Trump sparks outrage from MAGA loyalists over Qatar jet gift as base fractures over foreign ties

A political storm has erupted inside Donald Trump’s own base after reports surfaced that the former president is planning to accept a $400 million luxury jet from Qatar, a gift that critics argue threatens to shatter his America First image and stain his second-term ambitions.

The backlash, growing more intense by the hour, has not come from traditional Trump opponents or the mainstream press, but from high-profile MAGA voices who now accuse him of hypocrisy, dangerous foreign entanglements, and abandoning the nationalist principles that fueled his rise.

The jet, dubbed by some as a “sky palace,” has become the symbol of a rapidly spiraling controversy that has split Trump’s staunchest defenders. Among the loudest critics is right-wing firebrand Laura Loomer, who, despite her previously unwavering loyalty to Trump, warned that this move could tarnish his administration permanently.

Loomer, known for her over-the-top rhetoric and extreme devotion to Trump, declared on Sunday that she would take a bullet for him twice—but even she had to draw a line.

“We cannot accept a $400 million ‘gift’ from jihadists in suits,” Loomer wrote on X. Her words echoed a broader concern emerging within conservative circles: that Qatar’s ties to Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran make it an untrustworthy source of goodwill, especially for a leader who has so closely aligned himself with Israel and anti-terror platforms.

Qatar, long viewed with suspicion by pro-Israel conservatives, allowed senior Hamas figures to operate from its capital, Doha, until late 2024. For many MAGA influencers, the idea that the same country once accused of funding anti-American proxies would now offer such a lavish gift to their movement’s figurehead is nothing short of betrayal.

Fox News commentator Mark Levin joined Loomer in condemning the reported arrangement. Rather than remaining silent or offering a tempered analysis, Levin simply quote-tweeted Loomer’s post with a single word: “Ditto.” This brief but forceful signal marked a rare moment of public dissent against Trump from one of his most trusted media defenders.

Even more striking, Levin’s statement appeared to conflict with the messaging from his own network, which has circulated Trump’s denials and attempts to brush aside criticism.

Adding to the chorus of concern was Ben Shapiro, the Daily Wire founder and longtime conservative voice, who dedicated a significant portion of his podcast to slamming the proposal. Shapiro, whose past support for Trump has wavered depending on the issue, drew a sharp moral and ideological boundary on this one.

"Taking sacks of goodies from people who support Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, Al Jazeera, all the rest—that’s not America first," Shapiro said. His remarks weren’t veiled or qualified. They cut directly to the heart of the issue: that accepting gifts from a foreign state known to back hostile groups runs directly counter to the foundational values of the MAGA movement.

Shapiro then challenged Trump’s supporters to reflect on what America First truly means. "If you want President Trump to succeed, this kind of skeezy stuff needs to stop," he declared, sounding more like an exasperated parent than a partisan ally.

Outside of the big names, lesser-known MAGA users on X also joined in the criticism, though their tone tended more toward concern than outright condemnation. Some suggested that the real issue wasn’t constitutional or legal, but national security. One user warned that the jet could be compromised, a Trojan horse of sorts from a country with deep ties to U.S. adversaries.

“I don’t trust Iran and I don’t trust Hamas,” user @jessalanfields posted. “I don’t trust their ally, Qatar, who has given Hamas nearly $2 billion.” She continued by questioning the wisdom of letting Trump anywhere near a Qatari aircraft, citing the national security implications as potentially catastrophic.

Among those echoing the same fear was Marina Medvin, a pro-Trump lawyer who previously defended January 6 defendants. Medvin’s position was particularly notable because of her staunch defense of the MAGA cause. “I miss the old Trump, the one that was cautious of and critical of Qatar,” she wrote, signaling that this decision marked a clear departure from the Trump she once trusted.

Another MAGA voice questioned the geopolitical logic of the deal by comparing it to previous attacks on Democrats. In 2023, Representative Ilhan Omar came under fire from the right for attending the World Cup in Qatar. Many on the right accused her of being a foreign agent or at least a beneficiary of Qatari influence.

Now, those same critics are struggling to reconcile how Trump could accept something exponentially more valuable—a custom aircraft valued at nearly half a billion dollars—from the same regime. “Why would Qatar both fund Ilhan Omar and gift a $400 million plane to President Trump?” asked user @EYakoby. “The Qataris are Jihadists in fancy suits.”

Beyond the political optics, the legal questions surrounding the reported jet offer are just as explosive. The U.S. Constitution’s Emoluments Clause explicitly forbids federal officials from accepting gifts of value from foreign governments without the consent of Congress.

During Trump’s first term, Democrats raised concerns over foreign leaders staying at Trump-owned hotels, arguing that such transactions amounted to indirect foreign payments. While those charges were ultimately brushed aside, they pale in comparison to a direct $400 million gift of luxury aircraft.

Trump, for his part, has offered a mixture of denial and justification. He told reporters, “I would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer. I mean, I could be a stupid person and say, ‘No, we don’t want a free, very expensive airplane.’

But it was—I thought it was a great gesture.” He then pivoted by claiming that the aircraft would not be for his personal use, but rather a donation to the U.S. Department of Defense. However, that narrative quickly unraveled when he added that the jet would be decommissioned and handed over to a future Trump presidential library, casting doubt on whether the gift was meant for national use or personal legacy.

Constitutional experts are not persuaded by Trump’s rationalization. Richard Painter, a former White House ethics lawyer and now a professor at the University of Minnesota, offered a stark warning. “This is a classic example of what the founders worried about,” Painter said in a statement to AP News.

“But I don’t think the founders anticipated it would get this bad.” His concern, shared by several other legal scholars, is that Trump’s interpretation of what qualifies as a personal versus public gift is at best self-serving and at worst, dangerously misleading.

What’s particularly unique about this scandal is the identity of the opposition. In the past, Trump has weathered storms of criticism from Democrats, the media, and left-wing activists. But this controversy is different. The loudest voices calling him out now are those who once defended him most fervently.

The accusations don’t center on liberal ideals or progressive policies. They focus on betrayal—on Trump abandoning the very principles his movement was built upon.

For a movement forged in rejection of globalism and rooted in fierce loyalty to the idea of America First, the symbolism of accepting a gift from a regime tied to America’s enemies is proving to be a bridge too far. Whether this moment becomes a turning point or just another flash of dissent quickly buried beneath Trump’s media dominance remains unclear. But the cracks are visible, and this time they’re coming from within the MAGA house.