Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few things:
Google ponied up $20 million for the ballroom, to settle a civil suit brought by trump.
The construction must be approved by historical preservation committee, but demolition needs no approval. The demolition was not consistently communicated and has been far more extensive than expected.
The greatest concern now is will this extensive demolition weaken the entire White House? Without communication, there is no way of knowing if this is going to have a lasting effect on structural integrity.

You seriously think a man that made his career in building and construction, who is paying for a large amount of the project himself, would hire someone that’s going to make poor decisions regarding structural integrity?

You smoking crack.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not destroying the White House. They are adding a ballroom. They are not tearing down the East Wing, they are adding a ballroom. They took down the facade.

Why do they need a ballroom? Do you really think that having State dinners in a tent is a good thing? That is what they have been doing. As well as being second class, it is a security issue.

Taxpayers are not paying for it.

The spokesperson has arrived! Now explain the 90,000 square foot part, the lack of permits, and the complete lack of consultation with the usual reviewers of such plans.

The State Dining Room in the White House seats 140 and suited the other Presidents just fine for 200 years

Really?
https://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/obama.state.dinner/index.html
The dinner, in a tent set up on the White House South Lawn with a view of the Washington Monument, featured round tables for 10 set in resplendent colors -- apple green, ruby, gold -- with floral arrangements of roses, hydrangeas and sweet peas in plum, purple and fuchsia.

So because Obama did one event outside is a reason to gut the East Wing of th white house and install a gaudy and completely ahistoric structure that overwhelms the original white house?

That part of the White House is not original, it’s from the 1940’s Karen.

The party line has arrived, folks. Thank you stooge for enlightening us.

Did you even read the PP? Of course you didn’t clown.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The liberal fatigue is real. They are so anti trump , bad on everything that America doesn't take them seriously. Cried wolf soon many times that even semi valid points are ignored. They played themselves.

Yeah, that image of the one partially demolished wall of one wing of the White House will play real well with people who don't usually pay attention to politics.

Fixed it for you. Get your facts straight.

You're a total stooge. The entire west wing is demolished. FFS at least look at the model of the tumor that shows you it replaces the entire wing, fool.

Anonymous wrote:Brutal truth. Good job Trumpsters for finishing OBL’s work.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few things:
Google ponied up $20 million for the ballroom, to settle a civil suit brought by trump.
The construction must be approved by historical preservation committee, but demolition needs no approval. The demolition was not consistently communicated and has been far more extensive than expected.
The greatest concern now is will this extensive demolition weaken the entire White House? Without communication, there is no way of knowing if this is going to have a lasting effect on structural integrity.

You seriously think a man that made his career in building and construction, who is paying for a large amount of the project himself, would hire someone that’s going to make poor decisions regarding structural integrity?

You smoking crack.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few things:
Google ponied up $20 million for the ballroom, to settle a civil suit brought by trump.
The construction must be approved by historical preservation committee, but demolition needs no approval. The demolition was not consistently communicated and has been far more extensive than expected.
The greatest concern now is will this extensive demolition weaken the entire White House? Without communication, there is no way of knowing if this is going to have a lasting effect on structural integrity.

You seriously think a man that made his career in building and construction, who is paying for a large amount of the project himself, would hire someone that’s going to make poor decisions regarding structural integrity?

You smoking crack.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Few things:
Google ponied up $20 million for the ballroom, to settle a civil suit brought by trump.
The construction must be approved by historical preservation committee, but demolition needs no approval. The demolition was not consistently communicated and has been far more extensive than expected.
The greatest concern now is will this extensive demolition weaken the entire White House? Without communication, there is no way of knowing if this is going to have a lasting effect on structural integrity.

You seriously think a man that made his career in building and construction, who is paying for a large amount of the project himself, would hire someone that’s going to make poor decisions regarding structural integrity?

You smoking crack.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They are not destroying the White House. They are adding a ballroom. They are not tearing down the East Wing, they are adding a ballroom. They took down the facade.

Why do they need a ballroom? Do you really think that having State dinners in a tent is a good thing? That is what they have been doing. As well as being second class, it is a security issue.

Taxpayers are not paying for it.

The spokesperson has arrived! Now explain the 90,000 square foot part, the lack of permits, and the complete lack of consultation with the usual reviewers of such plans.

The State Dining Room in the White House seats 140 and suited the other Presidents just fine for 200 years

Really?
https://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/11/24/obama.state.dinner/index.html
The dinner, in a tent set up on the White House South Lawn with a view of the Washington Monument, featured round tables for 10 set in resplendent colors -- apple green, ruby, gold -- with floral arrangements of roses, hydrangeas and sweet peas in plum, purple and fuchsia.

So because Obama did one event outside is a reason to gut the East Wing of th white house and install a gaudy and completely ahistoric structure that overwhelms the original white house?

That part of the White House is not original, it’s from the 1940’s Karen.

The party line has arrived, folks. Thank you stooge for enlightening us.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The liberal fatigue is real. They are so anti trump , bad on everything that America doesn't take them seriously. Cried wolf soon many times that even semi valid points are ignored. They played themselves.

Yeah, that image of the one partially demolished wall of one wing of the White House will play real well with people who don't usually pay attention to politics.

Fixed it for you. Get your facts straight.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The liberal fatigue is real. They are so anti trump , bad on everything that America doesn't take them seriously. Cried wolf soon many times that even semi valid points are ignored. They played themselves.

Yeah, that image of the one partially demolished wall of one wing of the White House will play real well with people who don't usually pay attention to politics.

Anonymous wrote:The liberal fatigue is real. They are so anti trump , bad on everything that America doesn't take them seriously. Cried wolf soon many times that even semi valid points are ignored. They played themselves.

Anonymous wrote:Few things:
Google ponied up $20 million for the ballroom, to settle a civil suit brought by trump.
The construction must be approved by historical preservation committee, but demolition needs no approval. The demolition was not consistently communicated and has been far more extensive than expected.
The greatest concern now is will this extensive demolition weaken the entire White House? Without communication, there is no way of knowing if this is going to have a lasting effect on structural integrity.