The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Have You Ever Seen an Emolument Fly?
From Qatar, with love, a "palace in the sky."
ABC News reports:
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.
The gift is expected to be announced next week, when Trump visits Qatar on the first foreign trip of his second term, according to sources familiar with the plans.
Trump toured the plane, which is so opulently configured it is known as "a flying palace," while it was parked at the West Palm Beach International Airport in February.
One might think this gift raises legal issues. Administration lawyers apparently have those bases covered:
sources told ABC News that lawyers for the White House counsel's office and the Department of Justice drafted an analysis for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concluding that 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."
Sources told ABC News that Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump's top White House lawyer David Warrington concluded it would be "legally permissible" for the donation of the aircraft to be conditioned on transferring its ownership to Trump's presidential library before the end of his term, according to sources familiar with their determination. . . .
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. Bondi's legal analysis also says it does not run afoul of the Constitution's prohibition on foreign gifts because the plane is not being given to an individual, but rather to the United States Air Force and, eventually, to the presidential library foundation, the sources said.
One might also think a gift of this sort could raise security concerns, particularly given the Qatari government's efforts to influence U.S. policy (and universities). Apparently such concerns will be addressed when the plane is modified to meet the requirements for presidential use.
According to the story, the plane is to be transferred to the Trump Presidential Library Foundation no later than January 1, 2029, at the federal government's expense. The story estimates the value of the plane at approximately $400 million.
In unrelated news, the Associated Press reported on April 30:
The Trump family company struck a deal Wednesday to build a luxury golf resort in Qatar in a sign it has no plans to hold back from foreign dealmaking during a second Trump administration, despite the danger of a president shaping U.S. public policy for personal financial gain.
The project, which features Trump-branded beachside villas and an 18-hole golf course to be built by a Saudi Arabian company, is the first foreign deal by the Trump Organization since Donald Trump took office and unlike any done in his first term. Back then, he forswore foreign deals in an extraordinary press conference surrounded by stacks of legal documents as he pledged to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Sad state of affairs that Boeing still hasn't been able to furnish the two planes on order to serve as presidential planes after almost eight years and claims to need several more years to fulfil the order.
And once Boeing delivers the airplane(s) they still go to the US Air Force for another year or two of customization, and inspection.
Trump needs to show that gift is not influencing his decisions by sending the R9X Ginsu drones to visit the Hamas leaders living there.
https://www.thejc.com/news/features/how-hamas-leaders-in-qatar-built-their-mountains-of-cash-mlq5rzfs
I find your modifications acceptable.
Jeez, cut the guy a break - I mean it's not like he wore a tan suit or put Dijon mustard on a hot dog.
I know; imagine the outrage if Obama had accepted a gift like that.
Really. And imagine the democrats outrage if the Biden family had received millions from a Chinese state linked energy company. Or even more crazy if the unqualified crack head Hunter Biden was placed on the board of an Ukraine energy company.
And then Hunter's Vice President father extorted / bribed the Ukraine government to stop investigating his son and the energy company for corruption, and then the DNC impeached the next President for extorting / bribing the Ukraine government to resume the stopped investigation.
"Biden Family" does not exist as an entity, only individual members. There is zero evidence that Joe Biden received any money from what you allege. His son or other family members getting money is completely legal.
Why were the pardons needed, then?
Because the Trump DoJ does not care if something is legal or not.
Payments for what? What exactly was the Biden family business? I mean, besides influence peddling. And, just so you know, that particular business seems to have fallen on bad times for the Big Guy since he has little to no influence left to peddle.
There's a reason I said Obama rather than Biden since he appears to be the only relatively recent president of either party without ethical baggage. If you're going to what about, maybe you could what about in a way that is actually responsive to the comment I made.
That aside, how broken your moral compass must be if you seriously think "But what about Biden" is this magical incantation that makes Trump's ethical baggage go away. You just say "But what about Biden" and suddenly no moral crime of Trump's is fair game any more. Does that work in reverse? If someone brings up Hunter, does saying "But what about Trump" make all of Hunter's ethical baggage go away too? Or does that only work in one direction?
Biden is no longer president; Trump is. The immediate threat to the republic is Trump, not anything the Bidens did when they had power. Maybe that practicality should be taken into account.
Was the tan suit so that a mustard stain would not be as easily seen?
Or, took showers with his pre-pubescent daughter.
Maybe if Boeing could get their shit together and deliver the two planes Trump ordered during the last administration. Or a working spacecraft (Starliner). Or a working rocket to go to the moon. Id settle for just a safe passenger plane to take us little people on vaca.
It's not very nice to which death on someone, even Trump...
3 of the 4 safest Airliners are Boeings, (717, 777, and 787) but don't lets facts get in the way
So, this is all really Boeing's fault? Which is why the royal family of Qatar has to give him a Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet?
Is that the "logic" behind this inane comment?
Oops. Spoke too soon. I assumed that they were buying him a new plane. Seems out of character for him to accept a used one.
Aww, look. Between you and Bumble, you've got the talking points down just right.
Bite me. My comment was about Boeing being way behind on delivery and way over budget.
One article said Boeing executives claimed the jets might not be ready for delivery until 2035.
I said nothing about the propriety of this reported deal.
Well, gee. Neither did dwb68.
Cause it's obviously unethical and am probably unconstitutional, but if Trump can't get his airplanes from Boeing then we can just ignore that stuff. Boeing made him do it! (Especially the part where he gets to keep it to fly around on after he's President!)
FWIW, I agree that Boeing has been a really terrible vendor to the US lately. I'm not disputing that at all. But your reaction is kind of like hearing about Jeffrey Dahmer and complaining that Domino's no longer has a 30 minute deliver guarantee. Maybe he just got hungry!
This raises fascinating psychological questions.
Most obviously: there are clearly simpler ways for the Qatari government to bribe Trump. They could - and presumably have - simply spend hundreds of millions to buy $Trump. So what is it about this bribe that makes it more appealing than the equivalent sum in cash? Is it the sheer ostentatiousness of it? Is it that Trump has reached the point in his life where he likes rubbing everyone's faces in the fact that he can accept whatever bribes he likes without consequences?
Trump is old and it's a tangible thing.
As Trump learned with Air Force One it takes a while to build a custom aircraft. And Trump doesn't have a lot of time. But Qatar can just give him one instead. So it's both tangible and something money can't really buy.
Yeah, much better ways. A bribe that's 100 percent transparent to the public? That's just asking for trouble. They should have asked the Big Guy for advice. Better to put his son on a board of some energy company with a million dollar salary, or funnel payments to other family members through a complicated string of LLCs, and block any disclosure of suspicious activity reports. What amateurs.
Yes. Imaginary mind bribes are the worst! I also prefer to take transparently real bribes.
Calling it the "Pompetus of Love"?
I'd call it Mo-Reese (Wah Wah)
Does anyone think that Blondi and Warrington would not have decided this gift was ok? This was always going to be a case of "find me a way to accept this gift".
Jonathan misses the point big time. IF I give you on prime time TV a car vs I give you unbeknownst to everyone a million dollars -----that is the whole intent of the law, to discriminate those two cases. When the Clintons pulled up the moving van and cleaned out the White House did you say anything . NO
"After they were criticized for taking $190,000 worth of china,flatware, rugs, televisions, sofas and other gifts with them whenthey left, the Clintons announced last week that they would pay for$86,000 worth of gifts, or nearly half the amount."
... the $28,000 worth of furniture the Clintons took with them upon leaving the White House was returned in February 2001, according to the National Park Service.
That's what lawyers do. Do you still believe in the Rule of Law? Or have you come to realize all laws are interpreted by men?
The point is that there are lots of people who are better humans than Bondi and Warrington. Who aren't tools selected for their loyalty over all else.
There's some pretty interesting neuroscience studies about the interaction between emotional circuits and judgement/rational circuits. They're different processes that constantly short circuit one another but don't blend. Wild stuff!
Suffice to say, neither is purely in the driver's seat. Your wordview that the emotional one is all that matters in making legal judgements is a pretty pinched view of human nature.
They figured out that emotions effect judgement?
Science is amazing!
Your view that you comprehend my world view is amazing. Such talent! You should go on Ed Sullivan, I hear he's talk of the town.
My comprehension of your worldview comes from what you write in this here comments section.
E.g. "have you come to realize all laws are interpreted by men?"
E.g. "lawyers have used that corrupt power to abrogate to themselves the power to define government's limits, to write the laws, to enforce the laws, and to interpret the laws."
E.g. "EVERY politician is anti-constitution when it gets in their way."
You are not a closed book.
Too bad you went by the cover and neglected to open the book.
That's what lawyers do
That's what personal lawyers do. It should not be what lawyers who have sworn to uphold the Constitution, and who work for the US and the People, not for the president as personal lawyers, should be doing. Unsurprising that you can't see the difference
The nihilism that everyone is corrupt (well, "lawyers" or some other favored target) is well appreciated by the few who are particularly corrupt. The average lawyer is fairly ethical in their business, even if they bend some rules sometimes.
Sure, but power corrupts. It's not limited to lawyers, everyone is susceptible to corruption.
The difference is that lawyers have used that corrupt power to abrogate to themselves the power to define government's limits, to write the laws, to enforce the laws, and to interpret the laws.
That is why 99% of lawyers give the other 1% a bad reputation. I have never heard of any lawyer who thinks there is anything corrupt about putting the lawyers in charge of every aspect of laws.
Did you even read your own key words?
It would be interesting to see your list of such lawyers. A bit partisan, I suspect.
I'll bite. Here's a few: John Ashcroft, Daniel Sassoon, Liz Oyer, Paul Clement,
DoJ lawyers are the personal lawyers of Trump. They work for him and do what he tells them to do.
The statement about there being a “danger” of shaping US foreign policy for Trump’s personal financial gain doesnmt make any sense. Why is shaping US foreign policy for personal financial gain in any way a danger? In what way does it harm Mr. Trump? How does it endanger him?
There doesn’t seem to be any danger at all to anyone who matters here.
True. Any American is free to outbid the Qataris and buy a different foreign policy for the US.
It is very common for the needs of the US foreign policy to be opposed to the ability of a president to personally profit. One needs to be sure that needs of the US foreign policy always comes first. With Trump we know his personal greed comes first.
As Louis XIV famously put it, “L’Etat, c’est moi!” Mr. Trump promised to be a great leader like Louis XIV. If you think only servile monk who spent their time wearing sackcloth in poverty and self-flagellation and try for sainthood and never tell lies, never masturbate, never watch porn, never cheat on their spouses, never fornicate, never litter, never break speed limits, never disobey parking signs, and never cash in on their government offices for every dime they can get out of them should be president, you should not have voted for Mr. Trump. Great leaders are just above all that petty stuff.
So rest assured that the needs of US foreign policy always do in fact come first with Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump makes sure that the United States profits off of every deal. He will do everything for the United State’s benefit the same way Louis XIV took care of Francis.
And as Louis XIV famously said when advisers tried to warn him that he was driving France to bankruprcy with all the fancy palaces and whatnot he was doing and the peasants were starting to get restless from the taxes, “Apres moi, le deluge!” Rest assured Mr. Trump gives the future the same consideration.
I mean, he’s very up front about it. He considers people who wouldn’t steal from the government and public to be suckers and losers, weaklings he has no respect for and thinks you shouldn’t either. If you want protection from the other mobsters out there, his advice is you should be paying your protection money to the biggest mobster out there, someone who’s experienced at theft and bullying, someone who knows just how dishonest people really are and how to deal with thieves as an insider.
And that’s him. He’ll protect you from the other bullies because he’s an even bigger bully then they are. But of course it doesn’t come free. He does it because of what’s in it for him. If you want his protection you’ll have to pay, toady, gofer, and spread upon demand. He’s very upfront about it.
He thinks people who are so clueless about life that they actually expect the people they pay their protection money to to be honest are suckers who frankly deserve to have their lunch money stolen from them for their own good. I mean, it’s one thing to be naive. It’s another to wear ones cluelessness on ones sleeve and openly advertise it.
Trump has fucks up just about every deal he makes. He has never put the needs of the US first. He runs 100% off his own stupidity.
“L’Etat, c’est moi” is French for “The state, that’s me.” It was in that sense that I said you can be very sure Mr. Trump always puts “the state”’s interests first, just like Louis XIV did.
The symbol of corruption for the Founders were snuff boxes.
https://constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/articles/article-i/clauses/759
There are three emoluments' clauses in the Constitution & as a book by Zephyr Teachout notes, the Constitution as a whole is concerned about anti-corruption. Trump is anti-constitution though.
He is happy to support "they all do it" nihilism. Thanks for noting just one of many emoluments concerns that have arisen so far.
https://thinkbigpicture.substack.com/p/trump-constitution-violations
EVERY politician is anti-constitution when it gets in their way.
So, we might as well give up even talking about holding them to the Constitution!
There’s a huge difference between Biden signing an executive order over COVID evictions or student loans and Trump accepting a luxury flying palace. Biden like all Presidents sometimes did things that exceeded his powers and ended up getting checked by the courts. But when he did this he was not personally benefitting from his actions. Nor did he talk about suspending Habeas Corpus or rant about impeaching judges when they ruled against him.
Let's just acknowledge that greed won! The Roberts Court put the government up for sale, and the very wealthy people purchased it. The rest of the story has already been written.
Practicality: AF1 isn't just some random 747 with nice seats. The elaborate customization is installing all the super-dooper comms gear and what have you. Why can Boeing install all that quicker on this jet than the two they have been working on forever?
Morality: Having the US accept charity from Qatar seems odd to me, but whatever. As long as it's all out in the open, foreign govs can donate AF1's or aircraft carriers of F-35s or whatever, I suppose. It's not like I turn down free food, after all. But what's with the library bit? If it's still a working plane, then the next president gets to use it. I have no objection to the next president agreeing to send some bric-a-brac gifts to a predecessor's library, but a working 747?
That's why the transfer deadline is before Trump leaves office.
Although it would be funny if he screws things up so badly that the Dems take both chambers in 2026, impeach Trump (for violating 15 trade agreements, for an illegal deportation, and emoluments), and JD Vance decides to not honor the deadline.
I honestly do hope the Dems pursue impeaching Trump over the Abrego Garcia deportation. Keep picking the losing side on these 80-20 issues, guys!
In the article I linked below a different company ( L3Harris) will be doing the customization.
https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/air-force-one-trump-qatari-jet-l3harris-fc903838?st=G1CgNc
You seriously think this airplane isn’t bugged? I wonder who’s paying Qatar and how much to listen in. Mr. Trump’s inflated view of his sophistication and smarts is an asset to any US rival.
How much is the tariff on that jet?
It will be no less than 10% of the cost that Trump/USAF is paying for the plane. So: $0 * 0.1 = $0, thus no tariff is owed.
I have no idea how tariffs work in relation to the federal government, but you do have to pay tariffs on gifts received in a single day worth more than $100.
Zero
Did I miss a post about Trump's crypto
businessscam? Seem like an infinitely more concerning Emoluments Clause issue with the potential for corruption.I guess the silver lining of this rank corruption is that it's evidence he's not expecting to remain president for long after Jan 1 2029.
Contracts can be amended
Perhaps a different view on what is happening.
https://www.wsj.com/business/airlines/air-force-one-trump-qatari-jet-l3harris-fc903838?st=G1CgNc
After reading the WSJ article it seems a lot less suspicious and more like TDS is twisting what people are seeing.
Yup, that article has convinced me that the WSJ is has given up on being a reputable news source.
How many words and they didn't get around to mentioning that the Quatari's were gifting the plane nor that it was being transferred to his presidential library afterwards? (I'm guessing it's effectively becomes his private plane at that point).
That doesn't say anything that makes it less suspicious.
It does a good job explaining why Trump wants a new plane and can't get one through normal channels fast enough.
But this is the key sentence of that article:
"He spent more than an hour touring a Qatari-owned 747 in West Palm Beach, Fla., and said afterward that he might buy a new plane. “I’m not happy with Boeing,” he said."
If the government were buying a plane from Qatar that it planned to use for the life of the plane that might be dumb for other reasons but it wouldn't be an issue. Being gifted a plane that will then be transferred for Donald Trump's post-presidential use, at taxpayer expense, is a lot more problematic than what the WSJ was discussing 10 days ago.
There's a big difference between:
a) The US is buying a used plane to refurbish as part of the presidential fleet (WSJ)
and
b) The royal family of Qatar is *giving* a plane to Trump for him to use while in office and then take with him afterwards. (ABC, et. al.)
It's possible that ABC (and NYT, CNN, etc) are being lied to by the "senior administration officials", but unlikely.
It's also possible that the WSJ was unaware of the details when they published that article ten days ago. Regardless, there's nothing in that article that absolves the administration of the bribery accusations.
True, I didn't notice the date and was unjustly harsh on the WSJ. It's more likely they were unaware of the extremely problematic gift + donation aspect.
The source for the story might have been an L3Harris executive boasting off the record about having gotten the contract, plus one or more people in government who were willing to confirm the story off the record, but not provide any additional information. Two of the reporters on the story cover aviation. The third (Josh Dawsey) covers politics, but his contacts may not have been feeling talkative.
Given the Wall Street Journal’s emphasis on business coverage, it’s not surprising that they would break the story of L3Harris getting a new government contract, while another news organization would be the first to learn that the plane was a gift.
Is this legally bribery: Highly unlikely because the plane will never technically be owned by Trump, and SCOTUS has effectively eliminated the crime of bribery.
Is it actually bribery: Yes, without a doubt.
Is this an impeachable offense: Yes, so add it to the list.
They just need to call it a tip. Supreme Court already said those are ok.
Ah...so we finally know why Trump wants to remove income taxes on tips!
At some point the argument that "I wasn't giving the John a blowjob, I was giving the condom a blowjob, so any benefit to the John is purely coincidental" starts to get a little thin.
"Back then, he forswore foreign deals in an extraordinary press conference surrounded by stacks of legal documents as he pledged to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest."
Yes, and his goodwill was not returned; the shitlibs spent four years suing him over bullshit accusations of foreign emoluments. I think one of the best parts about Trump 2.0 is that he has clearly learned from his previous mistakes.
Few things are more corrosive in politics than the conviction that you have been wronged so much that you're justified in breaking all the rules to get even.
No rules have been broken, but other than that, great point!
It's clearly not intended to influence Trump in any manner whatsoever. If the Qataris actually wanted to influence Trump, they would have painted the airplane gold first.
Assuming that the "Trump Presidential Library Foundation is established to be exempt from federal income tax under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, Trump's use of the 747--a "charitable asset"--would be limited to use for purposes benefitting the Foundation. Use for personal or non-charitable business purposes would have to be paid for by Trump at fair market rates, or would be treated as compensation to Trump, and if his total compensation is unreasonably high, any excess would be an "excess benefit transaction." In that case, if the IRS audited the Foundation (as it should), he would be required to repay the amount of the excess to the Foundation, and pay a 25% excise tax to the IRS. If he were to fail to timely repay the excess, the excise tax jumps to 200%.
In addition, like the NY Attorney General previously did with the Trump Foundation, the state attorney general with supervisory jurisdiction over the Foundation coud ask a court to enjoin future violations and take other actions, e.g., requiring sale of the airplane, to prevent future abuse.
Reminds me of the U.S. embassy in Moscow which the helpful Soviet workers filled with bugs.
The only really successful business the Trump Family ever ran was using their name as some sort of branding, and not any particular activity on their part in running or developing a business. When they tried to do that, the business always failed. (USFL Generals, various Casios, Trump University, Trump Steaks, True Wine) Slap his name on something and get the suckers to buy in until his name becomes toxic and they want out.
Also the core attack on Hunter Biden was that he was using his connections to Joe to make money.
Apparently, for the Trump Family, that is perfectly OK. And, it is also OK for Trump to be part of the deal.
Just the security concerns should be enough to kill this gift. No way to ensure this fully loaded 747 is secure enough for the sensitive government and warfare business that will be conducted on it. oh, never mind.
I'm usually more of a The Onion guy, but I gotta give props to Babylon Bee for this one:
https://babylonbee.com/news/trump-accepts-generous-gift-of-imperial-class-star-destroyer-from-emperor-palpatine