The billion dollar ballroom
-
This would be unbelievable if it weren't so predictable
-
For the millionth time... he gets away with stuff that would tank other presidents. Like every week there is a once-in-a-decade Watergate level scandal that doesn't even make headline news.
In this case... imagine a West Wing episode where the President decides to spend a billion dollars on a gold ballroom while many in the country are hurting economically. It would be political suicide.
-
It's probably not true. A tasteful, non-bombastic pitch to the American people for a white house renovation to add a venue for large events, for the cost of a rounding error, could easily pass by unnoticed in an administration with good will from the public and media.
-
A U.S. Senate official on Saturday removed security funding that could be used for President Donald Trump's planned White House ballroom from a massive spending package, Democratic lawmakers said, imperiling Republican efforts to devote taxpayer money to the contentious project.
The decision by the Senate's parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, deals a blow to Trump and his administration, which has sought the money for security purposes related to the ballroom.
Trump has said the construction of the ballroom would be funded by $400 million in private donations. But Senate Republicans are seeking $1 billion in taxpayer funding to the Secret Service for security upgrades to the ballroom and other structures being built beneath it.
and
MacDonough ruled that the security funding provision falls under chamber rules that require 60 votes to pass most legislation, according to the office of Senator Jeff Merkley, the top Democrat on the Senate Budget Committee.
-
As far as I know the president did not request any of this, it just popped up as a reaction to the hotel debacle. The Senate GOP added it and I seriously doubt a billion dollars could be spent on the ballroom security alone. I suspect it was to beef up security for the president in other ways as well, which in not a bad idea.
But I suppose if one's bent its toward cheap dunks this is suitable fodder.
-
As far as I know the president did not request any of this, it just popped up as a reaction to the hotel debacle. The Senate GOP added it and I seriously doubt a billion dollars could be spent on the ballroom security alone. I suspect it was to beef up security for the president in other ways as well, which in not a bad idea.
But I suppose if one's bent its toward cheap dunks this is suitable fodder.
As far as I know the president did not request any of this, it just popped up as a reaction to the hotel debacle. The Senate GOP added it and I seriously doubt a billion dollars could be spent on the ballroom security alone. I suspect it was to beef up security for the president in other ways as well, which in not a bad idea.
But I suppose if one's bent its toward cheap dunks this is suitable fodder.
If one's bent is toward cheap dunks I'd humbly suggest that one is rather spoilt for choice at the moment.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login