Donald Trump had already halted funding on the Gateway tunnel construction project, one of the nation’s most important infrastructure investments, when he came up with an idea for a transaction: The president told Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer that he’d restore the money if Democrats agreed to rename Dulles International Airport and New York’s Penn Station after Trump.
The Republican’s pitch was, for all intents and purposes, an attempt at extortion: If Democrats wanted to save a critical infrastructure project and prevent the job losses, they had to indulge Trump’s obsession with self-glorification.
The White House made little effort to deny the accuracy of the reporting when it first reached the public, and on Tuesday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt commented publicly on the matter for the first time. Time magazine reported:
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt contracted President Trump on Tuesday, saying it was Trump who floated the idea of putting his own name on New York’s Penn Station and Washington, D.C.’s Dulles Airport during a conversation with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.
‘About renaming, why not? It is something the President floated in his conversation with Chuck Schumer,’ Leavitt said.
She didn’t appear to be kidding.
The obvious problem with Leavitt’s line is that it contradicted her boss’ line. In fact, on Friday night, during a brief Q&A on Air Force One, a reporter asked the president, “Can you set the record straight? There were reports circulating that you told Chuck Schumer that in order to restore funding for the Gateway train tunnel in New York, New Jersey, you would want Penn Station and Dulles Airport to be named after you. Is that true?”
The ideal answer would have been, “No, of course not, that would be insane.” Alas, that’s not what Trump said. Rather, the president claimed that it was the Senate minority leader’s idea.
“He suggested that to me,” Trump replied. “Chuck Schumer suggested that to me about changing the name. … It was suggested to me by numerous people, unions, Democrats, Republicans, a lot of people suggested.”
In other words, we’re supposed to believe that the Democratic Senate leader, among others, approached Trump with the idea of renaming an airport and one of the nation’s most storied train stations after the president they vehemently oppose.
Schumer wasted little time in responding to this absurdity, calling the claim an “absolute lie.” Evidently, according to the White House press secretary, the Democratic senator was correct.
As for the answer to Leavitt’s rhetorical “why not?” question, this isn’t especially complicated: At least in the United States, presidents aren’t supposed to hold taxpayer funds hostage as part of a ridiculous ego exercise.
Circling back to our earlier coverage, I continue to wonder what would happen if, hypothetically, Joe Biden unilaterally shut down funding for a critical infrastructure project in South Carolina, and the Democratic president then quietly told Lindsey Graham, “I’m prepared to release the funds if Republicans agree to name the Port of Charleston and Atlanta’s airport after me.”
Then imagine what would happen if, after the gambit was exposed, Biden told the press, “Graham suggested the idea to me,” only to have his own press secretary say the opposite soon after.
GOP officials would immediately conclude that the Democratic president had lost his mind, but they’d also likely condemn the obvious abuse as an offense warranting impeachment.
And yet, here we are, watching this same scenario unfold.
This post updates our related earlier coverage.
