• Francesca Bridgerton marries John Stirling, the Earl of Kilmartin, in "Bridgerton" season three.
• But the show makes a major creative choice at the end of the season that will deeply affect her story.
• It still remains to be seen how "Bridgerton" will handle it — but it will require some maneuvering.

Warning: Major spoilers ahead for "Brigerton" season three and the book "When He Was Wicked."

"Bridgerton" season three wrapped up Penelope and Colin's love story — but its finale set up a revelatory future for Francesca Bridgerton that's a major divergence from the books.

For those who have been praying for one of the Bridgerton siblings to get a queer storyline, season three delivered. Benedict Bridgerton experienced his first kiss with a man via a threesome with his paramour, Lady Tilley Arnold. But perhaps more shockingly, the show has staged a queer romance for Francesca, one that promises a deviation from her novel "When He Was Wicked."

By the end of season three, Francesca has finally married John Stirling, the Earl of Kilmartin. At the end of the season, at a ball hosted by Penelope Featherington's sisters, she finally gets to meet another member of John's family — his cousin, Michaela Stirling, played by Masali Baduza.

Book readers will note this as a significant change: In Quinn's novels, Michaela is actually Michael, John's cousin and a close friend of Francesca's after their marriage. He's also Francesca's eventual love interest after John dies suddenly two years into his marriage with Francesca.

"Bridgerton" doesn't really mince glances in the finale. Francesca is immediately visibly attracted to Michaela, tripping over her words as they meet and even briefly forgetting her own name. Even if you haven't read the books, the implication is clear — Francesca is going to fall in love with this woman.

"Bridgerton" has made some significant changes to Quinn's novels in the past — most notably, it asserted Queen Charlotte's Blackness, and takes place in a version of Regency-era London where people of color can hold titles. But three seasons in, it has yet to meaningfully change any of the siblings' love stories, making a divergence of this level unprecedented.

Showrunner Jess Brownell told Glamour that Francesca's story, and feeling of otherness, resonated with her as a queer woman and lent itself to this kind of change.

"I felt like there was fertile ground thematically in her book to nod toward telling a queer story," Brownell said.

It's notable that 'Bridgerton' has seemingly committed to a queer romance

"Bridgerton" has previously dabbled in queer relationships, but only between men. In season one, Benedict befriends an artist named Henry Granville, who's engaged in a secret relationship with another man. Granville is married and tells Benedict that he and his wife have an understanding that allows him to pursue the relationship — though only behind closed doors.

More prominently, in "Queen Charlotte," the king and queen's footmen, Reynolds and Brimsley, are also in a secret relationship that appears to have dissolved by the time they reach adulthood.

"Because of the world they inhabited, it was still a hangable offense to be gay, and it was just not possible," Hugh Sachs, who plays older Brimsley, told Vulture.

The rules between men and women differed at the time: Sodomy was a capitol offense in England until 1861, per the Encyclopedia Britannica, while lesbian sex acts didn't fall under any legislation. Obviously, "Bridgerton" is far from historical text, but it seems unlikely that an open, romantic relationship between two women would fly even in the show's alternate history. The show won't be able to write a romance between Francesca and Michaela without actively engaging with what it means to pursue a relationship with another woman in high-society Regency London.

That doesn't preclude their happiness though, according to Brownell.

"There are also some elements of her story that allow us to make sure we can tell a pretty happy ending for Francesca and Michaela," Brownell told Glamour. "It was important for me in telling a main queer story for us to be able to give them a happily ever after, as we have with every other couple."

Changing Michael to Michaela has other major plot implications

In "When He Was Wicked," Michael is forced to reluctantly assume John's title as Earl after Francesca miscarries, preventing it from passing on to one of John's sons. To make matters worse, he's also been in love with Francesca since they first met and does his best to conceal that through cultivating a rakish reputation. After John's death, he flees to India for four years, leaving Francesca to manage the Kilmartin estate.

"Bridgerton" has gone to great pains to remind us that women cannot inherit titles, especially in season three. Inquiries from the Crown leave the Featheringtons scrambling to produce a male heir (congrats to Penelope on winning that race), and the Mondrich family inherits the Kent estate after their young son miraculously turns out to be Lady Kent's closest male relative.

Michaela won't be able to inherit John's Earldom, nor presumably be able to sequester herself in India for years at a time, after his death. And as a presumably unmarried woman herself, she'll likely be facing pressure to marry, or living life as a spinster.

That doesn't mean that "Bridgerton" can't make adjustments to clear a thoughtful path for Francesca and Michaela. In the books, Francesca decides to pursue a second marriage after John's death not out of a need for companionship, but rather because of her desire for children. In fact, she's rather secure in her position as a widow, afforded the rare freedom to live an independent life as a woman. Should she not miscarry and give birth to John's son in the show, she would retain that freedom without question of which man would assume the title.

Brownell told Glamour that despite the change from Michael to Michaela, she still plans to "honor" the book on television.

"Obviously, some changes will have to be made to the storyline, but there are ways to honor a lot of the book," Brownell said.

At this point, we can't be certain of how "Bridgerton" will manage Michaela's gender swap, and her eventual romance. But for this gentle writer, it's heartening to see "Bridgerton" take a big swing like this — and set up a sweeping queer love story for one of its main characters.

• Patrick Synge fired one of his employees for secretly working a second remote job.
• He shared how he caught the employee and why he decided to fire them. 
• He says overemployment is "unethical" and hurts worker productivity. 

This as-told-to essay is based on an email conversation with Patrick Synge, the cofounder and CCO of the business-process-outsourcing and remote-recruitment company Metrickal. The business is headquartered in Barcelona and has 10 full time, fully remote employees, in addition to more than 200 contractors worldwide. The following has been edited for length and clarity.

I'm the CCO of a business where every employee works fully remotely. In January, I caught one of them secretly working a second full-time remote job.

Here's how it all played out — and why I decided to fire them.

My business is headquartered in Barcelona, but one of my employees was based in Peru. He was hired in 2022, and in the beginning, he did his job very well. But then, I started to receive complaints from clients about missed assignments and deadlines. He had also become quite unresponsive. These complaints from clients started to become somewhat regular.

When this employee started refusing certain shifts he usually worked, I became suspicious. I had a feeling that he was doing something on the side, but because there was no proof, I didn't want to jump to any conclusions.

So instead, I had one-on-one meetings with him to discuss his job performance. When the same issues continued, I told him that if things didn't change, I'd have to let him go.

While he showed some signs of improvement, his overall performance didn't change much. This put a significant burden on the rest of the team, who had to cover his shifts and deal with missed deadlines.

How I ultimately caught him

In December, unrelated to this particular employee, my company rolled out the time-tracking software called DeskTime.

My long-term goal is to introduce a four-day workweek at my company, and I decided the first step in this process would be understanding how my employees spend their time and what could be optimized to boost productivity.

So our entire team of full-time employees and freelance contractors started using DeskTime. They each had to install the app on their computers, so everyone was well aware that this was being implemented.

After a few weeks, I looked through the tracking data of the struggling employee and noticed there was another company's name — a US business — that regularly appeared in the data. It became clear to me that this employee had worked on some other company's tasks.

I fired them the next day.

The DeskTime data showed that the employee was using software during the workday that was unrelated to his job tasks. It also included a screenshot feature that captured his computer screen — and showed him working on a platform where the other company's name was visible.

Based on the DeskTime data, I estimate that he had spent close to half of his work time working for this other company. It seems that he forgot about the tracking software since once it's downloaded, it doesn't require any manual switching on and off.

To be honest, all the other signs — missed deadlines, lack of flexibility, and unresponsiveness at certain times — had already made me quite certain that he was doing something else during working hours. I would have probably fired him anyway, but the tracked data was the missing hard proof.

I believe he was working for the other company full time because soon after I fired him, he updated his LinkedIn profile to reflect that he was working full time at the other company.

Why I think overemployment is unethical

I know some people may judge me, but I really don't support the trend of overemployment. I think it's unethical and just wrong.

First of all, I don't think it's fair to the rest of the team who have to cover up for someone else's low performance. This is why keeping this employee of mine in the company wasn't an option. He wasn't fair and respectful to the team, and that's something I can't tolerate — his actions were just selfish.

Secondly, I don't believe a person can productively do two jobs at the same time, even if you use AI or other tools. Their attention will be scattered, so the quality of their work will suffer. As an entrepreneur, I have to think about my business and clients first. I can't afford to lose clients because someone wants to make extra money.

I really don't mind people having side hustles to earn extra income. But this should be something they do on their own time and that doesn't affect the quality of their day job.

Are you working multiple remote jobs at the same time and willing to provide details about your pay and schedule? Has a coworker or employee of yours done so? If so, reach out to this reporter at jzinkula@businessinsider.com.

Correction: June 13, 2024 — An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated that Patrick Synge was the CEO of Metrickal. He is the CCO.

• Average air conditioning costs in the US could reach a 10-year high this summer due to extreme heat.
• Heat waves now happen six times a year on average, up from twice a year during the 1960s.
• Advocates are calling for more funding to help low-income residents with their energy bills. 

Many Americans are cranking up the air conditioning this summer to cope with scorching temperatures. And it's costing them.

The cost to keep homes cool between June and September could reach a 10-year high this summer, say two groups advocating for programs to help low-income residents pay their energy bills. The groups projected that the average cost across the country could be $719, a nearly 8% increase from the same period last year. In some regions that figure is higher; in Southern states like Texas, the average cost could hit $858.

"There's a price to ignoring climate change," said Mark Wolfe, the executive director of the National Energy Assistance Directors Association, which conducted the analysis with the Center for Energy Poverty and Climate. "The amount of electricity people use is going to go up, and it's a reaction to extreme heat."

The forecast comes as the Southwest swelters under a heat wave that's moving across the US this week. Federal data indicates heat waves happen six times a year on average, up from about twice a year during the 1960s. Meanwhile, climate scientists said May was the hottest month on record globally, continuing a 12-month streak where each one was warmer than the last.

The culprit is the climate crisis, and burning fossil fuels for electricity is the largest source of greenhouse-gas emissions trapping heat in the atmosphere. The US still relies on natural gas and coal to produce 60% of its power.

The forecast for summer cooling costs is based on federal data on regional electric prices, summer temperatures, and residential air conditioning, Wolfe said. His group's predictions are slightly higher than those by the US Energy Information Administration in June, which forecast average monthly bills of $173, or a 3% increase over last year.

"We are assuming a higher rate of temperature change, and recent heat waves are bearing this out," Wolfe said. "We also assumed a slightly higher rate for electricity."

Many factors affect electricity prices, including the costs of fuel, renewable energy, and power-grid maintenance. Wolfe said the cost projections would've been higher if natural-gas prices hadn't been falling since the global energy crisis in 2021. But he emphasized that burning more fossil fuels would worsen the already deadly and expensive heat waves causing Americans to use more energy.

Wolfe argued that federal, state, and local policymakers needed stronger policies and programs to protect vulnerable people during scorching summers. Cities with typically hot summers — including Phoenix; El Paso, Texas; and St. Louis — set up public cooling centers, but that isn't enough to help people stay safe, Wolfe said.

A 2020 survey from the US Energy Information Administration found that nearly 20% of families earning less than $20,000 had no air conditioning. Those who do may not turn it on in an effort to avoid higher bills, Wolfe said. Meanwhile, 33 states don't prevent utility companies from disconnecting residential power during extreme heat, putting children and older adults in particular at risk.

Wolfe argued that more states and cities should adopt shutoff protections and that Congress should boost funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which covers a portion of low-income families' utility bills. He estimated that about 1 million fewer households would get financial help this year because Congress approved less funding for the program than it did for fiscal 2023.

Homeowners could also install energy-efficient appliances, such as electric heat pumps, and take advantage of tax credits and rebates under the Inflation Reduction Act to make retrofits more affordable.

Some states are expected to this year start doling out rebates to homeowners with low and moderate incomes. The program is designed to offer point-of-sale discounts on heat pumps, electric stoves, insulation, new breaker boxes, and wiring — capped at $14,000 per household. Landlords who rent to people in low and moderate income brackets are also eligible. New York this month became the first state to open up applications.

"We need to change the way we think about helping families during the summer and how to upgrade their homes so they can stay cool while not increasing energy use and emissions," Wolfe said. "Now is the time to prepare for higher temperatures."

Are you struggling to pay your energy bill this summer or worried about power shutoffs? Contact cboudreau@businessinsider.com

• Apple is integrating ChatGPT into its operating systems as part of its big AI push.
• It gets to do it without paying ChatGPT's creator, according to a new report.
• That's because Apple's power lies in its vast reach. 

When Apple officially announced its partnership with OpenAI at WWDC on Monday, a big question remained unanswered: on what terms?

When Apple has previously partnered with an outside company on a core product, the value it brings to the table has been pretty clear, with its long-standing partnership with Google on search a case in point.

Google operates the world's most popular search engine but has made it a point to pay Apple each year to keep it the default on Apple devices. It's no small amount, either. In 2022, Google paid Apple $20 billion for that privilege.

So what would the terms be that bring Apple and OpenAI together?

In recent months, Apple has made no noise about an AI model of its own that can rival the performance of OpenAI's GPT-4o, the new premium model to power ChatGPT. It's a sign that it simply lacks one that can measure up favorably.

So, a fair question has been whether Apple would pay to integrate OpenAI's technology into its operating systems to give users as powerful a chatbot experience as possible.

Though its ambitions are different, Microsoft —which has partnered with OpenAI since 2019 — decided to invest an additional $10 billion into the ChatGPT maker last year to not only "accelerate AI breakthroughs" but to weave the AI into its products like Office and Bing too.

However, new details suggest Apple will not be handing cash to OpenAI anytime soon.

That's according to a new report from Bloomberg's Mark Gurman that said Apple was not paying OpenAI for the integration of its much-hyped chatbot into Siri.

Apple still holds the power

In part, Apple might be getting away without paying OpenAI because it has its own AI models set to hum beneath the surface of its devices. Apple Intelligence — the company's take on generative AI — will involve plenty of in-house technology.

But Apple can also avoid paying OpenAI for ChatGPT integration because its distribution power remains king.

OpenAI stands to benefit from its powerful chatbot gaining further reach thanks to the huge install base Apple oversees, which includes more than two billion active devices.

As influential tech analyst and Stratechery founder Ben Thompson noted, OpenAI can accept not being paid as its distribution through Apple devices could serve as a "play to acquire users and mindshare, with the potential of upselling those users" to a premium ChatGPT subscription.

Apple Intelligence, Thompson added, is designed "to maximize the advantages that Apple has in terms of being the operating system provider on your phone" while allowing OpenAI to come in with a "general-purpose chatbot" only.

Investors seem to have recognized Apple's power here, briefly pushing its stock above Microsoft on Wednesday. Only $11 billion separated the two companies after the closing bell.

What happens in the longer term remains to be seen.

Upgrade cycle

Apple has been battling declining iPhone sales in recent months in key markets like China, which means it will be banking on its new suite of AI features to trigger a big upgrade cycle later this year among consumers enticed by the idea of Apple Intelligence.

Apple is doing its bit to spur this upgrade cycle by making Apple Intelligence available on only its most advanced devices, such as the iPhone 15 Pro models, M1 iPads, and M1 Macbooks.

However, there's no guarantee that consumers will bite, as Apple CEO Tim Cook has already conceded that Apple's new AI features are "not 100%" and may be prone to hallucination problems that have proven a headache for competitors like Google.

That could all come back to haunt Apple down the track, especially if generative AI struggles to match the hype surrounding it.

For now, though, generative AI is everything in Silicon Valley. Companies trying to put the technology in everyone's hands know they could do worse than turn to Apple for help.

"Food Wars" hosts Harry Kersh and Joe Avella travel across Los Angeles to find the best doughnuts in the city. They'll be visiting five locations in just one day to see what the city has to offer. This is "Food Tours."

• Elon Musk appears to be emulating Donald Trump's playbook.
• The Tesla CEO also seems to be immune to scandals in a similar way to the former president.
• Supporters of both Musk and Trump appear willing to overlook their sometimes questionable behavior.

Elon Musk seems to be taking a page out of Donald Trump's playbook.

The Tesla CEO once took a jab at the former president for being too old to run again for the White House, essentially suggesting he sail off into the sunset.

But now it appears Musk is looking to Trump more and more as an example of how to play the public relations game — from the way he prematurely declares victory, to the feuds he starts and the scandals he navigates.

The approach might be serving him well.

Take, for instance, the almost Trumplike way in which Musk, with no attribution, prematurely declared victory in securing his mammoth pay package many hours ahead of an official announcement from Tesla.

Musk decided to celebrate early on X, declaring that the vote was passing by "wide margins." If that is the case, it definitely is a win for the Tesla CEO.

Headaches ahead

Trump is of course now a convicted felon who still faces a brimming docket of pending court cases. Yet Musk also faces some headaches of his own.

Eight former SpaceX employees have filed a lawsuit against him, alleging they were wrongfully fired for speaking out against a hostile work environment in 2022.

Then there are new claims by The Wall Street Journal that Musk blurs lines with the women who work for him. That story also included a claim that Musk asked a SpaceX employee to have his babies, before denying her a promotion when she refused.

Immune to scandal

Musk also seems to be immune to scandals in a similar way to Trump.

Both have the backing of some prominent Silicon Valley figures. Reuters reported that tech venture capitalists David Sacks and Chamath Palihapitiya hosted a fundraiser in San Francisco earlier this month for the Republican presidential candidate.

And where Musk is concerned, no matter how salacious the scandals he can always rely on the support of his many fans on X.

Following Trump's playbook doesn't appear to have hurt his payday ambitions at all. If Musk has won shareholder approval, they've apparently overlooked some Trumpy tendencies — like feuding with plenty of his tech peers.

Zuck feud

One of Musk's long-running battles has been a near eight-year feud with Mark Zuckerberg that saw him challenge the Meta CEO to a cage fight.

Most recently, Musk filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, accusing the ChatGPT maker of violating its nonprofit mission by partnering with Microsoft — although that lawsuit was dropped on Tuesday for unknown reasons.

There's also the drug use. Musk admitted in his March interview with Don Lemon that he takes a "small amount" of ketamine every other week. When Lemon questioned him further, Musk seemed to imply that Wall Street didn't have a problem with it.

Supporters of both Musk and Trump appear very willing to overlook behavior that lesser public figures might not be allowed to get away with.

Representatives for Musk didn't immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider, made outside normal working hours.

• McDonald's didn't care about Grimace's birthday this year.
• Grimace didn't get a happy birthday post on the chain's Instagram or TikTok and his special purple shake hasn't returned to US menus.
• Fans are sad. They want to slurp his shake and pretend to die again.

After spoiling him rotten last year, McDonald's has completely ignored Grimace's birthday in 2024.

The McDonald's mascot made a comeback in 2023 when the burger giant released a limited-edition Grimace Shake to celebrate his birthday on June 12.

The fuzzy purple blob, believed by some to be a taste bud or a milkshake, became an internet sensation as TikTokers posted videos of themselves pretending to be injured or even dying after drinking the shake.

The trend generated huge buzz for McDonald's, which sold the shake as part of the Grimace Birthday Meal. The mascot's 52nd birthday celebrations appeared in a number of social media posts by the chain in June and July, before McDonald's said that it was "time to say goodbye" on July 5.

Since then, Grimace has barely appeared on McDonald's social media. It was his birthday again on Wednesday, and the chain was completely silent.

The Grimace Shake is back on menus in Canada, but Americans have been left empty-handed.

Fans are confused and upset. They've been commenting on McDonald's latest Instagram post, which promotes its Grandma McFlurry, to ask whether the Grimace Shake is returning. On TikTok, dozens commented on McDonald's most recent video on Thursday to wish the mascot a happy birthday.

McDonald's reaped the success of Grimace's birthday promotion last year, with Gen Zs scrambling to get their hands on his birthday shake so they could join in the viral trend.

"It quickly became one of our most socially engaging campaigns of all time with millions of reactions on our social media posts, a true demonstration of how the power of our brand emerges in organic and creative ways in our fans," McDonald's CFO Ian Borden told investors last year. "It contributed to the strong double-digit comparable sales growth for the quarter in the US."

If McDonald's was hoping it could replicate the success of the Grimace Shake with this summer's Grandma McFlurry — which also plays on feelings of nostalgia — then it's got another thing coming.

• Foot traffic to fast-food chains in California fell in April and May, new data shows.
• McDonald's and Burger King were among the chains to see visits fall. 
• These chains are among those to ahev raised prices to offset the new minimum wage in the state. 

Foot traffic to McDonald's, Burger King, and In-N-Out Burger restaurants in California appeared to fall in the weeks after they raised prices to offset the state's new $20 minimum wage for workers at limited-service restaurants, new data shows.

Since April, year-over-year visit trends to fast-food chains in the Golden State have lagged behind national trends, suggesting that diners could be put off by the higher menu prices, per data from Placer.ai, which tracks foot traffic analytics.

"It's clear that the menu price increase is having an impact," R.J. Hottovy, Placer.ai's head of analytical research, wrote in a report.

According to the data, the year-over-year change in the number of visits to fast-food chains in California across February and March was slightly higher than the national average.

"However, this abruptly shifted when the minimum wage increase went into effect," Hottovy wrote in the report, noting that traffic to fast-food chains in California had been weaker than the national average in seven of the eight weeks in April and May.

Restaurants raised prices to offset the new wage

California raised its minimum wage for workers at limited-service restaurants to $20 an hour on April 1.

The legislation applies to chains with at least 60 locations nationwide and has faced fierce opposition from the fast-food industry.

To offset their higher labor costs, restaurants have raised prices, turned to technology and automation like order kiosks, and considered reducing their opening hours. Some pizza restaurants have even laid off delivery workers.

Year-over-year visits to McDonald's, Burger King, and Wendy's restaurants in California trended well behind the chains' national averages in April and May, according to Placer.ai's data. Jack in the Box and In-N-Out also underperformed on foot traffic in California compared to their national averages, per the data.

A Jack in the Box spokesperson previously told Business Insider that at its company-owned locations in California, it had raised menu prices by between 6% and 8% in response to the minimum wage change. In-N-Out told KTVU that it had raised prices "incrementally" on April 1.

The data has to be taken with a pinch of salt, however.

After all, it only measures footfall, not delivery orders or the size of in-person orders. And there could be other factors, other than menu price increases, deterring diners.

But Placer.ai's research indicates that the legislation does appear to be having at least some impact on the number of customers visiting fast-food spots in the state, especially when restaurant chains are cagey about sharing their own data showing the effects of their price hikes.

The legislation was introduced to help workers cope with the state's rising living costs, though many fast-food franchisees have questioned why the wage only applies to their industry. Some fast-food executives, however, say it could make jobs in the industry more desirable and mean they have better-quality candidates.

Californian residents are divided: Some acknowledge that fast food is a tough gig and support the new minimum wage, while others say it will push prices up too much.

Are you a fast-food worker, franchisee, or restaurant manager in California? Email this reporter at gdean@insider.com.

• The flagship of Donald Trump's private jet fleet is a Boeing 757-200.
• Trump's Boeing 757 is a 30-year-old airliner converted for use as a private jet.
• It's not the most efficient private jet, but it's the perfect flying billboard for the former president.

Whether you love or hate him, there is no arguing Donald Trump's taste in private jets is fantastic. That's because his current flagship is a Boeing 757-200 airliner converted for VIP use.

The 757 is an aircraft without equal. Since its launch in 1982, it's been one of the most capable, versatile, and respected aircraft in the skies.

However, Trump's retrofit of the airliner as a business jet has recently been questioned in an article that turned its nose up at the plane, calling it "crappy" and "dilapidated."

While the article did make some good points — purpose-built business jets have more comfortable cabin pressure and can operate out of smaller airports — the author's disdain for its owner, whom I'm ambivalent toward, bled over into an unnecessarily harsh characterization of the plane.

There's a common saying in the business aviation industry. The private jet isn't a luxury; it's a time machine. The point of a private jet is to save its occupant time and increase their productivity. Time is money, and the time saved by flying private instead of commercial is worth more than the extra cost.

From that perspective, the 757 is probably not the most cost-effective or efficient corporate jet for a globetrotting business mogul. The jet burned through $2.6 million in fuel from 2023 to 2024.

A purpose-built Gulfstream or Bombardier Global are certainly better options. Both are newer, more efficient, and have the range to reach pretty much any destination in the world.

But neither can match the sheer presence and drama of arriving at a destination in a VIP airliner. And they don't look nearly as good behind a campaign stage.

And for a consummate self-promoter like the Donald, there's no better private jet than a three-story tall, 155-foot long, flying billboard covered in the Trump logo.

The marketing and brand value created by the flying billboard trumps the added cost of operating a decades-old airliner, equipped with two bedrooms and a dining room, all lined in 24k gold.

In fact, Trump once said in a documentary that "the plane is very much an extension of the Trump brand," The New York Times reported in 2016.

The jet, dubbed Trump Force One, has been a fixture at campaign stops ahead of the 2016 and 2024 presidential elections.

Trump acquired the 757, registration N757AF, from the late Microsoft cofounder Paul Allen in 2010 to replace his older Boeing 727.

N757AF was originally delivered to the defunct Danish low-cost carrier Sterling Airlines in May 1991. It also briefly flew for the defunct Mexican airline TAESA before the tech billionaire picked it up in 1995.

Even though the aircraft is now well into its 30s, older, well-maintained planes can operate safely and effectively at that age. In fact, according to Airfleets.net, plenty of 757s older than Taylor Swift, born in 1989, are in regular service with airlines and cargo operators like DHL, FedEx, and Delta.

Trump's 757 spent nearly a year in the hangar, receiving a full refurbishment and a new paint job before returning to service in late 2022.

Trump isn't alone in his preference for the VIP airliner, and his 757 is far from the biggest or most over-the-top.

Rapper Drake flies around in an even larger VIP airliner, a 1996 Boeing 767-200 widebody.

The Qatari and Saudi Royal Families both operate private Boeing 747 jumbo jets.

As an airliner, the 757 was a true tweener in Boeing's lineup, a twin-engine, narrow-body airliner that's bigger than your run-of-the-mill 737 but smaller than a widebody like the 787 Dreamliner.

In airline service, the 757-200 has the range and performance to easily brave the headwinds across the Atlantic on long-haul flights from Paris to New York. As a narrow body, it'll happily shuttle passengers on 45-minute flights to smaller airports that don't have the infrastructure to support a widebody.

But what stands out the most about the Boeing 757 is that it's the muscle car of the airline world.

With power from a pair of massively powerful Rolls-Royce RB211 (or Pratt & Whitney PW2000) turbofan engines, each producing upwards of 40,000 lbs of thrust, the Boeing 757 has developed a reputation among pilots for being an aircraft with the grunt to take off from airports in hot weather or at high elevation that would sideline many of its more modern rivals.

But the 757's power and versatility that helped it stand out from the crowd also doomed it. Even during its heyday in the 1980s and '90s, it was ahead of its time and was arguably much more airplane than most airlines needed.

By the early 2000s, a smaller and less capable Boeing 737 or Airbus A321 could handle most of the 757's duties at a lower price.

The availability of cheaper, more efficient alternatives, coupled with sky-high oil prices during the years following 9/11 and an airline industry on financial life support, meant the 757 was a non-starter for carriers.

After years without landing a new order for the plane, Boeing discontinued the 757 in 2004. In total, 1,050 Boeing 757s were produced over 22 years.

The final 757 rolled out of Boeing's Renton, WA factory in October 2004. The aircraft was delivered to Shanghai Airlines in April 2005 and now flies for Delta Air Lines as N823DX.

• Hunter Biden and Donald Trump's convictions may have damaged the US' global brand. 
• Andrew Payne, a foreign policy expert, said they undermined the US' status as a democratic system. 
• Biden's non-pardon of Hunter may benefit his campaign, but US credibility is hurt, said Payne. 

The US' reputation is in tatters, regardless of who takes the Oval Office in January, according to an expert.

With criminal convictions on both sides of the election campaign, it's a lose-lose situation, said Andrew Payne, a foreign policy expert and author of "War on the Ballot: How the Election Cycle Shapes Presidential Decision-Making in War."

On Tuesday, Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, was found guilty of three federal charges related to the purchase of a gun while he was using illegal drugs.

His conviction came less than two weeks after Donald Trump was found guilty of 34 counts related to falsifying business records before the general election in 2016.

Hunter Biden was the first child of a sitting president to be criminally convicted, while Trump was the first US president to be criminally convicted.

Speaking to Business Insider, Payne said the historic convictions have "significantly damaged" the US' reputation on the world stage.

The election won't help save the US' reputation

The presidential candidates had contrasting reactions to their respective convictions. While Trump told reporters that his trial was "rigged," Joe Biden said he would accept the outcome of his son's legal woes.

Trump used the publicity from his trial to capitalize on fundraising opportunities. Shortly after his guilty verdict was announced, his donor website crashed, a spokesperson wrote on X.

Members of the Trump campaign who spoke to The New York Times said they hoped Hunter Biden would be acquitted during his trial, as it would prove the narrative that Trump was a victim of political persecution — and would likely raise millions of dollars from supporters.

John Zogby, a veteran pollster, told The Guardian that Hunter Biden's guilty verdict could be a "marginal political gain" for the president and that his decision not to pardon his son will be seen positively.

"It pulls the rug out from under that Republican argument that the justice system is rigged against Republicans to get Trump … a Biden did not get a pass," Zogby said.

Hunter Biden's conviction may be slightly beneficial to his father's campaign, though it will not "move mountains," Zogby said.

In contrast, it's likely to further damage the US' reputation, which took a significant hit when Trump was convicted, Payne said.

"It is hardly a ringing endorsement of the health of democracy in the United States that allegations of the politicization of the judicial system or questions about candidates' commitment to the rule of law feature so prominently in the campaign," Payne told BI.

If Biden is elected, he may attempt to rebuild the US as "an example of a country where no one is above the law," Payne said. But as the president's approval rating reached a record low this week, his future in The White House is unknown.

On Monday, FiveThirtyEight's weighted tracker recorded a 37.4% approval rating for Biden, compared to 41.6% for Trump. Neither candidate is considered hugely popular, with an April Pew Research Centre survey showing that 49% of voters would replace both candidates if they could.

This will make the upcoming election particularly difficult to call.

"Even if Trump isn't elected, when you have one of the two major presidential candidates and someone who is a former president who carries a criminal conviction, it kind of undermines your case that the democratic system is superior," Payne said.

"So there's a big undermining of the US brand, irrespective of whoever is elected in November," he added.

Representatives for The White House and the respective Biden and Trump campaigns did not immediately respond to requests for comment.