正在加载视频...
视频加载失败
Paul: The constitution in article two talks about the president cannot take gifts from foreign leaders. There is a provision in the constitution that says you cannot do this… I think it’s not worth the appearance of impropriety
11 条评论

It's not just the appearance of impropriety. It's like saying that Trump should not be getting BJs from his cabinet during the televised cabinet meetings because it "appears" improper.🤦♂️

💪If you're seeing this, it must mean you support Trump. 👏 Let us help you show it. ✅ Classic, Tough, Real American Gear Here:

Watters won’t be inviting this guest on again.

When you have immunity and a part that won’t impeach, you can do whatever you want to the constitution.

MAGA is going to be so pissed about Rand Paul not walking the party line

How come Rand effing Paul has been siding with Democrats these days?🤣

There are no Boeing 747-8 airplanes the Air Force. They will have to train up whole new crews and Pilots. They will have to retrofit the plane to make it compatible with to be AF-1 or the SOAC. Unless Trump cuts corners, this plane won't be used as AF-1 until 2027-2028.

I am so tired of the ambiguous language! It is not an “appearance” of impropriety. They are not “potential” conflicts of interest. Nothing has been “possibly” illegal or unconstitutional. It’s all cut and dry!

Exactly, Sen. Paul. The Constitution is clear about no gifts from foreign leaders. Accepting luxury planes from Qatar isn’t just a bad look; it’s also a potential violation of the Emoluments Clause. Public office shouldn’t be up for sale. Trump must be stopped.

Now Fox News supports Rand’s neighbor

The Constitution’s Emoluments Clause exists for a reason—no official, elected or appointed, should exploit their position for personal gain. While the tweet references presidential gifts, the real issue is systemic: lifetime-appointed judges like Clarence Thomas accepting millions in undisclosed luxury trips, private jet flights, and real estate deals from billionaires with business before the Court. The Judicial Conduct and Disability Act is toothless when justices self-regulate, and the Code of Conduct remains optional for SCOTUS. If D.C. enforced accountability equally, Laken Riley Act-style mandates would apply to all branches—no more “aspirational ethics” while taxpayer trust evaporates. Real transparency? Enforce existing laws, audit every gift, and impeach those who betray public office.

