Today in Grift: Qatar Allegedly Plans to "Donate" Air Force One

There are presidents who managed to outshine all their peers (so far) in one way or another. Abraham Lincoln was the best public speaker. Lyndon B. Johnson was the best at getting legislation through Congress. Richard Nixon was probably the most skilled diplomat.

During his first term, Donald Trump established himself as far and away the most corrupt president in American history. It's not even close—scandal-plagued presidents like Warren Harding, Bill Clinton, Nixon, etc. aren't within a country mile of The Donald. And now that he is in his second term, Trump continues to explore new frontiers in corruption, finding novel and breathtaking ways to try to exploit his high office for his own benefit.

The latest news on this front, first reported by ABC News, is that the royal family of Qatar plans to bestow a $400-million super luxury Boeing 747-8 jumbo jet, described as a "palace in the sky," upon the Trump administration. The plane will ostensibly replace the current presidential plane—which, of course, bears the designation "Air Force One" whenever the sitting president is on board.

Trump is spinning this as a DOGE-style maneuver meant to save some money for the federal government. Here's the rant he uncorked last night on Truth Social, now brought to you by the nation of Qatar:

So the fact that the Defense Department is getting a GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE, of a 747 aircraft to replace the 40 year old Air Force One, temporarily, in a very public and transparent transaction, so bothers the Crooked Democrats that they insist we pay, TOP DOLLAR, for the plane. Anybody can do that! The Dems are World Class Losers!!! MAGA

You could possibly read between the lines there and deduce a somewhat more selfish motivation, namely that a luxurious 40-year-old plane just isn't luxurious enough for Trump, and he wants something newer and fancier (probably with golden toilets), and isn't happy that the actual new presidential plane won't be delivered until 2029, by which time he will be out of office.

But it is actually much worse than that. The plane is only going to be loaned to the federal government (which will then spend tens of millions of dollars modifying it to have the proper security and communications measures). At the end of Trump's term, it will then be transferred to the Trump presidential library foundation, which will be the permanent owner.

All of this stinks seven ways to Sunday. To start, the federal government does not need "donations," especially of such a high-profile nature, and especially from a foreign government. Beyond that, the whole "Trump presidential library foundation" is very obviously meant to mislead people. Most Americans, and presumably 99% of readers of this site, know that the Reagan Presidential library has the Air Force One that the Gipper flew on. So, this Qatar "deal" is designed to look like the same thing.

However, the Air Force One at the Reagan library is not only a non-functional plane, it also belongs to the library. And the library belongs to the National Archives and Records Administration, which means the plane actually belongs to the federal government. By contrast, this Qatari plane would be fully functional, and would belong to the Trump presidential library foundation, a charitable organization/PAC under the control of one Donald J. Trump. Put simply, Trump's name might not appear on the pink slip (or whatever color airplane-ownership paperwork is), but the Qataris would nonetheless be giving him a personal, luxury airplane for him to use for the rest of his days, even after he is no longer in office.

Already, AG Pam Bondi has "reviewed" the transaction, and determined that it does not violate the emoluments clause, because the donation is not conditioned on any specific official act. It is remarkable that Bondi and her underlings can say this with a straight face. The royal family of Qatar does not hand out planes worth nearly half a billion dollars because they are feeling generous. There could be a specific quid pro quo that has been agreed upon behind closed doors, or it could be that they expect some sort of favorable treatment (no tariffs?) going forward. Whatever the case may be, they expect to get far more than $400 million in value out of this clear-cut bribe.

Naturally, Democrats across the nation are apoplectic, but Trump does not care about them. However, he does tend to care about MAGA Republicans, and they are also unhappy. The primary problem is that Qatar is in bed with Iran, and most MAGA Republicans hate, hate, hate Iran. The Republican members of Congress have been silent, as is usually the case with them, but a lot of MAGA pundits have excoriated the deal. That includes Laura Loomer, who apparently exerts more influence over Trump than anyone who is not Stephen Miller.

Qatar, for its part, issued a press release that described as "premature" the news that the plane would be given over to Trump. It is possible that they are giving Trump an "out," in the event that he decides the heat is too much to handle. It is also possible that the Qataris have not quite nailed down what they are getting out of this transaction, and they want to wait until they meet with Trump this week (his first foreign trip of Trump v2.0) to figure out the nitty-gritty (even if that is off the record) before making the bribe donation.

If the arrangement does move forward, it would render the emoluments clause all but meaningless. If a person or business or government can "loan" something to a president, and then "give" that thing to their presidential library foundation once they leave office, and the only thing necessary is that there's no publicly announced quid pro quo, then it's open season for virtually any bribe one can imagine.

Might Congress step forward, should it come to that? We're not optimistic, but it's not impossible. It only takes a few Republicans to recognize the can of worms that would be opened here, and that would not only be open to exploitation by Trump over the next 3 years, but by all future presidents, Republican and Democratic. Alternatively, could the courts get involved? Maybe, but: (1) It's hard to know who might have standing to sue, and (2) it's very possible that the courts, and in particular the Supreme Court, could determine this is a political question and not justiciable.

So, the best hope for this to be torpedoed is political pressure from right-wingers. If that doesn't work, then the White House Office of Grift will likely do a land-office business over the next 3 years. (Z)

Trump Says He Will Cut Drug Prices

Yesterday, Donald Trump posted a long, and barely lucid, wall of text to his very unpopular social media site announcing a new executive order that he says will cut prescription drug prices by 30% to 80%. We will spare you the whole thing, which you can read here, if you are a glutton for punishment. The key portion is this:

I am pleased to announce that Tomorrow morning, in the White House, at 9:00 A.M., I will be signing one of the most consequential Executive Orders in our Country's history. Prescription Drug and Pharmaceutical prices will be REDUCED, almost immediately, by 30% to 80%. They will rise throughout the World in order to equalize and, for the first time in many years, bring FAIRNESS TO AMERICA! I will be instituting a MOST FAVORED NATION'S POLICY whereby the United States will pay the same price as the Nation that pays the lowest price anywhere in the World. Our Country will finally be treated fairly, and our citizens Healthcare Costs will be reduced by numbers never even thought of before. Additionally, on top of everything else, the United States will save TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS.

That was sent out at 3:22 p.m. yesterday. We would bet very large sums of money that, half an hour earlier, he was playing golf.

We feel a responsibility to pass something like this along, just in case something comes of it. Thus far, the details are so vague, it's not terribly easy to evaluate the plan. That said, the obvious question that occurs to us is this: "If there is an easy way this goal could be achieved, with just the stroke of a presidential pen, then how come some previous president (including Trump himself) didn't do it?"

In turn, we came up with only three vaguely plausible answers. You could conclude that Trump is the first president who is not in the thrall of "Big Pharma," and so is willing to take them on. It's a bit hard to imagine, however, that Lyndon B. Johnson, the president behind Medicaid, and Barack Obama, the president behind the Affordable Care Act, were in the pockets of the pharmaceutical industry, while Trump—who is more than willing to, for example, take free planes from the Qatari royal family (see above)—is the one willing to stand on principle, for the little guy. It's possible, but not especially plausible.

The second answer we came up with is that Trump's maneuvering, whatever it is going to be, is not lawful, and he's willing to go there, where Joe Biden, Obama, etc. were not. This was certainly the case when Trump tried to change prescription drug prices via fiat during his first term. And while Congress did not stand up to him then, and is not likely to stand up to him now, the pharmaceutical industry filed lawsuits aplenty, and Trump was defeated. Heck, the XO he issues today may well be an exact copy of the one he issued 6 years ago (not unlike what happened with the 2020 Republican platform).

The third and final answer we came up with is that, as is his wont, Trump is going to make some small change on the margins, and then claim it's a radical, earth-shaking transformation of American life as we know it. The early returns suggest this may well be the case; note that bit about how "the United States will save TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS." Americans spend about $750 billion a year on prescriptions, and only half of that is under the auspices of the federal government (Medicare, etc.). If Trump manages to reduce the federal spend by 50% (dubious), it would take about 5 years to be $1 trillion in savings, and thus a decade to be "trillions." In that case, his claim here would not be a lie, exactly, but it would be very misleading. "We will save trillions" implies some level of immediacy, not sometime in the fairly distant future.

In any case, today we'll learn what the big plan is. Again, we suspect that it is much, much smaller than Trump promised, which is so often the case with him. (Z)

J.D. Vance Is More Fake than Plastic

This story is about a week old, and we debated whether it was even worth noting. We finally decided that it is, for reasons we will explain in short order.

On Tuesday of last week, the White House had a press conference focused on the 2026 World Cup, which will be partly hosted by the United States (in cooperation, to the extent that's possible right now, with Canada and Mexico). The primary purpose of the event was to announce that Andrew Giuliani, son of Rudy, would be leading a task force that will oversee final planning for the event.

It was J.D. Vance, however, who ended up stealing all the headlines. For some reason, somebody decided to put a microphone in front of the VP, even though he's not actually on the task force. And Vance decided to make this comment:

We'll have visitors from close to 100 countries. We want them to come, we want them to celebrate, we want them to watch the games. But when the time is up, they'll have to go home, otherwise they'll have to talk to Secretary Noem.

By all accounts (and we read several dozen), the line landed with an absolute thud. Like, you remember when Johnny Carson sometimes used to do a fake golf swing when one of his jokes didn't land? Well, Vance would have needed a full course's worth of fake swings.

We do not know if Vance was freestyling, or if he had that "joke" pre-planned and all cued up. We similarly don't know if it was actually an attempt at humor, or an attempt to score political points, or both. But we do know two things. The first, and more immediate, is that this is simply not a joking matter. Even if someone thinks that the administration is somehow doing the "right" thing, people are being deported without due process and thrown into brutal foreign prisons. Either that is outright wrong or, if you take a staunchly anti-immigrant viewpoint, it's a regrettable necessity. What it isn't is funny, and anyone who thinks it's a joking matter is an asshole (note: deliberately left uncensored).

The second thing we know is that Vance is trying desperately to present himself as the next Donald Trump and it just Does. Not. Work. Trump is also an asshole (again, deliberately left uncensored), but he's the genuine article. That is to say, the president isn't just pretending to be a bloviating, self-aggrandizing, angry, retrograde xenophobe. He really IS a bloviating, self-aggrandizing, angry, retrograde xenophobe. That's what the MAGA crowd wants, and they appreciate that Trump is the real deal.

Vance is very clearly not a nice person, but he's also not Trump, and his efforts to get off a Trumpy "bon mot" or mount a Trumpy attack on "the libs" or come up with a Trumpy nickname for some "enemy" come off as entirely not genuine. Gov. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) had the exact same problem. And we predict that when Vance mounts the inevitable presidential run, he'll suffer the same fate—the base just won't buy what he's selling. (Z)

Workin' 9 to 5?, Part I: Kash Patel Is Reportedly Shirking His Duties...

In addition to what was coming out of the White House over the weekend, there was also some reporting from a few blocks down the street, namely FBI headquarters at 935 Pennsylvania Ave. It was not the kind of news that the administration likes, however.

In short, NBC News had a report that FBI Director Kash Patel—who, remember, is an ideologue and a political appointee, and who did not diligently work his way up the ranks—is cutting corners at his still-new job. The sources NBC talked to—off the record, naturally—say that the 8:30 a.m. "daily" briefing of pressing issues and concerns, drawn from law-enforcement sources across the nation, now happens only twice a week because Patel has trouble getting to work on time each day. Further, the usual Wednesday afternoon Zoom meeting, in which the Director is supposed to communicate his priorities to law-enforcement leadership across the nation, has been ended.

Reportedly, these changes were made because, in addition to not making it into the office in time, Patel has some of the same shortcomings as his boss. He is easily bored and, as is consistent with his path to his high office, is uninterested in, and not knowledgeable about, the nitty-gritty of law enforcement. Even with the two-days-a-week schedule, the folks presenting the briefings reportedly have trouble capturing Patel's attention, and have resorted to the same tricks used with Trump, like including lots of pictures.

There are some parts of the job Patel does enjoy. By law, the director travels on government planes, and he's made frequent use of that perk, flying at least half-a-dozen times to Nashville, Las Vegas and New York City for various social and leisure activities. He's also a big sports fan, and has been pictured sitting in prime seats at various sporting events, including UFC matches and hockey playoff games.

As is always the case when an outlet runs a piece like this (see below for more), Patel and his allies pushed back at every bit of NBC's reporting, asserting that the story is a "hit piece" and that Patel simply prefers different ways of keeping up with law-enforcement intel and law-enforcement officers, and that he might travel a lot, but he always does business when he reaches his destinations. It's worth keeping in mind that the folks who serve as sources for such a piece may well have axes to grind, given that Patel is an outsider. At the same time, it is unlikely that the off-the-record claims are 100% false. The truth probably lies somewhere between Patel's version of events and NBC's version, though we'd guess that NBC's version is closer to the truth than Patel's is. (Z)

Workin' 9 to 5?, Part II: ...And the Same Goes for John Fetterman

Kash Patel is not the only prominent political figure to be the subject of some unflattering reporting from behind the scenes in the last several days. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) was the focus of two such pieces, one from New York magazine and the other from NBC News. The gist of the reporting is that: (1) Fetterman is not especially interested in the work of being a U.S. Senator, and (2) His behavior has become increasingly erratic, very possibly as a by-product of his stroke and/or his failure to follow doctors' orders and take care of himself.

As to the first point, the evidence is pretty substantial. Since April of 2024, he has missed 77 of 381 votes in the Senate. The only members with worse records over that time are Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC) and VP J.D. Vance. One of them was busy running for president for much of last year, while the other was busy running for vice president. The committees on which Fetterman serves have met a combined total of 46 times this year; the Senator has attended one of those 46 meetings. Many Democratic senators have tried to get a meeting with him to discuss legislation, only to be denied. Fetterman has only attended one public event in Pennsylvania this year, and that was in January.

As to the second point, well, the evidence there is pretty substantial, too. Fetterman already had a reputation for being temperamental, but his propensity to blow his stack has reportedly grown noticeably worse. He once worked hard to build relationships with other politicians, but has apparently given that up, and is increasingly isolated. He has also reportedly begun engaging in conspiratorial thinking, muttering about shadowy forces who are out to get him.

As with Patel (above), Fetterman has an explanation for all of this. He says he was elected to be an "outsider" and not to be "cuddly," so of course he isn't the belle of the Senate ball. He argues that he's been present for the most important votes, or that he votes by proxy, and that when he misses a vote, it's because he's busy campaigning for other Democrats. He also insists that his health is fine, and that his doctors are satisfied. And he attributes the two "hit pieces," as he calls them, to left-wingers who are angry about his position on Israel and his efforts to build a relationship with Donald Trump.

As with the reporting on Patel, it's probable that there's some truth coming from both sides of these stories. That said, Fetterman's accounting of events is pretty seriously compromised by a letter written last year by his then chief-of-staff Adam Jentleson, to Fetterman's neuropsychiatrist Dr. David Williamson. Both the New York and the NBC piece quote passages from that letter, including this:

We do not know if he is taking his meds and his behavior frequently suggests he is not. We often see the kind of warning signs we discussed: conspiratorial thinking; megalomania (for example, he claims to be the most knowledgeable source on Israel and Gaza around but his sources are just what he reads in the news—he declines most briefings and never reads memos); high highs and low lows; long, rambling, repetitive and self-centered monologues; lying in ways that are painfully, awkwardly obvious to everyone in the room, such as swearing up and down that he didn't say something everyone heard him say a few minutes prior.

Jentleson was a Fetterman supporter and staffer when he wrote that letter, which was also not meant for public consumption. And Jentleson is well-known for being a centrist, and being disdainful of both progressive activism and Israel critics. So, it's hard to argue that the letter reflects some sort of ulterior motive on the author's part.

Recognizing that Fetterman has some unique challenges, and that he's deserving of support and sympathy, Democrats who spoke to the media this weekend largely defended him as a good colleague who is doing his job well. However, several Republican senators, namely Tom Cotton (AR), Chuck Grassley (IA), and Dave McCormick (PA), defended him even more aggressively. It is possible that those fellows are just nicer and more empathetic than the Democrats are. Or, it is possible that they think Fetterman is angry and taking things personally, and that he might be persuaded to flip to the GOP. Whether Fetterman switches parties (like his fellow Pennsylvanian Arlen Specter), resigns, or tries to stay the course, it's a situation that bears watching. (Z)

Greene Won't Run for Senate

There is no person that has a higher opinion of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) than Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA). That is not too unusual among politicians; they tend to have giant egos, and many of them believe 100% in their own branding (see Trump, Donald). So, it's not too big a surprise that when Greene looks in the mirror each morning, she sees Sen. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).

After Gov. Brian Kemp (R-GA) took a pass on challenging Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) next year, the path was theoretically open for Greene to shoot for a promotion. There were, however, three problems. The first is that while the Representative appears to be reasonably popular in her district, she's not well-liked by Republicans statewide. Of all the various Republicans who might plausibly run for the right to challenge Ossoff, including folks who are much less well known, like Georgia Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner John King, Greene polls dead last in terms of the preferences of Georgia GOP primary voters.

The second problem is that Greene is not well-liked by independent/swing voters statewide. And so, in a hypothetical matchup with Ossoff, she polls worse than any other Republican, trailing the Senator by 11 to 17 points.

The third problem is that, because of the first two problems, Republican pooh-bahs do not want her to run, and have reportedly signaled that if she tries it, she's on her own. That includes, supposedly, the general election, where the NRSC only has so much money to go around, and would prefer to spend it defending in-danger seats like the one in Maine, and not wasting it trying to tilt at Georgia windmills.

By all indications, Greene is not exactly the sharpest knife in the drawer. However, she does possess a well-developed instinct for self-preservation. And so, she has read the writing on the wall (or, very possibly, had someone read it to her), and has decided that one looney-bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Late Friday, she announced that she won't enter the Senate race, and that she'll stay where she is.

That means that the Republicans' candidate for this seat will very likely be someone who has won statewide office, but is not especially well known nationally.The biggest name left, now that Kemp and Greene are out, is state Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, but the MAGA types don't like him because he locked horns with the Dear Leader in 2020. More plausible are King or maybe state AG Chris Carr. Besides Kemp, the person who actually polls best against Ossoff is actually Generic Republican, but thus far Generic Republican is keeping their cards close to the vest. (Z)

It's a Scary Time to Be a Federal Judge

This year, an unknown number of federal judges (the U.S. Marshals service is not saying), across at least seven states, have received multiple hundreds of pizzas they did not order.

What's the problem here? Well, consider these three facts: (1) the deliveries started in late January/early February (i.e., after January 20); (2) they have often been sent to "Daniel Anderl," which is the name of U.S. District Judge Esther Salas's son, who was fatally shot at Salas' home by a disgruntled attorney posing as a delivery man; (3) the judges receiving the pizzas have generally gotten them during or immediately after hearings in which they ruled against the Trump administration.

The message, obviously, could not be clearer: We know where you live, and maybe next time it won't be a pizza, it will be a bomb, or a packet of anthrax-laced powder, or an armed gunman. Some of the senders of the pizzas have also had them delivered to the houses of judges' relatives, which adds an extra layer of scariness, since the judges have security details, while their relatives do not.

The vast majority of the people sending these pizzas, whoever they are, will not act on their implied threat. We have said it before, and we will say it again: Trumpers are cowards. A person with real courage does not need to make sure they have the biggest and scariest and most automatic gun, nor to blame immigrants for all their problems, nor to treat someone with different political/religious ideas as if they are vermin to be eliminated. That said, it only takes one person, almost certainly one whose mental health is less than 100%.

In the end, somebody had to pay for those pizzas. One hopes that some of the "brave" people who let pizzas do their talking for them were stupid enough to use a credit card or some other traceable payment method. Failing that, if they paid in cash, there have got to be pizza parlors with security cameras. Certainly, the U.S. Marshals Service is on it; one can only hope they nab a few perpetrators in high-profile fashion, in hopes of making other pizza-sending cowards think twice about their actions. (Z)

---

If you wish to contact us, please use one of these addresses. For the first two, please include your initials and city.

• questions@electoral-vote.com    For questions about politics, civics, history, etc. to be answered on a Saturday
• comments@electoral-vote.com   For "letters to the editor" for possible publication on a Sunday
• corrections@electoral-vote.com To tell us about typos or factual errors we should fix
• items@electoral-vote.com            For general suggestions, ideas, etc.

To download a poster about the site to hang up, please click here.

---

Email a link to a friend.

---The Votemaster and Zenger