Let's face it: there's no good reason to deny the construction of the ballroom.

[justoffal]

• Legal Challenge: The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit challenging the demolition of the East Wing and the construction of the ballroom, arguing it violates federal law.
• Administration Argument: The Trump administration argues that the project is a "national security necessity" for the safety of the President and staff, rather than a mere cosmetic change, in a push to continue construction.

You understand the claims that the ballroom is a national security necessity is just a deceitful maneuver to get around congressional approval, right? Or are you more gullible than I thought?

The building is not coming back. I suppose if they want to prosecute Trump for destroying property they can give it a try but good luck.
If the updated security bunker underneath is much larger than the one that's already there it's going to need a roof. No one can ***** about the money because it was donated. The ballroom is a very good idea something that should have been done decades ago frankly.
If the ballroom is the roof of the new security bunker Trump probably has an argument that no one wants to deal with....

 

[mudwhistle]

"Private donations" are the exact reason why the construction of the ballroom should NOT proceed. There is no record of who gave what amounts, nor is there a requirement for an audit of the funds. This is the "Inauguration Fund" debacle all over again, and there has NEVER been an accounting or an audit of what happened to that money.

Who are these "donors" and what are they getting in return for their bribe money??? We will never know.

Well you're obviously dumb as a stump.

Took me 30 seconds to find this list of donors:

Meet all 37 White House ballroom donors funding the $300 million build, including Silicon Valley tech giants, crypto bros and the Lutnicks | Fortune

The list, reviewed by Fortune, did not mention specific dollar amounts offered by each contributor.

fortune.com

 

[WorldWatcher]

Historical record is that no president has ever needed congressional approval when it is privately funded.

I'd like to see it built if possible using creamsicle orange marble with white swirls running through it, kinda like Trump's tan.

They can call it the orange room.

When has a President destroyed an entire wing of the White House and used private funds to build it without the consent of Congress?

WW

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

There is already a bunker under the White House for over 50 years

.

Look for key words.






.

 

[justoffal]

Well you're obviously dumb as a stump.

Took me 30 seconds to find this list of donors:

Meet all 37 White House ballroom donors funding the $300 million build, including Silicon Valley tech giants, crypto bros and the Lutnicks | Fortune

The list, reviewed by Fortune, did not mention specific dollar amounts offered by each contributor.

fortune.com

I didn't bother because you're speaking to someone who's going to argue with anything that Trump does no matter what it is. There will always be something wrong with what he does whether it's accept private donations or reject them whether it's build the ballroom or not. Whether he speaks or remains silent... None of it matters he's just 100% wrong 100% of the time and she is 100% offended 100% of the time for 100% no good reason at all. If it's even a she that is.

The government has a process for accepting private donations.... Once they are turned over they become government property.