So what if it comes on the bone-spurred heels of Trump buying a luxury golf resort in Qatar? So what if its legality was approved by Qatar’s former $100,000 per month lobbyist, now Attorney General of the United States? After all, it’s free and isn’t that what really matters?

So the fact that the Defense Department is getting a GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE, of a 747 aircraft to replace the 40 year old Air Force One, temporarily, in a very public and transparent transaction, so bothers the Crooked Democrats that they insist we pay, TOP DOLLAR, for the plane.…

— Donald J. Trump Posts From His Truth Social (@TrumpDailyPosts) May 12, 2025

The way this is supposed to work is that a Boeing 747-8 Jumbo Jet, described as a flying palace, will be given to the defense department to serve as the new and improved Air Force 1 and, after completion of his term of office, will be transferred to the Trump Presidential Library and Market, where he would then might be permitted to use it because, well, he’s Trump. And as emphatically noted, it’s a “GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE,” which pretty much sums up all relevant concerns from the White House, other than what he might have mentioned when he earlier toured the plane.

Trump had previously toured the plane, which is so opulently configured it is known as “a flying palace,” while it was parked at the West Palm Beach International Airport in February.

What would a Qatari royal do when the president says “nice plane you got here”? There are, of course, some security concerns involved, such as the outside possibility that there might be a bug or two built in, or perhaps a small explosive device should the royals be annoyed. But the defense department will inspect the plane to be sure it’s safe and silent when it’s outfitted to be AF1 with the requisite Trump gold-plated toilets. If you can’t trust Hegseth to make sure the plane is operationally secure, who can you trust?

But is it legal?

One might think this gift raises legal issues. Administration lawyers apparently have those bases covered:

sources told ABC News that lawyers for the White House counsel’s office and the Department of Justice drafted an analysis for Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth concluding that is legal for the Department of Defense to accept the aircraft as a gift and later turn it over to the Trump library, and that it does not violate laws against bribery or the Constitution’s prohibition (the emoluments clause) of any U.S. government official accepting gifts “from any King, Prince or foreign State.”

Sources told ABC News that Attorney General Pam Bondi and Trump’s top White House lawyer David Warrington concluded it would be “legally permissible” for the donation of the aircraft to be conditioned on transferring its ownership to Trump’s presidential library before the end of his term, according to sources familiar with their determination. . . .

Both the White House and DOJ concluded that because the gift is not conditioned on any official act, it does not constitute bribery, the sources said. Bondi’s legal analysis also says it does not run afoul of the Constitution’s prohibition on foreign gifts because the plane is not being given to an individual, but rather to the United States Air Force and, eventually, to the presidential library foundation, the sources said.

And, indeed, it would appear on the surface to have been structured in such a way as to circumvent the Emoluments Clause and not constitute a bribe, it’s value notwithstanding and the lack of an explicit quid pro quo, even though Qatar has not been shy about offering money for influence.

One might also think a gift of this sort could raise security concerns, particularly given the Qatari government’s efforts to influence U.S. policy (and universities). Apparently such concerns will be addressed when the plane is modified to meet the requirements for presidential use.

And did I mention it’s a “GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE,” which has always been Trump’s favorite price?

It would appear, from a technical perspective, that the legal analysis may be correct. It’s not a gift to Trump, personally, even if he gets to use it both as president and, afterward, as beneficiary of his presidential library’s largesse. It’s unseemly as can be, but unseemly doesn’t make it unlawful. And, to be fair, contributions to president’s inauguration and library are similarly unseemly when it comes to the appearance of buying influence and a dinner in the White House, winter or summer, or buy a few million dollars worth of $Trump meme coins.

What distinguishes this “gift” is both the face value of it, which suggests that Qatar isn’t gifting Trump a plane because he’s such a cool guy to whom royals just want to give stuff, and that despite any refitting to turn it into Air Force 1, it exposes huge security risks that are unlikely to be overcome no matter what.

Perhaps the most underdiscussed aspect of his gift is its opulence, that it’s a flying palace if not a flying Emolument Clause. Granted, Trump has already redecorated the Oval Office in early bordello, adding gold doodads to the room reminiscent of one of the Kings Louis more than George Washington. Should president’s be flying in palaces? Is there nothing that says “I am a servant of the people” more than opulence? Then again, given the tastes of a guy whose toilets are gold-plated, perhaps we should be happy that he has yet to paint pubic hair on statues. And after all, it’s a “GIFT, FREE OF CHARGE,” and isn’t that what really matters?