. 

[tadmjones]

Well isn’t it really trolling people who hate you personally? It’s a Boeing yeah, not some Qatari manufacturer, as a machine I’m sure it will be examined for airworthiness and control security. 

Edited May 13 by tadmjones