Zone1 A little common sense and less blood thirst.....maybe? The Ball Room

[justoffal]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

There's no way you can secure a rented space the way you can secure a dedicated structure built for that purpose. It's just not possible. Take a Hotel conference room for instance....there's always someone who knows the ins and outs, the back doors, the hidden comparmtnets, the structural flaws, better than the people coming in to rent the place. It would literally take a month of studying the structure and the surroundings includning the below gound access to be sure that they had it all conrrect and even then it's not going to be maximized for security.

Now then, let's take a building that is built from the ground up specifically to protect the President and whoever else may be a target for Political reasons....After Trump there will be others who will benefit from this building. With the blueprints available to the Secret Service....with built in surveillance....with built in station posts for armed agents....with all the modern gadgets that affiliate with high security including a tediously mamaged entry and exit system....there's no way you can hope to match it with a rented space.

Dudes.....this just makes sense....it makes HUGE sense and it is very hard to deny it.

JO

 

[Dragonlady]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

There's no way you can secure a rented space the way you can secure a dedicated structure built for that purpose. It's just not possible. Take a Hotel conference room for instance....there's always someone who knows the ins and outs, the back doors, the hidden comparmtnets, the structural flaws, better than the people coming in to rent the place. It would literally take a month of studying the structure and the surroundings includning the below gound access to be sure that they had it all conrrect and even then it's not going to be maximized for security.

Now then, let's take a building that is built from the ground up specifically to protect the President and whoever else may be a target for Political reasons....After Trump there will be others who will benefit from this building. With the blueprints available to the Secret Service....with built in surveillance....with built in station posts for armed agents....with all the modern gadgets that affiliate with high security including a tediously mamaged entry and exit system....there's no way you can hope to match it with a rented space.

Dudes.....this just makes sense....it makes HUGE sense and it is very hard to deny it.

JO

It's very easy to deny because it's all unnecessary and there is no point to it.

When has the current security in the White House been insufficient to protect the President?

What is Trump afraid is going to happen to the President in the White House that requires a nuclear bomb resistant bunker and underground "command facility" for the White House?

 

[justoffal]

It's very easy to deny because it's all unnecessary and there is no point to it.

When has the current security in the White House been insufficient to protect the President?

What is Trump afraid is going to happen to the President in the White House that requires a nuclear bomb resistant bunker and underground "command facility" for the White House?

Nope.... Stop arguing something just for the sake of arguing because you look like a jackass.

Anyone will tell you that a dedicated building built specifically for security is 100% better than a rented space trying to be converted to a security space.

This is just common sense it's not even politics.

 

[candycorn]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

There's no way you can secure a rented space the way you can secure a dedicated structure built for that purpose. It's just not possible. Take a Hotel conference room for instance....there's always someone who knows the ins and outs, the back doors, the hidden comparmtnets, the structural flaws, better than the people coming in to rent the place. It would literally take a month of studying the structure and the surroundings includning the below gound access to be sure that they had it all conrrect and even then it's not going to be maximized for security.

Now then, let's take a building that is built from the ground up specifically to protect the President and whoever else may be a target for Political reasons....After Trump there will be others who will benefit from this building. With the blueprints available to the Secret Service....with built in surveillance....with built in station posts for armed agents....with all the modern gadgets that affiliate with high security including a tediously mamaged entry and exit system....there's no way you can hope to match it with a rented space.

Dudes.....this just makes sense....it makes HUGE sense and it is very hard to deny it.

JO

As long as every event the president wants to attend is being held at the White House...you have a point.

The WHCD won’t have their event there....the other time a registered republican tried to kill the blob,it was at one of those rallies and the blob wasn’t President then....

If you’re going to talk about common sense, perhaps instill some in your OP.

 

[hadit]

It's very easy to deny because it's all unnecessary and there is no point to it.

When has the current security in the White House been insufficient to protect the President?

What is Trump afraid is going to happen to the President in the White House that requires a nuclear bomb resistant bunker and underground "command facility" for the White House?

We're talking about state events, not daily life in the White House. You do see the difference, right?

 

[WorldWatcher]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

There's no way you can secure a rented space the way you can secure a dedicated structure built for that purpose. It's just not possible. Take a Hotel conference room for instance....there's always someone who knows the ins and outs, the back doors, the hidden comparmtnets, the structural flaws, better than the people coming in to rent the place. It would literally take a month of studying the structure and the surroundings includning the below gound access to be sure that they had it all conrrect and even then it's not going to be maximized for security.

Now then, let's take a building that is built from the ground up specifically to protect the President and whoever else may be a target for Political reasons....After Trump there will be others who will benefit from this building. With the blueprints available to the Secret Service....with built in surveillance....with built in station posts for armed agents....with all the modern gadgets that affiliate with high security including a tediously mamaged entry and exit system....there's no way you can hope to match it with a rented space.

Dudes.....this just makes sense....it makes HUGE sense and it is very hard to deny it.

JO

Fine.

Do it the proper way.

Through Congress and not via bribes - ahhh - "Donations".

WW

 

[candycorn]

We're talking about state events, not daily life in the White House. You do see the difference, right?

The facilities were fine for what, 60 years? Suddenly they need to be tripled in size? Nope.

That being said, presidents have changed stuff in the white house often. So I say let the little boy have his toy. We'll just correct the error when he leaves. Too much has been made of this.

 

[hadit]

The facilities were fine for what, 60 years? Suddenly they need to be tripled in size? Nope.

What facilities? We don't have a permanent structure for these kinds of events, and given the current state of violence on the far left, we need something we can better secure.

That being said, presidents have changed stuff in the white house often. So I say let the little boy have his toy. We'll just correct the error when he leaves. Too much has been made of this.

Sure, give the taxpayers a massive bill for demolishing something that works very well just so you can have your little temper tantrum.

 

[MostBoringManInTheWorld]

How come the OP isn't the head of Trump's security detail?

 

[toobfreak]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

Dude, the last thing democrats are interested in is creating more secure spaces for Trump to hold banquets and funding drives! They're trying to kill the guy. They want to dance on his coffin.

 

[Care4all]

It doesn't matter if you can't stand the guy.....that's your right. But he's right about this thing.....so you don't like lavish? OK...that's reasonable but let's look at this for a minute from the logistics angle.

There's no way you can secure a rented space the way you can secure a dedicated structure built for that purpose. It's just not possible. Take a Hotel conference room for instance....there's always someone who knows the ins and outs, the back doors, the hidden comparmtnets, the structural flaws, better than the people coming in to rent the place. It would literally take a month of studying the structure and the surroundings includning the below gound access to be sure that they had it all conrrect and even then it's not going to be maximized for security.

Now then, let's take a building that is built from the ground up specifically to protect the President and whoever else may be a target for Political reasons....After Trump there will be others who will benefit from this building. With the blueprints available to the Secret Service....with built in surveillance....with built in station posts for armed agents....with all the modern gadgets that affiliate with high security including a tediously mamaged entry and exit system....there's no way you can hope to match it with a rented space.

Dudes.....this just makes sense....it makes HUGE sense and it is very hard to deny it.

JO

uhhhhh
The correspondence dinner has about 2500 guests each year, the new ballroom maximum guests is 999.

 

[Care4all]

Dude, the last thing democrats are interested in is creating more secure spaces for Trump to hold banquets and funding drives! They're trying to kill the guy. They want to dance on his coffin.

How many attacks did the east wing banquets have over the century? Zero....why isn't that already, secure enough?

 

[MostBoringManInTheWorld]

They should change the name of the White House Ballroom to the White House No Balls Room.

 

[toobfreak]

They should change the name of the White House Ballroom to the White House No Balls Room.

Could you possibly settle for the House with no Room for White Balls?

 

[candycorn]

What facilities? We don't have a permanent structure for these kinds of events, and given the current state of violence on the far left, we need something we can better secure.

Sure, give the taxpayers a massive bill for demolishing something that works very well just so you can have your little temper tantrum.

We've had state dinners at the White House since (at least) the 1960's.

 

[hadit]

We've had state dinners at the White House since (at least) the 1960's.

And why then did we need a tent and porta-potties, or to rent out a hotel?

 

[candycorn]

And why then did we need a tent and porta-potties, or to rent out a hotel?

Because your blob destroyed the ballroom we had.

 

[hadit]

Because your blob destroyed the ballroom we had.

Nope, try again without your knee-jerk blob nonsense. We've been using tents for decades.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Dude, the last thing democrats are interested in is creating more secure spaces for Trump to hold banquets and funding drives! They're trying to kill the guy. They want to dance on his coffin.

LOL,

The ballroom isn't projected to be completed until 2028 just before he leaves office.

The ballroom has nothing to do with Trumps safety.

WW

 

[justoffal]

Dude, the last thing democrats are interested in is creating more secure spaces for Trump to hold banquets and funding drives! They're trying to kill the guy. They want to dance on his coffin.

Yeah I know it....crazy stuff