Tag Archives: Trump

Trump’s $230M DOJ settlement bid likely has few legal backstops

President Trump’s bid to be awarded as much as $230 million by his own Department of Justice as compensation for the various federal probes into his conduct would likely face few legal obstacles if successful.

The president confirmed Tuesday that his personal legal team was seeking a settlement, a request that could prompt his…
https://thehill.com/homenews/5572539-legal-experts-question-trump-settlement/

Stephen Miller Lists Potential Criminal Charges Against JB Pritzker

**JB Pritzker Threatens ICE Agents with Arrest; Stephen Miller Responds on Potential Legal Consequences**

Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker, on October 12th, suggested that state prosecutors might investigate the conduct of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Speaking to FOX 32 Chicago, Pritzker stated, “The tables will turn one day. These people should recognize that maybe they’re not gonna get prosecuted today, although we’re looking at doing that, but they may get prosecuted after the Trump administration because the statute of limitations would not have run out.”

In response, President Trump’s aide Stephen Miller addressed the issue during a discussion with Will Cain, explaining how arresting a sitting governor like Pritzker could work under federal law.

### Pritzker’s Proposed Commission to Track ICE Agents

Governor Pritzker is reportedly setting up a commission aimed at tracking the activities of ICE agents. His goal is to either prosecute these agents or at least intimidate them by creating a public record of their conduct. According to reports, the commission will “set up a public record of the conduct of federal agents” and will “consider policy recommendations to prevent future harm to these individuals and communities.”

The communities Pritzker refers to include illegal aliens, criminal illegal aliens, and foreigners who did not enter the country legally. His plans might also affect the left-wing activists who obstruct justice on their behalf.

### Stephen Miller Explains the Legal Authority to Arrest State Officials

During the conversation, Will Cain asked Miller about the federal authority under which a sitting governor like Pritzker could be arrested. Miller responded, emphasizing that his explanation applies not only to Pritzker but to any state or local official who unlawfully interferes with federal law enforcement duties.

He explained, “If you engage in a criminal conspiracy to obstruct the enforcement of federal immigration laws or to unlawfully order your own police officers or officials to interfere with ICE officers or even to arrest ICE officers, you’re engaged in criminal activity.”

Miller outlined various offenses that could come into play, including obstruction of justice, harboring illegal aliens, and impeding immigration law enforcement. He also mentioned the possibility of seditious conspiracy charges depending on the conduct.

### Federal Immunity for ICE Agents

Miller reassured ICE officers of their legal protections, noting that ICE agents have federal immunity while performing their duties. “Anybody who lays a hand on you or tries to stop you or tries to obstruct you is committing a felony,” he stated.

He emphasized, “No city official, no state official, no illegal alien, no leftist agitator or domestic insurrectionist can prevent you from fulfilling your legal obligations and duties.”

The Department of Justice, Miller noted, has made clear that any official crossing the line into obstruction or criminal conspiracy against ICE officers will face justice.

### Additional Remarks

Miller also hinted that attention should be given to Letitia James, who is reportedly tracking ICE activities, suggesting that charges may be warranted.

This exchange highlights the ongoing tensions between state officials who oppose federal immigration enforcement and federal authorities defending ICE’s role. As this legal and political battle continues, it raises important questions about the balance of power and the enforcement of immigration laws in the United States.
https://www.independentsentinel.com/stephen-miller-lists-potential-criminal-charges-against-jb-pritzker/

Ontario quickly caves to Trump and promises to pull the offending Reagan ad that killed Canada trade talks

The post on former President Donald Trump’s social media site Thursday night escalated tensions between the United States and its northern neighbor, Canada. The controversy stemmed from Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney’s announcement that Canada plans to double its exports to countries outside the U.S. due to the threat posed by Trump’s tariffs.

### Trump’s Response and U.S. Government Reaction

White House officials described Trump’s reaction as the culmination of long-standing frustration over Canada’s trade negotiation strategies. On Friday morning, Trump wrote on his social media site, “CANADA CHEATED AND GOT CAUGHT!!!” He accused Canada of fraudulently taking out an ad claiming that former President Ronald Reagan opposed tariffs, when Trump argued that Reagan actually supported tariffs for national security reasons.

Trump also alleged that the ad aimed to influence the U.S. Supreme Court ahead of an upcoming hearing that could decide the president’s authority to impose sweeping tariffs—a cornerstone of his economic policy. Trump expressed a strong personal interest in the case, stating he would like to attend the oral arguments.

### The Controversial Ad and Ontario Premier’s Response

The ad in question was financed by Ontario’s provincial government, not the Canadian federal government. Ontario Premier Doug Ford, whose province sponsored the advertisement, initially refused to back down. On Friday, Ford posted that Canada and the U.S. are allies, emphasizing that Reagan believed both countries were “stronger together.” He included a link to a 1987 speech where Reagan expressed opposition to tariffs.

Ford announced that Ontario plans to invest approximately $54 million CAD ($40 million USD) to air the ad across multiple American television stations, featuring audio and video footage of Reagan speaking against tariffs. Despite the controversy, the ad was scheduled to continue airing over the weekend, including during Game 1 of the World Series between the Toronto Blue Jays and the Los Angeles Dodgers on Friday night.

However, after discussions with Prime Minister Carney, Ford decided to pause the advertising campaign effective Monday, allowing for the resumption of trade talks. “Our intention was always to initiate a conversation about the kind of economy that Americans want to build and the impact of tariffs on workers and businesses,” Ford said. “We’ve achieved our goal, having reached U.S. audiences at the highest levels.”

### Canadian Government’s Position

Mark Carney emphasized that the Canadian government remains ready to continue discussions aimed at reducing tariffs in specific sectors. “We can’t control the trade policy of the United States. We recognize that that policy has fundamentally changed from the 1980s,” Carney stated before departing for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Malaysia, which Trump was also set to attend.

### Reagan Foundation’s Response

The Ronald Reagan Presidential Foundation and Institute condemned the ad for misrepresenting Reagan’s 1987 “Presidential Radio Address to the Nation on Free and Fair Trade.” The foundation stated that Ontario did not have permission to use or edit Reagan’s remarks and is reviewing legal options. The foundation, located in Simi Valley, California, is responsible for maintaining the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library and Museum and is governed by a board including prominent Republican figures.

Following the foundation’s statement, Trump doubled down, calling the ad “FAKE” and asserting that tariffs are “VERY IMPORTANT TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY, AND ECONOMY, OF THE U.S.A.” He declared, “Based on their egregious behavior, ALL TRADE NEGOTIATIONS WITH CANADA ARE HEREBY TERMINATED.”

### Historical Context and Administration Insights

Contrary to Trump’s claims, Reagan often criticized tariffs and protectionist policies that interfered with free commerce, as highlighted in his 1987 radio address.

White House spokesman Kush Desai referred to the Ontario ad as the “latest example of how Canadian officials would rather play games than engage with the Administration.” Kevin Hassett, director of the National Economic Council, criticized Canada for its “lack of flexibility” and mentioned lingering tensions stemming from relations with former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Carney had met with Trump earlier in the month to ease trade tensions as the United States, Canada, and Mexico prepared to review the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), which Trump had originally negotiated during his first term but later criticized.

### Economic Stakes and Past Conflicts

More than 75% of Canadian exports go to the United States, with nearly CAD $3.6 billion (USD $2.7 billion) worth of goods and services crossing the border daily.

Initially, Trump appeared unbothered by the Ontario ad, remarking during a lunch with Republican senators that “If I was Canada, I’d take that same ad also.” Ontario had purchased over $275,000 in ad reservations for the campaign, which aired in 198 out of 210 U.S. media markets this month. The ad was broadcast most frequently in New York, Washington, D.C., Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, and West Palm Beach, Florida.

Previously, Ford had drawn Trump’s attention with an electricity surcharge targeting U.S. states, which led to Trump doubling steel and aluminum tariffs on Canadian goods. In response, Canada imposed retaliatory levies on certain U.S. products in April, although it exempted select automakers through remission quotas.

Trump’s tariffs have significantly impacted Canada’s automotive sector, especially in Ontario. As a result, companies like Stellantis have announced plans to move production lines from Ontario to U.S. states such as Illinois.

*Associated Press writers Maya Sweedler and Paul Wiseman in Washington contributed to this report.*
https://fortune.com/2025/10/24/canada-tariffs-tv-ad-trump-carney-ontario-prime-minister-trade-what-happened/

Jack Smith, in a Stunning Move, Offers To Testify Under Oath About His Prosecutions of Trump

Special Counsel Jack Smith’s request to testify before Congress underscores his intention to pull no punches as he defends his legacy against a growing Republican onslaught.

President Trump has declared, in the presence of Attorney General Pam Bondi, that “deranged Jack Smith in my opinion is a criminal.” Mr. Smith’s willingness to speak under oath came Thursday in a letter written by his lawyers to Senator Chuck Grassley and Congressman Jim Jordan, the chairmen of the Judiciary Committees in the Senate and House of Representatives.

That could set up a high-stakes reckoning of Mr. Smith’s two unsuccessful prosecutions of Mr. Trump. The special counsel’s desire to tell Congress and the nation his account of two of the highest-profile cases in American history comes as his record has come under escalating scrutiny.

Mr. Jordan has summoned him to answer for the “prosecutorial misconduct and constitutional abuses of his office.” Meanwhile, Mr. Grassley has expressed outrage over “Operation Arctic Frost,” Mr. Smith’s inquiry into the events of January 6. As part of that probe, the prosecutor acquired telephone data of Republican lawmakers.

The prosecutor’s attorneys, Peter Koski and Lanny Breuer of the Covington & Burling firm, wrote: “Given the many mischaracterizations of Mr. Smith’s investigation into President Trump’s alleged mishandling of classified documents and role in attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Mr. Smith respectfully requests the opportunity to testify in open hearings before the House and Senate Judiciary Committees.”

Mr. Smith contends that he has, throughout his career, “steadfastly adhered to established legal standards and Department of Justice guidelines.”

However, Mr. Grassley appears hesitant to offer Mr. Smith a platform just yet. He told CNN, “Jack Smith certainly has a lot of answering to do, but first, Congress needs to have all the facts at its disposal. Hearings should follow once the investigative foundation has been firmly set.”

While the special counsel appears ready to talk, his lawyers are insisting on ground rules and guardrails. They write, “Mr. Smith is prepared to answer questions about the Special Counsel’s investigation and prosecution, but requires assurance from the Department of Justice that he will not be punished for doing so.”

This suggests that they are seeking some form of immunity, possibly prompted by the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey for lying to Congress.

Mr. Smith also requests “guidance from the Department of Justice regarding federal grand jury secrecy requirements and authorization on the matters he may speak to regarding, among other things, Volume II of the Final Report of the Special Counsel, which is not publicly available.”

The release of that second volume, which covers the Mar-a-Lago prosecution, was blocked by Judge Aileen Cannon. Mr. Smith’s report on the January 6 case, which insists that he possessed the evidence to convict Mr. Trump, was released by Attorney General Merrick Garland.

Congressman Jamie Raskin, a critic of Mr. Trump, quickly wrote his own letter to Mr. Jordan urging him to accept Mr. Smith’s offer. “I can think of no reason to deny the American people the opportunity to hear his testimony, under oath and with questioning from Members of both parties, and to let all Americans judge for themselves the integrity of Mr. Smith’s investigations,” Raskin stated.

The special counsel’s request to address Congress in an open hearing adds to an emerging strategy of publicly defending his record and criticizing Mr. Trump.

Last month, he delivered a keynote address at George Mason University where he said, “What I see happening at the Department of Justice today saddens me and angers me.” He also defended the DOJ employees who have been fired by Ms. Bondi, which include his entire team.

Mr. Smith followed that denunciation with an appearance in Britain alongside paid MSNBC contributor Andrew Weissmann, a fierce foe of the president who was Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s top deputy.

During the same Oval Office diatribe in which he called Mr. Smith a “criminal,” Mr. Trump declared, “I hope they are going to look into Weissmann, too. Weissmann’s a bad guy. There was tremendous criminal activity.”

Mr. Smith told Mr. Weissmann in respect of the DOJ that “Nothing like what we see now has ever gone on,” and blasted as “absolutely ludicrous” the accusation that his prosecutions of Mr. Trump were politically motivated.

The special counsel wrote in his final report that the “claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.”

Mr. Smith is also facing scrutiny from the Trump administration over whether his all-fired rush to prosecute Mr. Trump before the 2024 presidential election violated the Hatch Act. That federal law prohibits federal employees from undertaking political activity intended to influence elections.

No prosecutor has ever been found to violate its prohibition, which is a civil offense.
https://www.nysun.com/article/jack-smith-in-a-stunning-move-offers-to-testify-under-oath-about-his-prosecutions-of-trump

‘The Epstein Ballroom’ Is Getting Funded By Tech Bribes

Turns out, it’s not just “patriot donors” funding the new White House ballroom — tech giant Alphabet, the parent company of Google and YouTube, is chipping in, too. CNBC reports that the company is contributing $22 million to the $250 million project, with the money routed through a legal settlement reached last month over Trump’s YouTube ban following the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

The Google-owned platform froze Trump’s account in the riot’s aftermath, warning his posts could spark further violence. Trump later sued, claiming censorship and wrongful suspension. Under the Oakland, California, federal court settlement, nearly 10% of the ballroom’s estimated construction costs will now come from Alphabet.

CNBC reports the money will be donated on Trump’s behalf “to the Trust for the National Mall, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt entity dedicated to restoring, preserving, and elevating the National Mall, to support the construction of the White House State Ballroom.”

Images of cranes tearing into the East Wing to make way for the 90,000-square-foot ballroom sparked public backlash this week and raised fresh questions about who is footing the bill. Trump has repeatedly insisted the project is privately funded and will cost taxpayers nothing.

“For more than 150 years, every President has dreamt about having a Ballroom at the White House to accommodate people for grand parties, State Visits, etc. I am honored to be the first President to finally get this much-needed project underway—with zero cost to the American Taxpayer!” Trump wrote on Monday on Truth Social.

Trump has pledged some of his own money to the project, and other donors include Lockheed Martin, reportedly contributing more than $10 million. Tech companies are also pitching in: Beyond the settlement contribution, Google is committing at least $5 million. Comcast—parent company of CNBC—is also listed as a donor, though the amount is unknown. The company will spin off CNBC later this year under a new parent, Versant.

The project has drawn scrutiny from Treasury Department employees, whose offices overlook the demolition site. The department has barred staff from sharing images of the work, citing security concerns, though critics argue transparency is vital for public oversight.

The East Wing’s demolition, including the removal of historic elements like trees and architectural details, has fueled complaints that the project is far more than a simple upgrade—it represents a substantial transformation of one of the nation’s most symbolic spaces.

Preservationists are weighing in as well. On Tuesday, the National Trust for Historic Preservation sent a letter urging a pause on demolition until proper public review processes are completed. Carol Quillen, National Trust’s president and CEO, stressed that while a larger meeting space may be useful, the scale and height of the proposed ballroom could “overwhelm the White House itself” and disrupt its classical design.

She called for consultations with the relevant review agencies and public input to ensure the project respects the historic significance of the building and its grounds.

“The National Trust stands ready to assist the White House, the National Park Service, and relevant review agencies in exploring design alternatives and modifications that would accomplish the objectives of the Administration while preserving the historic integrity and symbolism of the People’s House,” Quillen added.

Trump has insisted the ballroom “won’t interfere with the current building.”

“It’ll be near it but not touching it, and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of,” he said in July. But that doesn’t appear to be the case anymore.

The New York Times reported Wednesday that the White House has decided it would be “cheaper and more structurally sound to demolish the East Wing” rather than build an addition. The full demolition is expected to be finished by this weekend.

The White House has also dismissed criticism, comparing the project to minor modifications under former President Barack Obama, such as adding basketball lines and baskets to the tennis courts. But those changes were far less disruptive than dismantling the East Wing.

With Alphabet, Lockheed Martin, and other major donors helping foot the bill, Trump is moving full steam ahead on a ballroom he says will be “happily used for generations to come,” promising a mix of private financing and personal investment.

The project underscores Trump’s ongoing fascination with leaving a permanent mark on the White House, turning construction into both a legacy project and a showcase for corporate support.
https://crooksandliars.com/2025/10/what-trump-calls-donors-are-actually

‘Under siege’: Inside Trump’s comprehensive plan to steal 2026 midterms

Both times he was inaugurated—January 20, 2017, and January 20, 2025—President Donald Trump entered the White House with Republican majorities in both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives. However, Democratic strategists are hopeful that the 2026 midterms will play out similarly to the 2018 midterms, which saw Democrats flipping the House with a net gain of 40 seats.

Some Democrats have argued that the 2018 “blue wave” in Congress’ lower chamber could have been even larger if House districts had not been so heavily gerrymandered. It remains to be seen what will happen in 2026, but Trump is clearly hoping that next year’s midterms won’t be a repeat of 2018.

In an op-ed published by MSNBC on October 23, Symone D. Sanders Townsend—who co-hosts MSNBC’s *The Weeknight* with Alicia Menendez—alongside former Republican National Committee (RNC) Chairman Michael Steele, argues that although Trump faces some major disadvantages going into the 2026 midterms, he has devised a comprehensive game plan to try to steal the election.

Townsend warns, “As part of a broad, multi-state effort by allies of President Donald Trump, Republicans in North Carolina have taken the dramatic step to try to redraw their already gerrymandered congressional districts five years before the normal end-of-decade cycle. The goal is to secure one more Republican U.S. House seat in a desperate attempt to hang onto the House majority and protect Trump from political consequences. Keep in mind, this map was already unfairly drawn up.”

She continues, “The Princeton Gerrymandering Project gave it an ‘F,’ with only one competitive district, ten safe Republican seats, and three safe Democratic seats. The new map would be even worse.”

This pattern is happening across the country. From Texas—where lawmakers passed a new map reportedly at Trump’s behest—to Missouri, where organizers are attempting to put an initiative on the ballot to overturn a recent gerrymander, to Indiana, where party leaders recently admitted they may not have the votes to push through a new map.

Townsend emphasizes that Republicans “wouldn’t be trying this if they were confident they could win in 2026. But rather than trying to persuade the American people that they have better ideas, they are trying to rig it so that they can win anyway.”

She warns that the representative ideal is under siege—but not defeated. “The people still hold the power. They always have. And the fight now is to make sure they can still exercise it freely.”

As Republicans attempt to redraw the lines of power, Townsend urges us to “listen for the echoes of our ancestors. Times have changed, but the struggle has not.”
https://www.rawstory.com/under-siege-inside-trumps-comprehensive-plan-to-steal-2026-midterms/

Trump plows past concerns over East Wing demolition — and envisions an even bigger ballroom than initially planned

(CNN) — President Donald Trump has proceeded with enormous latitude as he constructs his massive new ballroom, bypassing concerns raised by preservationists and so far stopping short of seeking approval from the commission overseeing construction on federal buildings to tear down the entirety of the White House East Wing.

The ballroom is now expected to be larger than initially planned, according to multiple sources familiar with the matter. The president has shown visitors two flat tabletop models, at times quizzing the room on which version they preferred: the smaller one or the larger one. Most answered that the bigger one was better, to which Trump agreed.

While it’s not clear how much larger, Trump said Wednesday that the ballroom is expected to cost a projected $300 million, seemingly in line with a larger structure. Previously, the administration had put the cost at $200 million.

The project has drawn outcry and led to questions about whether the president was within his legal authority to dismantle entire sections of the executive mansion. Not all of Trump’s own team was set on the project at the start, one source familiar with the internal conversations told CNN.

At the beginning, some aides and advisers thought it was too big of a task to undertake, and attempted to explain how difficult and lengthy the process was likely to be. But once it became clear the president wasn’t going to give up on the idea — which he’s been musing about for the better part of 15 years — everyone quickly got onboard.

The White House says it will submit plans for the ballroom construction to the National Capital Planning Commission, but insists the body doesn’t have purview over the decision to knock down the East Wing. Some former members of the panel have questioned that assessment. And one of the nation’s premier historic preservation organizations is calling for an immediate halt to the leveling of the East Wing.

But there appeared little standing in the way of the president’s decision to move ahead with the audacious, multi-year project. Now the demolition is well underway, making it seem unlikely the plans will be reversed.

“In order to do it properly, we had to take down the existing structure,” Trump said Wednesday in the Oval Office when questioned about the project. A scale model of the White House grounds with the ballroom prominently jutting out from the East Colonnade sat on the table in front of him.

He said after a “tremendous amount of study with some of the best architects in the world,” the determination was made that “really knocking it down” the East Wing would be necessary. “It was never thought of as being much,” he said. “It was a very small building.”

On Wednesday, track excavators continued their work ripping into the former home of the office of the first lady, the White House calligrapher, and some military aides. The demolition was proceeding quickly, with roughly half the structure now reduced to a grey pile of cement and twisted rebar. Staffers in those departments have been relocated to other areas on the complex.

The East Wing’s wood-paneled foyer has long been the main point of entry for visitors attending social events at the White House, as well as those going on tours of the building. The section emerged in its current form in 1942.

Officials said the rest of the East Wing is likely to be demolished by the end of the week.

In some ways, the cries of disapproval are coming too late. Renderings released by the White House in July showed the ballroom sitting atop where the East Wing used to sit, and an official press release at the time stated it would sit “where the small, heavily changed, and reconstructed East Wing currently sits.”

Trump said anyone outraged or concerned he was taking steps without being frank about his intentions were misplaced. “I haven’t been transparent? I’ve shown this to everybody that would listen,” he said in the Oval Office.

Still, images of the building torn to pieces this week have caused shock, particularly as Trump tests his authority in nearly all aspects of the presidency — not least of which is the building he lives and works in.

The project began ramping up over the summer, one source said, and weekly meetings to discuss the project began. The president himself has been involved in these meetings, which have also included Chief of Staff Susie Wiles, the White House Military Office, the Secret Service, an architecture team, and other staffers internally who have been tasked with helping move the project along quickly, the source said.

The White House said in late July that McCrery Architects and its CEO James McCrery would take the lead in the design of the addition. A few days later, McCrery was spotted alongside Trump on the White House roof surveying the area on the South Grounds where the ballroom will go.

Trump’s aides were prepared for pushback on the ballroom and sought to review what was legally required to complete the project, the source said.

Ultimately, administration officials determined the White House would only need approval from the National Capital Planning Commission, which oversees federal construction projects in Washington and its neighboring states, Virginia and Maryland.

However, officials said the commission has jurisdiction only when “vertical” construction begins and does not oversee demolition.

Trump recently appointed White House staff secretary and loyalist Will Scharf to chair the commission. White House deputy Chief of Staff James Blair and another Trump aide were also appointed to the commission at the same time.

Scharf said during a meeting of the commission last month the body would eventually be involved in the project, but not until after the East Wing was demolished.

“I know the president thinks very highly of this commission, and I’m excited for us to play a role in the ballroom project when the time is appropriate for us to do so,” he said.

The commission, which is closed amid the ongoing government shutdown, was created by Congress in 1924 and is comprised of 12 members. Three are appointed by the president, along with the chairman, with the rest of the seats reserved for federal agencies, such as the National Park Service, and representatives from the District of Columbia.

Projects reviewed by the NCPC in recent years include changing the perimeter fence around the White House grounds and a tennis pavilion Trump installed during his first term. The fence, in particular, took several years before it was ultimately approved; officials said it was a necessary change because people kept jumping over the previous one and running toward the North Portico.

L. Preston Bryant Jr., who served as chairman of the NCPC for nearly a decade, described a three-stage process that typically unfolds for federal projects, beginning with early consultations that he described as collaborative.

“The Commission staff very much wants a potential project to get started on the right foot. This early consultation stage is very important,” he told CNN.

The project goes through subsequent phases — conceptual, preliminary approval, and final approval — before the process is complete.

Bryant said he couldn’t remember a time when demolition was separated from the approval process in the way the Trump White House has done.

“That was not my experience during my time at NCPC,” Bryant said. “If there’s to be demolition, that’s part of the project. The demolition element is inherent in the overall project. Demo is not separated from construction. It’s part of it.”

Rebecca Miller, the executive director of the DC Preservation League, said demolishing the East Wing before a formal submission of the ballroom plans essentially starts the project before a formal review process.

“Most concerning is that they’re just tearing down the East Wing without any public submission as to what is going to be built in its place,” she said. “And that’s where the National Capital Planning Commission, or the Commission on Fine Arts, or the public, would have their input into the design of the property, its compatibility with the White House, and how to mitigate or minimize the impact on the current historic resource.”

“We’re in this kind of zone where there’s nothing that prevents the demolition, but we’ve also not seen what the submission is,” Miller added.

Other laws and rules also appear not to apply to the White House. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the National Historic Preservation Act in 1966, which details the process by which stakeholders should be brought in for large public projects. But the law excludes the three pillars of US government — the Capitol, the Supreme Court, and the White House — from its provisions.

The Shipstead-Luce Act of 1930 also requires that alterations to buildings in the national capital area, including the White House, must be presented to the Commission of Fine Arts. The language, however, refers to buildings facing the White House and not the White House itself.

For Trump, the concerns about the new ballroom appear unconvincing.

Sitting in the newly gilded Oval Office as the machines were working away outside, he held up a pile of paper renderings showing the plans, including the Louis XIV-style interior that closely resembles the ballroom at Mar-a-Lago.

“You see it goes beautifully with the White House,” Trump proclaimed. “I mean, the mix is beautiful.”

© 2024 The-CNN-Wire™ & ©.
https://wsvn.com/news/politics/trump-plows-past-concerns-over-east-wing-demolition-and-envisions-an-even-bigger-ballroom-than-initially-planned/

Trump warned Zelensky that Putin could ‘destroy’ Ukraine if he wants in closed-door ‘shouting match’: report

President Trump chastised Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky during an explosive, closed-door meeting at the White House on Friday, warning the leader that President Vladimir Putin would “destroy” Ukraine if he wanted to, according to a report.

The three-hour sit-down, which took place a day after Trump held a call with Putin, reportedly devolved into a “shouting match,” with Trump “cursing all the time,” people familiar with the matter told The Financial Times. Sources told the outlet that Trump also dismissed maps of the frontline in Ukraine, insisting Zelensky surrender the Donbas region to Russia.

The president’s rhetoric appeared to mirror many of Putin’s talking points, a European official with knowledge of the meeting said. Trump reportedly told Zelensky that Putin had described the bloody war that has ravaged Ukraine as a “special operation, not even a war.”

“If [Putin] wants it, he will destroy you,” Trump warned Zelensky, at one point throwing the maps of the battlefield to one side, the official said. Trump then expressed frustration, saying he was “sick” of seeing the map of the frontlines.

“This red line, I don’t even know where this is. I’ve never been there,” Trump lambasted, according to the official.

Following the tense meeting, Zelensky was described as “very negative,” one official told the publication. Meanwhile, European leaders remained “not optimistic but pragmatic” as they planned next steps.

The White House did not respond to The Post’s request for comment by the time of publication.

Zelensky’s primary goal for the meeting was reportedly to procure powerful Tomahawk missiles that could target Russia within range of remotely launched attacks from Ukrainian territory. However, Trump later urged Russia and Ukraine to end their nearly four-year war at the current battle lines.

“Enough blood has been shed, with property lines being defined by War and Guts. They should stop where they are,” Trump posted to Truth Social shortly after the volatile sitdown. “Let both claim Victory, let History decide! No more shooting, no more Death, no more vast and unsustainable sums of money spent.”

Zelensky told reporters that Ukraine was ready for an end to the war. “I agree with the president, yes, both sides must stop,” he said. “But between us, it’s about Putin, because we didn’t begin this war.”

Though Zelensky left the White House meeting empty-handed, he maintained that it was significant Trump did not outright say “no” to the possibility of acquiring the long-range missiles.

“For today, it’s good again that he didn’t say no,” Zelensky told NBC’s “Meet the Press,” referring to Trump. “The Tomahawks, it’s very sensitive for Russians,” he added. “I think that Putin [is] afraid that [the] United States will deliver us Tomahawks. And I think that he’s really afraid that we will use [them].”

The Ukrainian leader also mentioned that Ukraine has proposed exchanging its drone technology for American weapons. Trump acknowledged that Washington and Kyiv have been discussing such an exchange.

“They make a very good drone,” Trump said of Ukraine.
https://nypost.com/2025/10/20/world-news/trump-warned-zelensky-that-putin-could-destroy-ukraine-if-he-wants-in-closed-door-shouting-match-report/

Top 10 Quant rated U.S.-listed Chinese stocks as trade war escalates

Trade tensions between the world’s two largest economies have been reignited after U.S. President Donald Trump and his administration imposed additional tariffs on Chinese goods.

This move comes as a retaliation against China’s strict export controls on rare earth elements, a critical component in many high-tech industries.

On October 10, President Trump further escalated the situation by issuing new threats, signaling a continued standoff between the two nations.
https://seekingalpha.com/news/4505443-top-10-quant-rated-us-listed-chinese-stocks-as-trade-war-escalates?utm_source=feed_news_all&utm_medium=referral&feed_item_type=news

How Trump Can Better Deal With New Delhi

As he demonstrated in the Knesset this week, Donald Trump is making a serious bid to become a historically consequential figure. His influence extends beyond upending American politics; he is also positioning himself as a key player in furthering world peace.

A recent trip to India highlighted how this peace campaign presents both challenges and opportunities for Trump in the region. While some issues have arisen, the visit also opened doors for important diplomatic advancements.

Read Full Article »
https://www.realclearworld.com/2025/10/18/how_trump_can_better_deal_with_new_delhi_1141774.html