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

[1srelluc]

We can only hope.

Hey!

 

[Greenbeard]

Moron.

Public corruption is bad.

 

[j-mac]

Hey!

Come on, everyone knows that anything north of Richmond is utterly useless…Hell, maybe even Richmond now.

 

[j-mac]

Public corruption is bad.

Building a structure is corruption now?

 

[Greenbeard]

Building a structure is corruption now?

No, soliciting bribes is corruption. Public structures are built with public dollars, no bribery or money laundering required.

 

[rightwinger]

How about we don’t need a freaking ballroom that seats 1300 people?

 

[j-mac]

No, soliciting bribes is corruption. Public structures are built with public dollars, no bribery or money laundering required.

Except you have no proof of any of that.

 

[j-mac]

How about we don’t need a freaking ballroom that seats 1300 people?

Sure, tents are good enough right?

 

[Hollie]

How exciting, I'm so happy for you. But I'm sure you once had a life, what happened to you?

^^^^ coming from a groupie of a failed monarchy.

 

[Hollie]

Sure, tents are good enough right?

Tents and porta- potties.

 

[Blaster]

The ballroom will be built eventually.

 

[rightwinger]

And it looks like we're getting it via private donations.

Are those making donations deducting them as a charitable contribution?
So that would be 37 percent paid by taxpayers

 

[berg80]

The overblown childishness that he needs to get permission from Congress to build the ballroom—under which there will be doomsday bunkers for the president, his family, and other officials—is on its face basically absurd and definitely politically motivated.

Whatever design features were added to the structure in order to try to justify its construction, they will never excuse the demolition of an over century old building of historical significance.

Congressional Authorization Required: U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the project is too transformative to the White House to be completed without congressional approval, noting that "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."

Even if congressional approval wasn't required, why would any prez go ahead with construction of a project that will radically alter the architecture of the WH without it?

 

[Hollie]

Are those making donations deducting them as a charitable contribution?
So that would be 37 percent paid by taxpayers

How much did the magic Kenyan’s basketball courts cost taxpayers ?

 

[Greenbeard]

Except you have no proof of any of that.

What do you mean? Congress appropriated no money for this, Trump tore the White House to shake down billionaires and corporate donors. This is not secret, he hasn't concealed that this "project" just consists of rich people depositing money directly into Trump's pocket.

 

[Hollie]

Whatever design features were added to the structure in order to try to justify its construction, they will never excuse the demolition of an over century old building of historical significance.

Congressional Authorization Required: U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the project is too transformative to the White House to be completed without congressional approval, noting that "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."

Even if congressional approval wasn't required, why would any prez go ahead with construction of a project that will radically alter the architecture of the WH without it?

“Whatever design features were added to the structure in order to try to justify its construction, they will never excuse the demolition of an over century old building of historical significance.”

‘…… because I say so”

 

[justoffal]

Whatever design features were added to the structure in order to try to justify its construction, they will never excuse the demolition of an over century old building of historical significance.

Congressional Authorization Required: U.S. District Judge Richard Leon ruled that the project is too transformative to the White House to be completed without congressional approval, noting that "no statute comes close to giving the President the authority he claims to have."

Even if congressional approval wasn't required, why would any prez go ahead with construction of a project that will radically alter the architecture of the WH without it?

I have to admit the demolition of the old building was a Kamikaze approach.... The damnableness of the whole thing of course is that you can't put the old building back together. I'm sure the planners were well aware of that when they started this project. Can't say I particularly like that approach but I also don't like the fact that foreign dignitaries have had to use porta potties at White House events.

 

[Hollie]

What do you mean? Congress appropriated no money for this, Trump tore the White House to shake down billionaires and corporate donors. This is not secret, he hasn't concealed that this "project" just consists of rich people depositing money directly into Trump's pocket.

What money is going into Trump’s pocket?

Anything other than your goofy conspiracy theory to support that?

 

[Greenbeard]

What money is going into Trump’s pocket?

All the money, this entire project is under the table with no public sanction or funds attached. How much of the funds he's shaking down he contributes to filling in the hole he carved in the White House lawn is left entirely to his discretion.

 

[j-mac]

What do you mean? Congress appropriated no money for this, Trump tore the White House to shake down billionaires and corporate donors. This is not secret, he hasn't concealed that this "project" just consists of rich people depositing money directly into Trump's pocket.

To build the structure dumb ass.