Men's Lifestyle October 5, 2026 0 Comments

Kristi Noem’s Latest Move Just Shattered Everything You Thought You Knew—Here’s What Happens Next!

Ever wonder what happens when politics and private jets collide in a whirlwind of questionable deals and luxury splurges? Picture this: a massive Boeing 737 converted into a private palace on wings, complete with marble showers and—of all things—a table covered in manta ray skin. Yeah, you heard me right. Is this a new trend, or did Williams Sonoma just start moonlighting as a seafood décor supplier? In the final hours of Kristi Noem’s stint as homeland security chief, her agency decided to shell out sky-high sums—well above market value—for planes from a company linked to one of her donors. Could it be coincidence… or a classic “who you know” scenario flying high? From sudden no-bid contracts to jaw-dropping markups, this story smells fishier than the manta ray itself. Buckle up—this preview might just be the tip of the iceberg when the dust settles on what many are already calling a “plague of grifters.”
LEARN MORE

3 min read

Treat this story as a preview of what’s going to come slithering out from under many rocks when it comes time to kick them over when this plague of grifters finally passes. From The New York Times:

In the last hours of Kristi Noem’s tenure as the homeland security secretary, her agency delivered a windfall to one of her political donors by buying five airplanes from the man’s firm at a substantial markup, documents show. The Department of Homeland Security agreed to pay the donor’s firm $108 million for a Boeing 737 airliner that had been converted into a massive private jet, complete with a stand-up bar, two bedrooms, marble showers and a table covered in manta ray skin.

Manta ray skin? Is that a thing now? Has Williams Sonoma opened a seafood counter?

The firm, Daedalus Aviation Corporation, had bought the same plane a few months earlier from a seller who had asked for less than $90 million, according to documents reviewed by The New York Times. At the same time, the agency agreed to buy two smaller Gulfstream luxury jets at prices that also seemed to yield a hefty profit for the seller. Daedalus spent about $83 million to buy the pair, but resold them to the agency for $106 million, the documents show. The agency also paid the company $45 million apiece for a pair of 17-year-old Boeing 737 passenger planes, the documents show. The Times spoke to six aviation experts, who said that those prices were millions of dollars higher than the typical market value for jets of that age.

Gee, I wonder if this company, you know, knew somebody important?

Daedalus’s chairman is William Walters, who gave $10,000 to Ms. Noem’s American Resolve political action committee in 2024. The company said Mr. Walters did not know the group was associated with Ms. Noem at the time, though the group existed to support her. Its website prominently displayed a photo of her face.

After Ms. Noem took office, her agency awarded more than $900 million in contracts to companies led by Mr. Walters. It hired his company Salus Worldwide Solutionsto encourage immigrants to leave the country voluntarily, and to fly her and her aides on chartered jets. Then it gave Daedalus a no-bid contract to procure planes for deportation flights, under an arrangement in which the company could buy planes from others and resell them to the government, in essence as a middleman.

On the Xwitter, Noem was shocked—SHOCKED—at the NYT’s audacity.

I write to formally request the retraction entirely or explicit correction of the article titled ‘Kristi Noem’s Agency Gave Her Donor a Lucrative Contract Just Before She Left.’ The article’s characterization of the individual as a “donor” (confirmed not to be the case) is materially misleading and, as unsupported by the factual record, conveys a false implication of a direct financial relationship obviously intended to influence official action. Accuracy is fundamental to responsible journalism. If the individual did not personally make political contributions to Secretary Noem, or if the term ‘donor’ instead refers indirectly to unrelated entities or legally distinct contributions, the article simply fails to meet the standards of precision expected of The New York Times. Numerous times clarifications were made to the journalists responsible for this libelous story. Such wording unfairly prejudices readers and creates an inference of impropriety that is not supported by the underlying facts.

The newspaper stands by its story. And, given Noem’s history of enjoying the high life on the government dime, I know which way I’m leaning.