Forums

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Trump got in trouble because he used his office, and taxpayer money, for political gain. Any senator or congressman would be in similar trouble for doing the same. Look at Christie in NJ, for example.

But Presidents are allowed to use Air Force One to travel to political events? How is the use of AFO for political travel not an abuse of power?

For as long as I can recall, I'd hear news stories starting with, "President Reagan traveled to Ohio today to support so and so..." or "President Clinton was in Los Angeles to meet with donors at..." They've all done it. They do it all the time.

I guess the argument is, "How else would the President travel? He has to use AFO."

Okay, well if that's the case, then shouldn't his party reimburse taxpayers for his use of the jet for party political events? Or maybe he shouldn't be allowed to simply use the jet because he feels like it? How much have we spent on Trump's trips to Mar a Lago?

I understand that it's difficult to separate the political from the official, and using one's resources for political ends (holding press conferences or taking foreign trips for political gain, starting investigations for political purposes, siccing agencies on political opponents, etc.) has been common forever. But this is openly using a plane that costs a fortune per hour to operate for political purposes. Openly. Presidents will talk to the press on the tarmac about how they're going to get in the plane, with a cadre of expensive Secret Service people, and fly to some location to support a political ally at some rally or other event. They nakedly admit using it to travel to fundraisers.

How is this not an unlawful use of govt money for political purposes?

There is apparently some ambiguous reimbursement process, and some lack of clarity that encourages name-calling and accusations:

https://thehill.com/homenews/adminis...ticizing-obama