Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, George J. Mitchell, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, Anthony Weiner, Eric Schmidt, Henry Kissinger, Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson, David Copperfield, Naomi Campbell, Alec Baldwin, Leonardo DiCaprio, Cameron Diaz, Gigi Hadid, Ralph Fiennes, Uma Thurman, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner, Jean-Luc Brunel
There are any number of reasons why people may be upset about the ballroom construction and changes Trump has made.
Trump originally promised that the new structure would be next to the existing structures and nothing would be torn down. Obviously, that was a lie.
A lot of people have questioned whether the existing structure could be modified without any study or architectural review -- let alone demolishing an entire wing. They're wondering what happened to art, was asbestos remediated, etc. They consider it the "people's house" and there doesn't appear to have been any studies or reviews from outside parties.
Some people are upset at the lack of transparency into the funds, wondering if this is another Trump corruption scheme where he's selling influence.
There probably other thing as well.
All that to say, this is nothing like whatever Bush approved and Obama implemented. So your "but Obama" argument falls really flat.
More TDS. Classic keyboard architect response. Did you forget I am an architect/ developer and Ivy League trained? All of what you say is nonsense because it is required to obtain permits. Your sense of things is adolescent at best.
The White House is maintained by the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) — a professional federal agency that handles engineering, historical preservation, asbestos abatement, and structural reviews. Unlike a public renovation project, these studies are mostly internal for security reasons, so the public doesn’t see the reports.
Asbestos remediation: mandatory for federal construction; the AOC wouldn’t skip that.
Art and historical objects: the White House has museum-grade protocols, curated and moved for any construction.
Calling it “the people’s house” is rhetorical — the White House isn’t a community center; decisions are made by professionals and Congress.
All major federal spending must be approved and accounted for by Congress. It isn’t a private corporation where he could secretly “sell influence.” Claims of corruption are speculation, not evidence. Suggesting this without proof is just the internet’s default outrage mode. Do you have any proof, Nancy?
“nothing like Bush/Obama” argument is cherry-picked. Most White House renovations (Truman, Kennedy, Clinton, Obama) involve internal changes, modernization, and some temporary relocations, which are invisible to the public. The outrage isn’t about the scale, it’s about visibility — which is not a fair comparison.
You guys whine about nothing.
If there is an argument about anything, and this should be your side's argument because it is hard to debate against, is the aesthetics/ intrusive design to a historical application. All of the other nonsense you people are crying about aside, the design could be argued that it lacks hierarchy and possibly overshadows the White House to some degree as it may be over-scaled.
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS shows you are more of an idiot than I have ever thought anyone could be. You're forgetting that your DILF did what he did to the East Wing without even telling the AOC. And you call others clueless.
More TDS. Classic keyboard architect response. Did you forget I am an architect/ developer and Ivy League trained? All of what you say is nonsense because it is required to obtain permits. Your sense of things is adolescent at best.
The White House is maintained by the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) — a professional federal agency that handles engineering, historical preservation, asbestos abatement, and structural reviews. Unlike a public renovation project, these studies are mostly internal for security reasons, so the public doesn’t see the reports.
Asbestos remediation: mandatory for federal construction; the AOC wouldn’t skip that.
Art and historical objects: the White House has museum-grade protocols, curated and moved for any construction.
Calling it “the people’s house” is rhetorical — the White House isn’t a community center; decisions are made by professionals and Congress.
All major federal spending must be approved and accounted for by Congress. It isn’t a private corporation where he could secretly “sell influence.” Claims of corruption are speculation, not evidence. Suggesting this without proof is just the internet’s default outrage mode. Do you have any proof, Nancy?
“nothing like Bush/Obama” argument is cherry-picked. Most White House renovations (Truman, Kennedy, Clinton, Obama) involve internal changes, modernization, and some temporary relocations, which are invisible to the public. The outrage isn’t about the scale, it’s about visibility — which is not a fair comparison.
You guys whine about nothing.
If there is an argument about anything, and this should be your side's argument because it is hard to debate against, is the aesthetics/ intrusive design to a historical application. All of the other nonsense you people are crying about aside, the design could be argued that it lacks hierarchy and possibly overshadows the White House to some degree as it may be over-scaled.
TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS TDS shows you are more of an idiot than I have ever thought anyone could be. You're forgetting that your DILF did what he did to the East Wing without even telling the AOC. And you call others clueless.
The White House itself is maintained by the Executive Residence staff and the White House Curator.
Major structural work or renovations (like the East Wing or a new ballroom) often involve internal teams and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) for building permits and federal oversight.
The Architect of the Capitol is generally not involved in White House construction. They might consult if a project impacts adjacent Capitol-owned property, but for internal White House renovations, they’re not the approving authority.
The White House itself is maintained by the Executive Residence staff and the White House Curator.
Major structural work or renovations (like the East Wing or a new ballroom) often involve internal teams and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) for building permits and federal oversight.
The Architect of the Capitol is generally not involved in White House construction. They might consult if a project impacts adjacent Capitol-owned property, but for internal White House renovations, they’re not the approving authority.
Destruction of government property comes with a ten year prison sentence.
Nate Silver??? He's inaccurate with a far left bias. You have got to do better than posting his garbage. C'mon man.
At the risk of repetition: I defy you to produce ANY averager of polls that has his approval numbers at their highest ever.
In fact, I'll go farther: I defy you to pick any two polls of your choice that show he currently has "approval numbers at their highest ever." Many or most polls had him with 50+% percent approval, immediately post-inauguration; now many or most have him underwater.
Shoot, I'll go even farther: Find ONE poll of your choice that has him NOW with his highest approval numbers ever. If you can, I'll donate $100 to the charity of your choice. Fair?
The White House itself is maintained by the Executive Residence staff and the White House Curator.
Major structural work or renovations (like the East Wing or a new ballroom) often involve internal teams and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) for building permits and federal oversight.
The Architect of the Capitol is generally not involved in White House construction. They might consult if a project impacts adjacent Capitol-owned property, but for internal White House renovations, they’re not the approving authority.
The NCPC says they have not issued any permits nor did they approve demolition of the East Wing.
There are any number of reasons why people may be upset about the ballroom construction and changes Trump has made.
Trump originally promised that the new structure would be next to the existing structures and nothing would be torn down. Obviously, that was a lie.
A lot of people have questioned whether the existing structure could be modified without any study or architectural review -- let alone demolishing an entire wing. They're wondering what happened to art, was asbestos remediated, etc. They consider it the "people's house" and there doesn't appear to have been any studies or reviews from outside parties.
Some people are upset at the lack of transparency into the funds, wondering if this is another Trump corruption scheme where he's selling influence.
There probably other thing as well.
All that to say, this is nothing like whatever Bush approved and Obama implemented. So your "but Obama" argument falls really flat.
More TDS. Classic keyboard architect response. Did you forget I am an architect/ developer and Ivy League trained? All of what you say is nonsense because it is required to obtain permits. Your sense of things is adolescent at best.
The White House is maintained by the Architect of the Capitol (AOC) — a professional federal agency that handles engineering, historical preservation, asbestos abatement, and structural reviews. Unlike a public renovation project, these studies are mostly internal for security reasons, so the public doesn’t see the reports.
Asbestos remediation: mandatory for federal construction; the AOC wouldn’t skip that.
Art and historical objects: the White House has museum-grade protocols, curated and moved for any construction.
Calling it “the people’s house” is rhetorical — the White House isn’t a community center; decisions are made by professionals and Congress.
All major federal spending must be approved and accounted for by Congress. It isn’t a private corporation where he could secretly “sell influence.” Claims of corruption are speculation, not evidence. Suggesting this without proof is just the internet’s default outrage mode. Do you have any proof, Nancy?
“nothing like Bush/Obama” argument is cherry-picked. Most White House renovations (Truman, Kennedy, Clinton, Obama) involve internal changes, modernization, and some temporary relocations, which are invisible to the public. The outrage isn’t about the scale, it’s about visibility — which is not a fair comparison.
You guys whine about nothing.
If there is an argument about anything, and this should be your side's argument because it is hard to debate against, is the aesthetics/ intrusive design to a historical application. All of the other nonsense you people are crying about aside, the design could be argued that it lacks hierarchy and possibly overshadows the White House to some degree as it may be over-scaled.
The White House itself is maintained by the Executive Residence staff and the White House Curator.
Major structural work or renovations (like the East Wing or a new ballroom) often involve internal teams and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) for building permits and federal oversight.
The Architect of the Capitol is generally not involved in White House construction. They might consult if a project impacts adjacent Capitol-owned property, but for internal White House renovations, they’re not the approving authority.
Destruction of government property comes with a ten year prison sentence.
At the risk of repetition: I defy you to produce ANY averager of polls that has his approval numbers at their highest ever.
In fact, I'll go farther: I defy you to pick any two polls of your choice that show he currently has "approval numbers at their highest ever." Many or most polls had him with 50+% percent approval, immediately post-inauguration; now many or most have him underwater.
Shoot, I'll go even farther: Find ONE poll of your choice that has him NOW with his highest approval numbers ever. If you can, I'll donate $100 to the charity of your choice. Fair?
You scared him off with your facts.
Incorrect!
I never posted that Trump had the highest approval numbers at this time.
On the otherhand, I have posted several times about that joke of polling aggregator, called Nate Silver.
I have listed other pollsters that are much more accurate when it comes to presidential polling such as AtlasIntel, Trafalgar, Rich Baris (Big Data Poll) & Rasmussen- they all destroy Silver.
Nate Silver had Cackles beating Trump the day before the election. What a joke.
The White House itself is maintained by the Executive Residence staff and the White House Curator.
Major structural work or renovations (like the East Wing or a new ballroom) often involve internal teams and the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC) for building permits and federal oversight.
The Architect of the Capitol is generally not involved in White House construction. They might consult if a project impacts adjacent Capitol-owned property, but for internal White House renovations, they’re not the approving authority.
The NCPC says they have not issued any permits nor did they approve demolition of the East Wing.
I wonder what the AIA thinks?
Haha. What the hell would the AIA have to do with anything? If your point is what I think it may be, but hard to tell due to your cluelessness, perhaps the state board of architectural examiners may have something to say? That is, only if the practicing architects are not licensed or operating within the bounds of the rules of practice issued by the AIA, not enforced by the AIA.
Further, I highly doubt the architects are not registered with their examination board.
In fact, I just looked up McCrery Architects.
I think what you're trying to say is that the local authority have jurisdiction (AHJ) may have something to say if they are constructing buildings without approved building permits within that authority which governs D.C.
What you don't know is none of this really matters much since the White House is federal property, so city building permits are not required.
So, to answer your question, it doesn't matter what the AIA thinks. McCrery Architects is a legally licensed entity operating within the law.
This post was edited 1 minute after it was posted.
🚨 JUST IN: President Trump has CNN losing their MINDS after confirming he'd be eligible to serve a 3rd term as president - they're now saying Trump is a "despot" and a "threat" to the nation
"We have to take this quite seriously! It's a THREAT!" 😂
DONALD TRUMP: I haven’t really thought about it. We have some very good people as you know, but I have the best poll numbers I’ve ever had. I mean I just solved eight wars and a ninth is coming. I believe Russia Ukraine will happen. But we just did– you know we just left and when you look at the treaty we just did, that was a war. Thousands of people were already shot at the border and when you look at what we just did, it was pretty amazing. We got a lot of pretty good credit. And I really have to thank Malaysia for that because the prime minister and everybody really helped get the two countries together. But, it was quite a great peace treaty. But that was one of eight and it makes me feel good. I mean it’s millions of people we saved. I saved the lives of millions of people. That’s what’s important. REPORTER: You said that for 2028 there are very good people? TRUMP: Well, we have great people. Well, I don’t have to get into that, but we have one of them standing right here. We have JD [Vance] obviously. The vice president is great. Marco [Rubio] is great. I’m not sure if anybody would run against us. I think if they have a form to group it would be unstoppable, I do. I really believe that. I would love to do it. I have my best numbers ever. It’s very terrible. I have my best numbers and if you read it– REPORTER: You’re not ruling out a third term? TRUMP: Am I not ruling it out? I mean, you’ll have to tell me. All I can tell you is that we have a great group of people which they don’t.
Bill Clinton, Alan Dershowitz, George J. Mitchell, John Podesta, Hillary Clinton, Anthony Weiner, Eric Schmidt, Henry Kissinger, Prince Andrew, Michael Jackson, David Copperfield, Naomi Campbell, Alec Baldwin, Leonardo DiCaprio, Cameron Diaz, Gigi Hadid, Ralph Fiennes, Uma Thurman, Glenn Dubin, Les Wexner, Jean-Luc Brunel
David Copperfield will make the files disappear with a wave of his hands and the commanding line "MAGIC!" And then we will have nothing left to complain about.
Wait? Was that Doug Henning? I'm pretty sure he's in there, too...