0 like 0 dislike
by (160 points)

According to the paper, federal official Kristi Noem allegedly approved the acquisition of multiple aircraft that had missing engines and weren't even owned by the seller. Investigations later showed that the purchase of ten Boeing 737s from Spirit Airlines for government use had not been thoroughly examined. This raised serious questions about the use of taxpayer funds and whether appropriate checks were performed prior to making such a significant purchase. The circumstances point to a severe supervision gap in the decision-making process. Since there doesn't seem to have been much investigation into the ownership or condition of the planes prior to approving the acquisition, critics contend that the deal represents bad management and poor judgment. Stronger review processes could have prevented this error, according to proponents of more government accountability. Overall, the report emphasizes how this unsuccessful acquisition not only embarrassed the officials involved but also raised concerns about how government departments manage public monies.

1 Answer

0 like 0 dislike
ago by (140 points)

This claim that Kristi Noem approved the buying of several planes without engines for $200 million from Spirit Airlines is indeed a fact. Several reliable sources, such as The Wall Street Journal, the Senate website, and The Guardian, all state the same information regarding this purchase of planes. These organizations are known to be reputable, and confirmed what "MateoT" posted.

For primary sources, I went to the senate.gov website and found an article posted by Homeland Security and Government Affairs on October 24, 2025. It states that US Senator Gary Peters had sent a letter to DHS wanting to investigate her $200 million purchase of two luxury private jets. Noem has previously testified in Congress that she would only need $50 million to purchase 1 jet, and made no mention of multiple jets or any monetary value over $50 million, certainly not $200 million. Peters also went on to state that this $200 million was mainly paid for from taxpayers money, and that the current Trump Administration knows no limits in spending citizens' money. (https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/SIGNEDLetter-to-DHS-IG-Re_-Noem-Jets2.pdf) This is a primary source of a letter sent by a senator to the DHS, so I know this is reputable since senators are under oath to tell the truth.

A secondary source that supports the claim made by MateoT is from the online newspaper company, The Guardian. An article by Mariana Dunbar, who is a reporter for The Guardian, goes into detail about the situation with the aircraft and shares a direct quote from a letter written by Democratic representative to the DHS about how the planes were purchased, "United States Coast Guard entered into a sole source contract with Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation to procure two new G700 luxury jets to support travel for you and the deputy secretary, at a cost to the taxpayer of $200m..." (https://democrats-appropriations.house.gov/sites/evo-subsites/democrats-appropriations.house.gov/files/evo-media-document/letter-to-noem.pdf) These direct quotes from those in power make the sources very reliable, and free from potential biases since these people apart of the government are sworn to an oath of truth. There would also be no agenda or reason for them to fabricate. However, biases and feelings surrounding the current political climate are very common nowadays, so one should definetely fact check from primary sources. before believing anything on either side.


 

True

Community Rules


• Be respectful
• Always list your sources and include links so readers can check them for themselves.
• Use primary sources when you can, and only go to credible secondary sources if necessary.
• Try to rely on more than one source, especially for big claims.
• Point out if sources you quote have interests that could affect how accurate their evidence is.
• Watch for bias in sources and let readers know if you find anything that might influence their perspective.
• Show all the important evidence, whether it supports or goes against the claim.
...