The Plain Text
A passing observation on the attempt to gift Trump a plane.
Sometimes, reading the actual text of the US Constitution can be quite striking.
Here’s Article I, Section 9, paragraph 8:
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
The notion that Trump can receive a plane from the royal family of Qatar as a gift kind of runs counter to, you know, the words on the page.
And since I was poking around in Article I, section 9, I will go ahead and share the following.
The Privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.
It is very, very, very difficult to take seriously the proposition that the contemporary Republican Party reveres the US Constitution.
Indeed, it is impossible to defend that position.
See also the plain text of the 14th Amendment on birthright citizenship.
Also: “jokes” about third terms.
Not to mention pardoning people who violently disrupted a constitutional process.
So, no, not the Party of the Constitution.
And money laundering done in public is still money laundering. And it won’t be the plane that will be hung out to dry.
There’s also that business about insurrectionists in the 14th amendment. How funny that the plain language used to be taken seriously.
I think Trump should take the plane and use it, as is. As is. As a big, old jet with a huge radar cross-section and no enhanced coms or sensors, and without any countermeasures. He could use it to see the Donbas, or Beirut, or Kaliningrad, or Yemen, or Sudan, or North Korea from the air. Or he could land it at Newark.
@JohnMc: The 14th includes,
That plain language wasn’t taken seriously even once throughout Jim Crow.
The funniest thing about this entire episode is the Stepford Wife Press Secretary piously claiming Trump would NEVER do anything to benefit himself. In spite of all history indicating the contrary.
@Daryl:
Not the Simpsons this time.
See also the Fifth Amendment’s guaranty of due process to all persons (and not just citizens, as the Administration has been arguing).
As long as we’re listing this out:
“All persons born […] within the United States […] , are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside”
14th Amendment.
“natural born” is not a phrase that appears. The full text is “All persons born or naturalized within the United States, and subject to its jurisdiction, are citizens…”
I mean, if you want to argue that the child of a person here illegally is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, go ahead, but I don’t think that will end well for you.
The president’s $400 million bribe plane runs counter to the Republican Party’s newfound working class identity. But so do their plans to strip ~14 million Americans of healthcare to shower tax cuts on Trump, Musk, Bezos and other billionare welfare kings.
@gVOR10: Years ago, a private school in Daegu was advertising for foreign teachers who *understands that a contract is a rough approximation of the conditions under which business would be conducted*.
It shouldn’t be a surprise to people living in this nation, with its history what it has been, for our Constitution to be the same type of situation. The pendulum is swinging away from aspirations of American ideals and back to American realities.
Which wolf prevails in the cosmic battle? It’s still the one we feed. Always has been. Always will be.
@Jay L Gischer:
Is it worth pointing out that Melania Trump was NOT a U.S. citizen when she gave birth to Barron/
@CSK: Only if Donald J wasn’t either. The EO allowed for one citizen parent for qualifying the spawn, IIRC. (Probably to shield Barron from ICE investigation.)
ETA: But it might be worth asking if Trump’s GRANDPARENTS were citizens. It could be that Donald is a second generation anchor baby. IDK.
@CSK:
They were careful to limit their case to babies born from women here illegally or certain types of visas. Wouldn’t be surprised if the situation of Trump’s kids factored into that though.
Trump uses two kinds of lawyers, clowns for the TV, true pros for serious bid-ness. Scary good, the latter can be.
Speaking of scary lawyers, this week is the 50th anniversary of Jaws, btw.
Uh, er, except it will be titled to the US Air Force.
Kinda makes the rest all speculative BS.
@Connor: What do you think you are defending here?
@Steven L. Taylor:
I’m not defending anything. But I think there is a better take on this situation.
As usual, one needs to view these issues through two lenses. The factual or legal, and the political.
The plane is being gifted to the US and will be titled to the US Air Force. Endeth the story on the emoluments clause.
But there is a political view. And on this I think I would completely agree with you.
A – it offers the opportunity for the wildly partisan to speculate on bribery and legalities etc. Why expose yourself to that nonsense?
B – But perhaps more importantly, Qatar is not a good actor. Its relationships with Hamas are clear. No matter how much financial sense it might make. No matter how much sense lighting a fire under Boeings ass might make. I don’t see Qatar as the party to be doing such a transaction with. I disagree with the move.