---
title: "Coin of Corruption"
description: "In 2025, the government of Qatar donated a $400 million Boeing 747-8 jet to the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and in return was granted the…"
url: https://www.independentpress.com/article/coin-of-corruption
date: 2026-07-04
categories: ["Politics","United States"]
author: "Allie Pallotta"
---

# Coin of Corruption

![Coin of Corruption: Political Graft and the Emoluments Clause](https://images.ctfassets.net/ewtdlsoyixc1/5y9BlnnBFslF9ixme6V359/113fd92f4ca925523fd2ca45d01052a8/photo-1776519501636-a9e9b383962e.avif)

In 2025, the government of Qatar donated a $400 million Boeing 747-8 jet to the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and in return was granted the right to build a military facility in Idaho to train Qatari pilots to fly F-15 fighter jets alongside U.S. troops. Throughout the second administration of President Trump, billions of dollars in investments have been placed in the stock market, conveniently timed before major policy announcements made by the President. The President’s own sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, have made several notable investments in drone manufacturers seeking lucrative U.S. military contracts at a time when the Trump administration has banned the use of foreign-made drones and the Pentagon is ramping up spending on unmanned aircraft systems. Most eyebrow raising of all, President Trump reported $1.4 billion in income on his 2025 tax return from his family’s investments in cryptocurrency while his administration continues to push for crypto-friendly government legislation and for greater acceptability of cryptocurrency in global financial markets. While the net worth of President Trump and his family continue to soar, [48% of Americans](https://www.newyorkfed.org/newsevents/news/research/2026/20260608) report that they are struggling with inflation, the rising cost of living, and stagnant wages, leaving many feeling that their financial burdens are only worsening.

When a government begins to serve its own interests rather than those of its citizens, it breaks the social contract and damages the institutions that it is meant to uphold. In Plato’s_ Republic_, one of the seminal texts on western political theory, Plato argues that the greatest threat to good government is allowing appetitive desires—such as the pursuit of wealth and personal gain—to dominate rational judgment. Plato asserts that the guardian class—the individuals entrusted with the political authority to rule—should be stripped of private property to ensure that they are governing for the sake of the common good rather than private gain. According to the _Republic_, when the guardian class abdicates reason for personal gain, they abdicate their moral duty to the state at the expense of the people, leading to inner conflict, injustice, and societal collapse.

In designing the U.S. Constitution, the Framers sought to codify anti-corruption laws through the Emoluments Clause to prevent politicians from using their government office to enrich themselves. The Emoluments Clause is divided into two parts: the Foreign Emoluments Clause and the Domestic Emoluments Clause. The [Foreign Emoluments Clause](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artI-S9-C8-3/ALDE_00013206/) directly forbids any “Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under [the United States]” from accepting “any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.” The Foreign Emoluments Clause is meant to protect the U.S. government from the undue influence of wealthy foreign actors and powers. [The Domestic Emoluments Clause](https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S1-C7-1/ALDE_00000233/?__cf_chl_f_tk=7ucF5ZSunFdd3wXFGI6N1jMwGUInwTGkYCJATUzpXJE-1783157000-1.0.1.1-yHovSDCeA6LCr3sUcLy2hFeGs9TUYhiSqj0y7SDFIY0) explicitly states that the President shall “receive a Compensation, which shall neither be encreased nor diminished during the Period for which he shall have been elected, and he shall not receive within that Period any other Emolument from the United States.” The Domestic Emoluments Clause sets a fixed presidential salary and forbids the President from receiving any additional compensation outside of that salary. It attempts to protect the President’s independence and ensure that the President cannot be bribed, coerced, or financially influenced by domestic actors.

The Emoluments Clause lays down a strong foundation for anti-corruption in the executive branch, but its effectiveness has been largely undermined by its somewhat ambiguous language and its lack of a concrete enforcement mechanism. As it presently stands, the Emoluments Clause lacks the bite to chew out corruption in the federal government. Current Enforcement is highly dependent on voluntary disclosures from public officials. And codifying any changes to the Emoluments Clause would require bipartisan support, which may be difficult to obtain in the highly polarized political environment that exists in America today. Complicating matters is the fact that the Emoluments Clause has never been successfully litigated, nor have past legal decisions offered definitive legal interpretation of what can be considered emoluments. The first significant cases invoking the Emoluments Clause were filed during the first Trump administration, prompted by President Trump’s failure to divest from his vast business empire. However, these cases were eventually dismissed by the Supreme Court; one case on the grounds that Congress lacked standing to sue and two cases on the grounds of being moot after Trump vacated office following his first term.

While the Trump administration has been covered extensively for its conflicts of interest, it is not the first presidential administration to be involved in scandals involving political graft. During Ulysses S. Grant’s tenure in office, his close associates were involved in a gold manipulation scheme that resulted in the 1869 stock market crash known as [Black Friday](https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/black-friday-1869). And during the early 1870s, several close associates of President Grant were implicated in the infamous [Whiskey Ring](https://www.history.com/articles/the-whiskey-ring-and-americas-first-special-prosecutor) scandal for colluding with whiskey distillers to defraud the government and avoid federal taxes. In 1921, the administration of 29th President Warren G. Harding was ensnared in the [Teapot Dome](https://www.fjc.gov/sites/default/files/trials/Teapot%20Dome%20Student%20Handout.pdf) scandal; one of the largest government corruption scandals in the history of the United States. The scandal led to the charge and conviction of Secretary of the Interior, Albert Fall, for accepting bribes; the first U.S. cabinet official to be convicted of a felony while in office. 

Over the years, political graft has become more nakedly visible across all branches of the U.S government. Dick Cheney, former CEO of Halliburton and Vice President to 43rd U.S. President George W. Bush, came under intense scrutiny after Halliburton and its subsidiary KBR were awarded multi-billion-dollar contracts, or sweetheart deals, with the U.S. military and Iraq’s oil industry during the Iraq War. Not only did Cheney create a major conflict of interest given his position as the company’s former CEO, but the Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audited Halliburton and discovered hundreds of millions of dollars in fraudulent service charges to the U.S. government. 

Political graft has become endemic in American politics. Any member of Congress who has made a stock trade while in office is likely guilty of insider trading. [Data](https://campaignlegal.org/sites/default/files/2025-11/Congressional%20Stock%20Trading%20by%20the%20Numbers%20-%20119th%20Congress.pdf) indicates that roughly half of the members of Congress own stock. While insider trading—buying or selling a company’s stock based on material, non-public information—is illegal, many Congressional representatives have access to important, private information on companies and the economy that they can utilize for their own gain. Before the COVID-19 lockdown, Congressional caucuses and committees deliberated over the potential impacts of the pandemic on the U.S. economy. Following the deliberations, multiple members of Congress, including Senators Richard Burr (R-NC), Dianne Feinsten (D-CA), James Inhofe (R-OK), and Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), sold significant amounts of stock immediately preceding the COVID-19 market crash of February 2020. 

Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and her husband Paul Pelosi are particularly notorious for their millions of dollars’ worth of stock holdings and for making well-timed bets in the market. While no insider trading charges have ever been filed against Pelosi or her husband, several of Paul Pelosi’s stock and option trades have drawn public scrutiny, including a large purchase [of Nvidia stock](https://thehill.com/business/3577326-pelosis-husband-sells-off-up-to-5-million-worth-of-chipmaker-stock-ahead-of-semiconductor-bill-vote/) prior to the signing of the [CHIPS Act](https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/4346) in 2022. The Pelosi’s investment portfolio has been so lucrative that it has led to the creation of the “Nancy Pelosi ETF”—the Unusual Whales Subversive Democratic Trading ETF (ticker: NANC)—that is meant to simulate the investment holdings disclosed by sitting Democratic members of Congress. Even Supreme Court justices have been accused of political graft, with Justice Clarence Thomas failing to disclose more than 20-years’ worth of luxury gifts and travel from wealthy donors. 

The self-dealings of politicians in the U.S. government have garnered widespread criticism and outrage. According to the [Brennan Center for Justice](https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/poll-voters-want-solutions-government-corruption), 92% of voters believe that government corruption is a major systemic issue. 79% of voters point to a lack of consequences for elected officials and the prioritizing of personal gain as being some of the leading reasons for the prevalence of corruption in the government. The Supreme Court itself has helped embed money in U.S. politics through its ruling in _Citizens United vs. FEC_ (2010) which held that political spending is protected as free speech under the First Amendment. The ruling essentially gave corporations, unions, and PACs the ability to spend unlimited amounts of independent expenditures advocating for or against political candidates. The aftermath of _Citizens United_ has given wealthy donors disproportionate influence in U.S. elections and has legitimized dark money organizations and Super PACS, making it easier to funnel contributions to the private businesses, family payrolls, and preferred vendors of political candidates.

If the United States is seeking to weed out political self-dealing and curb graft in the government, anti-corruption legislation needs to be prioritized, and enforcement mechanisms need to be given real teeth. It is time for Congress to codify the Emoluments Clause by clearly defining what counts as a prohibited emolument, mandating political disclosures of any gifts or compensation over a specific monetary value, and by creating clearer statutory standards to enforce prohibitions. It will also be necessary to restrict corporations’ access to political campaigns, either by passing new legislation in Congress or by striking down key provisions of the _Citizens United_ decision, so that political donors don’t have an unchecked influence on political decisions. By implementing a full stock trading ban on members of the federal government or by strengthening the enforcement mechanism of the [STOCK Act](https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-bill/2038?__cf_chl_f_tk=kM1dKM1RZMp70KouwW8_DERvWFDRlBTBZtRZV0xhCbQ-1783162995-1.0.1.1-d59SKmpIxlF8asnNxlCDE1dIynhP.DuM29MniBMIxG4), the U.S. government can reduce the prevalence of insider trading in Congress and prevent members from self-dealing. As an immediate stopgap, members of the federal government should be required to incur more frequent audits and oversight concerning their financial dealings while in office.

Ultimately, the bulk of the political reform necessary for removing self-dealing in the U.S. government must come from the very systems that have perpetuated the corruption. Legislation introduced in Congress to strengthen ethics laws and expand anti-corruption measures has stalled repeatedly due to partisan divisions and legislative gridlock. As such, definitive progress may very well depend on sustained public support. On a local level, citizens should remain engaged and continue to exert public pressure on officials to maintain accountability and transparency. Just as effective laws are needed for strong governance, good governance requires keeping vices in check and maintaining a commitment to the common good. By combining rigid structural safeguards with a political culture that values public service over personal gain, the government can truly uphold the interests of those it serves. And the wisdom of reason can govern the republic rather than appetitive desires for personal gain.