Thursday, August 13, 2026
Homeland Security Paid $464 Million for Airplanes. Then It Parked Them.
Homeland Security Paid $464 Million for Airplanes. Then It Parked Them.
Homeland Security spent $464 million via a no-bid contract for 10 used planes from Daedalus Aviation Corporation, citing urgency for deportations. The fleet has largely sat idle; three jets were offered to other agencies, and seven Boeing 737s remain parked.
The agency used a no-bid contract to buy 10 used jets, saying they were urgently needed for deportation flights. But the fleet has largely sat idle for months.
Starting last fall, the Department of Homeland Security spent $464 million on a no-bid contract to buy 10 used airplanes from a firm in Northern Virginia.
That was an enormous price tag, but the department said it had no time to consider other offers. The planes were needed urgently for deportation flights.
But since then, the department has barely used this new fleet — for deportations, or anything else.
Three of the aircraft are luxury business jets. Just months after acquiring them, the department sought to loan or lease two to other agencies, including one for the use of F.B.I. director Kash Patel, according to a letter to the department sent Wednesday by top Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee.
The other seven are older Boeing 737 passenger jets, which the government has left parked at an airport in Lake Charles, La., for months at a time. An internal government document, obtained by The New York Times, said the agency did not have the staff necessary to operate them.
The acquisitions were part of a surge of rushed contracts handed out recently by the Homeland Security Department, which has repeatedly used the need for “urgency” to bypass regular contracting procedures. The idled planes highlight the risks of that approach. The agency rushed headlong to spend nearly half a billion dollars, only to end up with planes it did not fly.
The contract also illuminated a broader trend within the second Trump administration: no-bid contracts awarded to people with connections to Mr. Trump or his cabinet secretaries. The company that received this contract, Daedalus Aviation Corporation, is led by a chairman who had donated to a political committee supporting the previous Homeland Security Secretary, Kristi Noem.
The department’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency has long outsourced its deportation flights by chartering planes from private companies. It also uses military and Coast Guard aircraft. Because of that, former immigration officials said there seemed to be little need for the department to take on the expense of buying and maintaining a significant number of its own aircraft.
“If you asked me to write a list of the things ICE needed to increase the number of deportations, buying its own fleet of airplanes would absolutely not make the top ten,” said John Sandweg, a former acting director of ICE during the Obama administration.
In a written statement, the Homeland Security Department sought to shift responsibility for the contract to Ms. Noem. President Trump fired her in March, and appointed Markwayne Mullin, a Republican Senator from Oklahoma, as secretary.
“The contract for Daedalus was made and approved by department leadership before Secretary Mullin was sworn in,” the department said in a statement. The agency said it “reserves the right to adjust course in an environment with evolving requirements and demands.”
A spokeswoman for Ms. Noem sought to place the responsibility on Mr. Mullin instead, saying the purchase was “finalized” under his leadership.
Contracting records show that the size of the contract increased by $303 million on the day that Mr. Mullin was sworn in as secretary.
The agency said that the idle 737 passenger jets had been undergoing maintenance checks, and that there were plans for two of them to begin deportation flights later this month.
The situation with the planes was reminiscent of the department’s about-face on a plan to acquire warehouses to hold detainees. The department spent heavily on those when Ms. Noem was secretary, but reversed itself just months later under Mr. Mullin. The department is now giving away or selling seven warehouses that it bought for more than $700 million.
A letter sent to the department Wednesday by Democratic senators Patty Murray of Washington and Christopher Murphy of Connecticut, who sit on the Senate Appropriations Committee, said Homeland Security officials had already conceded to the committee that most of the planes would not be used for deportations.
“The American people deserve a full accounting of this gross misuse of their tax dollars,” the letter, which was reviewed by The Times, said.
The senators asked for details about the purchase price of each plane and how they would be used.
Federal law generally requires government agencies to seek competing bids before awarding a contract, to ensure taxpayers get the best deal. But the department sidestepped that requirement for the planes contract, by invoking an exemption for cases of “unusual and compelling urgency.”
That exemption can be used only when delaying the contract would result in “serious injury, financial or other,” to the government. Historically, it has been used during natural disasters, war and the coronavirus pandemic.
The department declined to answer questions about what serious injury it was trying to prevent. Contracting regulations require agencies to publish the rationales for no-bid contracts, but the department refused to release this one, saying it “would compromise national security or create other security risks.”
The department has invoked the urgency exemption to justify more than $29 billion in spending across about 500 contracts awarded during Mr. Trump’s second term, according to an analysis of federal data by The Times. Much of that total came from border wall spending. Urgency claims were also used to justify projects like the $220 million in media contracts awarded to firms tied to Ms. Noem and her allies, scrutiny over which contributed to her ouster.
The exemption accounts for nearly two-thirds of the $34 billion that the department has spent on contracts signed in 2026. That’s up sharply from past years. In 2025, the figure was about one-quarter. In 2024, it was less than 1 percent.
Urgent Business
Department of Homeland Security spending on contracts, by year signed
No other major agency has used the exemption for urgency as frequently as Homeland Security, even in an administration that has turned to no-bid contracts repeatedly — for event planning, fountain repair and the troubled makeover of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.
Lorna Tedder, a retired contracting expert who spent more than three decades at the Defense Department, said that, “Some things truly are urgent — people are going to die if you don’t do this.” But if agencies claim the exemption all the time, “it will eventually be abused.”
The contract for the planes was first awarded in late November. At the time, the government was already paying other contractors hundreds of millions to operate a network of charter flights called “ICE Air.”
The immigration agency has chartered about 25,800 flights in Mr. Trump’s second term, shuttling immigrants between detention centers domestically and deporting them abroad, mainly to Latin America and the Caribbean, according to the ICE Flight Monitor tracking project at Human Rights First, a nonprofit advocacy group. The department sometimes has 25 or more planes in the air in a day, according to the nonprofit’s tracking.
But at the time, the Homeland Security Department said it still needed its own planes.
Last fall, Tricia McLaughlin, a department spokeswoman, told The Washington Post that purchasing the planes would allow “ICE to operate more effectively, including by using more efficient flight patterns.” Ms. McLaughlin has since left the agency. The department did not respond directly to a question asking about her comments.
Daedalus, the Arlington, Va.-based company the government hired to find the planes, had not previously held a federal contract. However, a company spokesman said it had worked as a subcontractor to other companies evacuating Afghans who had done work for the U.S. government.
Daedalus’s chairman is William Walters, a doctor who until 2021 led a State Department office that evacuated Americans from outbreaks of Ebola, Covid-19 and other crises. In 2024, after leaving government, Mr. Walters donated $10,000 to a political committee connected to Ms. Noem, then the governor of South Dakota.
Last year, with Ms. Noem in charge, the agency gave a separate company run by Mr. Walters a contract worth nearly $700 million to encourage immigrants to leave the U.S. voluntarily.
A Daedalus spokesman said that Mr. Walters was unaware that the political committee was tied to Ms. Noem.
Daedalus declined to say how much each of the 10 planes had cost, or what its profit margin was for acting, essentially, as a broker. It provided a written statement that it was proud to provide “the best value to the American taxpayer.”
One of the planes is a Boeing 737 luxury jet, now painted in the color scheme of Mr. Trump’s new Air Force One. Two others are smaller Gulfstream business jets, each seating about 14 people.
Those planes flew only sporadically after the agency acquired them, according to flight records from airplanes.live, an independent flight tracking service. And the department soon moved to jettison two of them to other agencies, according to the account from Senate Democrats and the internal document reviewed by The Times.
One of the luxury jets “has already been leased to the F.B.I. for 12 months to support director Patel’s travel — despite the fact that the F.B.I. already has its own jets to support the director’s travel,” the Senate Democrats wrote.
The F.B.I. confirmed that it is using one of the Gulfstream jets, saying it was paying the Homeland Security Department significantly less than it had paid a private company to lease a similar plane and that the aircraft was being used to support a range of agency operations, in addition to Mr. Patel’s travel.
The Homeland Security Department also wanted to lend the larger Boeing luxury jet to the Pentagon, according to the senators’ letter and the internal document. But a Pentagon spokesman said no agreement had been signed.
One Gulfstream jet will remain with Homeland Security, for the use of its top leaders, according to the letter.
The other 737s seemed more suited for deportation flights. Flight records show they had been in active use by Avelo Airlines, a low-cost carrier that also flew charter flights for ICE.
But when the government bought them, it parked them.
Daedalus said that two were used briefly to evacuate Americans from the Middle East at the outbreak of the Iran War in early March.
Senate Democrats said they were told by Homeland Security staff that four of the 737s were no longer expected to fly detained immigrants. The senators said the department said it would use them to fly members of Congress on overseas trips, a job now handled by commercial carriers or military aircraft.
For the long term, the agency said it needs a contractor to provide crews and mechanics to operate its new fleet. A recent solicitation said that contract would start next summer.
Devlin Barrett and Madeleine Ngo contributed reporting. Kitty Bennettcontributed research.
David A. Fahrenthold is a Times investigative reporter writing about nonprofit organizations. He has been a reporter for two decades.
Andrea Fuller is a data journalist at The Times, using data analysis to make sense of complex topics.
Nicholas Nehamas is a Washington correspondent for The Times, focusing on the Trump administration and its efforts to transform the federal government.
Hamed Aleaziz covers the Department of Homeland Security and immigration policy for The Times.“
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
Tuesday, August 11, 2026
Trump Said to Have Secretly Used Military Jet to Leave Turkey Amid Threats - The New York Times
Trump Said to Have Secretly Used Military Jet to Leave Turkey Amid Threats
"President Trump hid in an airport catering container and was taken to a military jet for a secret flight out of country after the NATO summit last month.
Top administration officials engaged in an elaborate deception to spirit President Trump out of Turkey during the NATO summit there last month, transporting him in a catering container to a military jet because of a threat against him and Air Force One from Iran, two senior U.S. officials said on Monday.
Mr. Trump and other officials had said publicly that he would be leaving Turkey on July 8 aboard one of the older versions of Air Force One rather than a luxury 747-8 donated by Qatar that he had flown in on. Mr. Trump told reporters at the time that he was making the switch for “old time’s sake.”
Mr. Trump boarded the older plane from the left-side door in view of cameras, and news organizations, including The New York Times, reported that he had traveled on it to Britain, where he switched back to the newer plane. The Times reported at the time that the decision was driven in part by concern about the security of the new plane donated by Qatar, which had not been equipped with all of the defensive capabilities of older versions.
But instead of flying out aboard that older, powder blue, modified 747, Mr. Trump was whisked off that plane via a catering container that had been lifted to the opposite side of the plane from where the journalists traveling with him boarded, one of the U.S. officials said. The president was then taken to a third plane, which he flew in secret to Britain, the official with knowledge of the matter said.
Reporters on the older plane were not told that Mr. Trump had not flown with them from Turkey to an air base in Britain, making them unwitting participants in the ruse and leaving them, along with some White House staff members, to serve as unknowing decoys.
After Mr. Trump arrived in Britain, he was secretly moved back to the older version of Air Force One. He then disembarked in view of reporters and walked across the tarmac to the plane donated by Qatar, which he flew to Washington.
The elaborate plan appears to have been developed in a matter of hours after officials determined that a threat against Mr. Trump from Iran was credible. It came after years of threats against Mr. Trump from Iran and amid the war he launched against that country. And it was an unusual instance of the public being deceived about a president’s whereabouts.
Officials have not previously acknowledged that Mr. Trump was not where they claimed he was. The furtive operation was reported earlier by the Washington Post, which identified the plane that carried the president to Britain from Turkey as a C-32A, a military variant of a Boeing 757.
It is rare for presidents to travel without the reporters who comprise the press pool designated to be with them, or in their vicinity, without some general awareness of the commander in chief’s whereabouts.
President George W. Bush kept a slimmed-down press pool with him as he flew first to a military base and then back to Washington in the chaotic hours after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. And presidents — including Mr. Trump — have traveled to war zones with reporters alongside them.
Donald Mihalek, a former Secret Service agent who worked in the protective details for Mr. Bush and President Barack Obama, said the Secret Service has used decoy motorcades and flights in the past to move presidents secretly.
“Anytime the president is in a theater where there’s potential combat danger, the Secret Service has employed protective counter measures including the use of a decoy,” Mr. Mihalek said.
He added that the agency has long prioritized the security of the president over transparency with the public.
“The agency is not the agency of public affairs,” he said. “The agency is the agency of the Secret Service. Their number one job is to keep the president safe.”
In this case, the threat led the White House to purposely mislead reporters assigned to cover Mr. Trump, leaving journalists to report that he was traveling on board a plane that was being used as a decoy.
After The Times reported last month on the security shortcomings of the Qatari-donated jet amid the concerns about the threat from Iran, Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, seemed to hint that subterfuge might have been involved in Mr. Trump’s departure from Turkey.
“As the president has said recently, there are many enemies of America who have their sights on him, and we use every tool at our disposal — including distraction and misdirection — to address those threats,” he said at the time.
The threat from Iran was not specific to the Qatari-donated jet, people familiar with the sequence of events said. Instead, Mr. Trump was being targeted on whatever airplane he was traveling on, as The Times has previously reported.
Mr. Trump was briefed on the threat while in Turkey, and a plan was soon put in place, with a small group of top government officials involved, including Gen. Dan Caine, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, the official with knowledge of the deception plan said.
The Defense Department and a spokesman for General Caine referred all questions to the White House on Monday. The White House reissued Mr. Cheung’s statement from the week of the NATO summit, only without the clause mentioning “distraction and misdirection.” The U.S. officials with knowledge of the deception plan spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive security issues.
When Mr. Trump arrived at the airport to leave Turkey, a camera that had been positioned beforehand captured him getting on the old Air Force One, and journalists traveling with him, rushing to board the plane through lower steps in the back, had only a glimpse of him. A pool report noted as the plane took off, “We have been advised to keep our window shades in the press cabin closed.”
The older Air Force One landed at 10:16 p.m. at the Mildenhall military base in England, a pool report said, with Mr. Trump stepping off it 40 minutes later. Before that, unbeknown to reporters, Mr. Trump was brought by vehicle from the third plane that he had arrived on to the older Air Force One, boarded it through a different entrance and strode down the step from the upper left-side door as he would typically do, according to the U.S. official.
He walked from there to the Qatari jet, as the small group of reporters who had traveled aboard the older jet watched. The president and the press pool then boarded the new plane to fly back to Washington.
When asked by reporters during that flight back to the United States about why they had flown on the old Air Force One to England, Mr. Trump claimed he had wanted the troops stationed at the U.K. base to see the new plane. When pressed on why the window blinds had been directed to be shut on the flight from Turkey, Mr. Trump said that he knew of no specific threat, but described himself as under constant siege from Iran.
“I’m number one on their list, before you,” he told the reporters. “But if I go, you go. Right?
Mr. Trump and a number of his advisers have faced threats from Iran for years, especially after Mr. Trump, during his first term, ordered the killing of a powerful Iranian commander, Maj. Gen. Qassim Suleimani.
Mr. Trump’s advisers during the 2024 campaign privately told allies that they were given intelligence that Iran still hoped to harm Mr. Trump. That led to the occasional use of decoy planes during the campaign. His staff at times put the candidate aboard a secret jet, without alerting the media, while his staff flew his private plane. The Biden administration increased security for Mr. Trump that summer after new intelligence about plots to kill Mr. Trump; a short time later, he faced an unrelated assassination attempt in Butler, Pennsylvania at an outdoor rally. There was a second unrelated attempt in September 2024.
The collective threats, which ranged from a prosecuted murder-for-hire plot by an Iranian proxy to the hacking of Trump campaign officials’ email and social media accounts, created a siege climate for the candidate and his aides. It led to fear, insularity and, at times, paranoia, that shaped how officials interacted with the Biden administration, which was responsible for allocating Secret Service resources, as well as with the media, and with other government officials.
After the Times reported about the security concerns in Turkey, and the fact that the Qatari jet lacked the same defensive capabilities as the older presidential aircraft, Mr. Trump was enraged by the leaks. The Justice Department issued subpoenas for grand jury testimony to the reporters who had been on the bylines of the stories, as well as some of their family members. Those subpoenas were withdrawn after a federal judge admonished federal prosecutors for the process involved.
Mr. Trump has continued to rage about information coming from his government that contradicts what he is telling the public, particularly about the war in Iran that he began on Feb. 28, according to multiple officials.
Katie Rogers, Erica L. Green and Doug Mills contributed reporting.
Maggie Haberman is a White House correspondent for The Times, reporting on President Trump.
Eric Schmitt is a national security correspondent for The Times. He has reported on U.S. military affairs and counterterrorism for more than three decades. Contact him securely on Signal: @ericschmitt.36.
Zolan Kanno-Youngs is a White House correspondent for The Times, covering President Trump and his administration."
Monday, August 10, 2026
Trump Shrugs Off A.I. and Data Center Concerns as Voters Grow Anxious - The New York Times
As Voters Grow Anxious Over A.I., Trump Shrugs Off the Concern
"The president and his top aides have been especially bullish about data centers, despite national blowback against the facilities.
The rapid rise of artificial intelligence has started to rattle voters around the country, raising fears that they could be thrust from their jobs if the technology succeeds, or lose their retirement savings if the industry falters.
But for all of the emerging doubt and political blowback, there has been no sign of concern at the White House, where President Trump has generally maintained a much more sanguine view about the coming digital revolution.
To the administration, A.I. can do little wrong.
In recent weeks, Mr. Trump and his top aides have dismissed the suggestion that widespread automation could carry real negative consequences for families, businesses and the broader U.S. economy. Even as the electorate grows uneasy about the technology — and the data centers that power it — the president has only hardened in his view that A.I. will supercharge everything from medical research to military action.
The political chasm between the president and the public has been most evident surrounding the red-hot issue of data centers, which Mr. Trump has defended as “Money Machines” even as opposition widens nationally over the facilities.
A small group of demonstrators interrupted one of Mr. Trump’s rallies in Michigan last month to demand an end to data center construction. That incident came on the heels of similar protests around the country, in a campaign organized by conservatives who otherwise support Mr. Trump’s politics.
“I think they are bullish about this technology,” said Michael Strain, the director of economic policy studies at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, said of the administration’s approach.
Mr. Strain said he generally agreed with much of the president’s “general approach” in seeking to foster A.I., and that he believed the technology would benefit the economy and national security. But, he acknowledged, the White House seemed to be less interested in preparing for the possible downsides.
“It’s a potential vulnerability for the economy,” he said, “and one worth tracking and seeing how it develops.”
Mr. Trump may yet prove correct in his glowing assessment about A.I. But his support has contrasted starkly with the more measured views from economists and policymakers across the political spectrum. Even among those who see A.I. as the most significant technological leap in human history, there is a sense that a disruption of this magnitude rarely occurs without consequence — and that Washington needs to be more prepared for every scenario.
There is one view that A.I. can make workers significantly more productive and that the resulting gains could add significantly to global growth. Chasing that vision and the immense wealth that may accompany it, the largest technology companies, known as the “hyperscalers,” could spend as much as $5 trillion on A.I. infrastructure in the coming years, according to JP Morgan. That could require companies like OpenAI and Anthropic to generate significantly more revenue than they do now.
That has delighted Mr. Trump, who has sought in his second term to increase construction and manufacturing. But there is also great doubt among many experts that such an evolution is going to be frictionless.
At the Stanford Digital Economy Lab, economists including Erik Brynjolfsson, a widely cited expert on technology, have started trying to measure those early effects. In its latest update, published in July, the think tank reported a significant uptick in spending on A.I. infrastructure — but, for now, “no decisive evidence” of a grand transformation to the labor force and entire industries.
Mr. Brynjolfsson said that the capabilities of A.I. would improve rapidly in the coming years, which would have “profound implications on our economy, both in good ways but also potentially with some real risks.” The very concern prompted Mr. Brynjolfsson to help organize about 200 economists and A.I. experts earlier this year to issue a joint statement calling on government to “build the incentives, guardrails and institutions needed to steer A.I. in a direction that complements humans and benefits society.”
Recognizing some of the risks, the White House last week readied a long-awaited planto monitor some A.I. models to ensure that they do not create security vulnerabilities. Developed in coordination with companies including Google, Microsoft and OpenAI, it represented a departure from administration’s hands-off approach toward the new technology.
Otherwise, though, the White House has tried to position itself primarily as a cheerleader for A.I.
“The narrative for so long coming from government, prior to President Trump, has been so fixated on the negative impacts of this technology. Like of course people are skeptical,” Michael Kratsios, the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said on a podcast hosted by Peter H. Diamandis, a technologist, which was published last week.
During the interview, Mr. Kratsios recalled attending an A.I. safety summit in the United Kingdom two years ago, which he said had focused on “what could go wrong.” That, he added, helped to crystallize the current problem facing the industry — and the administration’s rationale in sharing a more “positive” take about A.I. with the public.
“The only thing they’re hearing from politicians and from people in industry is that, oh, there’s going to be a bunch of job losses, and everything is dangerous,” he said, adding, “I think those are the things that get people worked up, and it shouldn’t surprise us that the P.R. is bad.”
The Trump administration has struck its most bullish note on data centers, the growth of which has served as a flashpoint in elections around the country.
Many cities and states have started to question the economic value of the facilities, which may support few long-term jobs once construction concludes, and the power, water and other resources they demand. The concern has prompted some policymakers to halt data center construction, including in New York, where Gov. Kathy Hochul, a Democrat, enacted the first statewide moratorium in July.
In response, Mr. Trump lashed out on social media. Demanding a reversal to the policy, the president said the facilities would generate taxes and jobs that amounted to “LIQUID GOLD,” adding that data centers “are tremendous WINS for the States and Communities that are lucky enough to get them.”
The White House did not respond to a request for comment. The New York Times has sued OpenAI and Microsoft, claiming copyright infringement of news content related to A.I. systems. The two companies have denied the suit’s claims.
In an attempt to tamp down voters’ mounting concerns, Mr. Trump did broker an agreement earlier this year with technology companies that included those companies paying for needed electricity upgrades. But the pact, which is voluntary, came as the president appeared to doubt openly whether there was even an energy cost problem to begin with.
“They need some P.R. help,” he said at a March event, referring to the public relations image of data centers. “Because people think that if a data center goes in there, electricity prices are going to go up. And that’s not happening. It’s not going to happen.”
Lawmakers in 15 states nonetheless have considered such bans targeting data centers over the past year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures, which last updated its count in July. Last week, Gov. Andy Beshear of Kentucky, a Democrat, also signed a new directive meant to protect residents from electricity price hikes from data centers, while Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas, a Republican, required new projects to submit to an energy audit.
Mr. Trump still appeared to criticize some of the moves. Singling out Texas, he told Punchbowl News in an interview published Friday that its actions were a “mistake,” adding of data centers: “It could be bigger than oil.”
The full-throated endorsement of data centers has increasingly put the president on the opposite side of his fellow conservatives, who have long been skeptical of the nation’s largest technology companies.
Among the most vocal is Humans First, an advocacy group led by Amy Kremer, a former Tea Party leader who helped to organize the Stop the Steal rally on Facebook after the 2020 presidential election. Ms. Kremer said she used A.I. every day and was not wholly opposed to it. But, she said, policymakers at all levels of government had failed to chart the future of the technology in a way that accounted for the public’s anxieties.
“People are very, very upset,” she said. “They feel like there’s a disconnect. They feel like no one is speaking for them.”
Ms. Kremer said her group helped to organize a day of protests against data centers in 42 states last month. She fretted that the nation’s largest technology companies had “bought their way” into Mr. Trump’s inner circle and had shaped some of his approach to the issue.
“I think the people around him definitely know of the backlash,” she said, “and I just hope that he understands what people are thinking and feeling.”
But the pushback has hardly appeared to rattle the public optimism of the administration. Speaking weeks after the conservatives’ protest, Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House National Economic Council, still sought to downplay some of the national trepidation around A.I. and data centers.
“I don’t think anyone should be worried that a data center is going to be plopped on top of them,” he told Fox Business in late July, adding that the deals between tech companies and local communities around the facilities have been negotiated “pretty generously.”
“If you take a sleepy town that hasn’t really seen much in the last 20, 30 years, and put a data center there," Mr. Hassett later added, “then there are going to be a whole bunch of happy residents in that town.”
Tony Romm is a reporter covering economic policy and the Trump administration for The Times, based in Washington."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)