Trump's gaudy royal ballroom is bigger and more extravagent than the King's ballroom at Buckingham Palace

171120173238-buckingham-palace-ballroom-getty-images.jpg

71d1d4d0-6e3e-11f0-a3f5-afebbe7846cc.jpg
Cry some more; it's funny to watch.

200w.gif



The new event center is for all subsequent presidential quests...not just Trump's.
 
tear down the East Wing


The original East Terrace was added by Thomas Jefferson in 1866 and was demolished removed in 1902 it was rebuilt for visitors and social events by Theodore Roosevelt.

In 1942 the East Terrace was rebuilt expanded and called the East Wing to conceal an underground bunker

And now it is being rebuilt "AGAIN" for visitors and social events by Trump

This room/area has a history of being rebuilt etc its nothing new... since its Trump now doing it you cant stand it!
 
Last edited:
By building ball rooms?
By doing anything. Building a ballroom on donated funds seems reasonable. Normally, tards, like you, would be applauding that millionaires and billionaires are making big donations to the public coffers for a public project done by government using private contractors.

Of course, in this case it's Trump doing something. That means insane, hysterical, TDSer's like you have to oppose it.
 
By doing anything. Building a ballroom on donated funds seems reasonable. Normally, tards, like you, would be applauding that millionaires and billionaires are making big donations to the public coffers for a public project done by government using private contractors.

Of course, in this case it's Trump doing something. That means insane, hysterical, TDSer's like you have to oppose it.
LIE.

If public money is not to be used for a government project and private money is being considered then Dem's would only applaud in that open and transparent process. Or build a blind trust where no one ever knows who put money in.

There is a reason NO POLITICIAN should get any of their pet projects funded by HIDDEN private money those donating do not want exposed as those people may well be donating based on some desired quid pro quo.
 
LIE.

If public money is not to be used for a government project and private money is being considered then Dem's would only applaud in that open and transparent process. Or build a blind trust where no one ever knows who put money in.

There is a reason NO POLITICIAN should get any of their pet projects funded by HIDDEN private money those donating do not want exposed as those people may well be donating based on some desired quid pro quo.
So, PBS is lying when they say it's privately funded?


Factcheck.org, a clearly Trump hating source grudgingly admits it's privately funded.


CNN attacks the donors even as they admit private funding in full


Fortune is a bit more neutral.


It isn't like this is the first time private funding has been used for public projects either. That has a history going back into the 19th century.
 
So, PBS is lying when they say it's privately funded?


Factcheck.org, a clearly Trump hating source grudgingly admits it's privately funded.


CNN attacks the donors even as they admit private funding in full


Fortune is a bit more neutral.


It isn't like this is the first time private funding has been used for public projects either. That has a history going back into the 19th century.
Terry how can we help you be less stupid? Let us help you.

I said a government should first use public money for public projects but it would be ok to use private money if they did it in a completely open process.

Having Politicians accept any private money for their pet projects where the donors is NOT KNOWN is a problem. If a politician wanted to get private funding to build a new bridge in a small town... FINE, as long as they did so all voters could see who is donating and what influence they may have or expect.



Donors to Trump’s Ballroom Are Asked Why They Chose to Remain Incognito

Senator Richard Blumenthal is requesting information from business interests whose donations were not disclosed by the White House.
 
...
It isn't like this is the first time private funding has been used for public projects either. That has a history going back into the 19th century.
Show me any history where private donors funded a politicians pet project while the names of those donors were shielded from the public knowing who they were?
 
Terry how can we help you be less stupid? Let us help you.

I said a government should first use public money for public projects but it would be ok to use private money if they did it in a completely open process.

Having Politicians accept any private money for their pet projects where the donors is NOT KNOWN is a problem. If a politician wanted to get private funding to build a new bridge in a small town... FINE, as long as they did so all voters could see who is donating and what influence they may have or expect.



Donors to Trump’s Ballroom Are Asked Why They Chose to Remain Incognito

Senator Richard Blumenthal is requesting information from business interests whose donations were not disclosed by the White House.
The donors are known, and Forbes lists them in some detail, among other sources.
 
Show me any history where private donors funded a politicians pet project while the names of those donors were shielded from the public knowing who they were?
The donors are known, and Forbes lists them in some detail, among other sources.
 
Nope I'm not going to watch that has a redirect warning....it is going to happen. :laugh:IMO Obama tried to commit treason when he tried a soft coup against Trump by trying to sabotage him. So FUCK OBAMA.
You do not need to watch is as the link title tells you what happened and that picture is what Obama put up to mock what Trump would do as he had a pretty clear vision about how classless and gawdy Trump would be. But start at 4.48 if you want to watch Obama make Trump sulk.


 
You do not need to watch is as the link title tells you what happened and that picture is what Obama put up to mock what Trump would do as he had a pretty clear vision about how classless and gawdy Trump would be. But start at 4.48 if you want to watch Obama make Trump sulk.


So Obama thought he was born a king. NO KINGS

The bottom line is He who laughs last laughs the hardest. And Obama supported Hillary and Kamala and Trump beat both of them. So Trump gets the last laugh :



:magagrin:
 
Last edited:
Back
Top