Bulwark Takes: This Is the Most Obvious Corruption Ever (w/ Sen. Brian Schatz) Release Date: May 14, 2025

In this episode of Bulwark Takes, host Sam Stein engages in a comprehensive discussion with Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii about the alleged corruption surrounding a $400 million plane gift from Qatar to the United States. The conversation delves into the implications of such a gift, the political fallout, and the broader context of integrity in governance.

1. Introduction to the Corruption Allegation

Sam Stein opens the conversation by addressing the central issue: a proposed $400 million plane from Qatar, reportedly intended as a gift to the President of the United States. He highlights the gravity of the situation and seeks to understand the current status of the plane.

[00:00] Sam Stein: "Sam, you've led a resolution to condemn this plane. Can you update us on its status?"

2. Senator Schatz's Condemnation of the Plane

Senator Brian Schatz vehemently criticizes the proposed gift, labeling it as blatant and gross corruption. He emphasizes the symbolic importance of Air Force One and argues that accepting such a gift from a foreign government undermines its significance.

[00:40] Senator Brian Schatz: "This is the most blatant, obvious, ridiculous, gross corruption that I've ever seen in my entire life."

3. The Nature of the Corruption

The discussion transitions to the broader implications of accepting gifts from foreign entities. Stein raises concerns about the open nature of the corruption and the accusations Democrats face for allegedly overlooking the ethical breach.

[01:12] Sam Stein: "We're being accused of being suckers for not seeing the virtue of accepting this plane."

Schatz dismisses any justification for the gift, irrespective of its intended use, arguing that no foreign gift should be accepted due to the inherent conflict of interest.

[02:04] Senator Brian Schatz: "Nobody should take a $400 million item from a foreign country. And that's the end of the conversation."

4. Political Reactions and Republican Responses

Stein queries whether there were any internal debates within the Trump administration about refusing the gift, noting the absence of such discussions in media reports.

[03:55] Sam Stein: "There was no one who said, you know what, maybe this isn't actually the right thing to do."

Schatz expresses disappointment in Republican colleagues who have failed to recognize the corruption, highlighting a lack of bipartisan acknowledgment.

[06:23] Senator Brian Schatz: "We recognize that when it's not our leader, when it's our leader, only about 50 some odd percent of the people recognize, like, dude is ripping you off."

5. Emoluments Clause and Legal Implications

The conversation shifts to the legal framework surrounding such gifts, specifically the Emoluments Clause. Schatz explains that any foreign gift of this magnitude constitutes an emolument, requiring congressional approval.

[08:19] Senator Brian Schatz: "The emoluments clause doesn't just say you can't take a foreign bribe. It says you can't have any foreign entanglements of any financial nature."

He references past efforts by Dick Blumenthal to litigate similar issues, which were dismissed but indicates plans to readdress the matter.

[09:14] Senator Brian Schatz: "I've talked to Dick Blumenthal and he's very anxious to re-litigate this because at a minimum, Congress should ratify this."

6. Leveraging Legislative Tools for Accountability

Schatz discusses potential legislative actions that can be taken to hold the administration accountable, such as forcing reports on human rights compliance related to foreign countries like Qatar.

[10:41] Senator Brian Schatz: "Any member can force a report on the human rights violations of any country that with which we have a security arrangement."

He highlights the discovery and utilization of obscure Senate rules to prompt votes and ensure that officials are held accountable on issues of corruption and foreign influence.

7. Comparing Corruption: Plane Gift vs. Crypto Meme Coin

In a lighter yet critical comparison, Stein asks Schatz to evaluate which corruption is worse: the $400 million plane or the so-called "Crypto Trump meme coin dinner."

[12:44] Senator Brian Schatz: "The meme coin is not Bitcoin. It's not real currency or even cryptocurrency. It is the equivalent of opening up a Swiss bank account and saying, hey, if you'd like to just remunerate me for fund, you can. So I think that's pretty squarely corrupt."

Schatz concludes that while both are egregious, the plane is more tangible and easier for the public to comprehend as a symbol of corruption.

8. Concluding Remarks

The episode wraps up with Stein acknowledging the severity of both corruption cases and thanking Senator Schatz for his insights.

[13:37] Sam Stein: "Senator Brian Schatz, thank you so much for joining us. Really appreciate it."

Key Takeaways

• Blatant Corruption: The proposed $400 million plane from Qatar is seen as a direct and egregious act of corruption, undermining the integrity of American symbols like Air Force One.

• Legal Framework: The Emoluments Clause serves as a critical tool in preventing foreign entanglements and ensuring that any gifts or financial dealings with foreign entities are subject to congressional scrutiny.

• Bipartisan Accountability: There is disappointment in the lack of bipartisan recognition and action against such corruption, with Senator Schatz emphasizing the need for collective responsibility.

• Legislative Actions: Senators are exploring various legislative avenues, including forcing reports and re-litigating past cases, to hold officials accountable and prevent future occurrences.

• Public Perception: The tangible nature of the plane makes the corruption more recognizable to the public compared to more abstract forms like cryptocurrency schemes, though both are deemed highly corrupt.

This episode underscores the ongoing battle against corruption in high offices and the legislative measures necessary to uphold integrity within the government. Senator Brian Schatz’s candid discussion provides valuable insights into the challenges and strategies involved in addressing such significant ethical breaches.