Anonymous
11/12/2025 19:32
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why in the world do you think it’s wise for someone in Bowser’s position to antagonize Trump?
I'm not terribly invested in this particular issue, but it's important to always push back against this administration whenever possible. Their corruption is so blatant and total.
Keep in mind DC in particular has been targeted because so many of its residents had that mindset the first time around. DC is meant to be a neutral capital.
DC was targeted because of who its residents voted for. And who they are. To pretend otherwise is to attribute more logic to Trump than he merits.
DC is targeted because it is a federal city with no real power against a president or national guard.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 20:14
Subject: Re:Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At least Democrats in Congress are on the case, even if Bowser is cowering in a corner somewhere.
Senators, advocates demand explanation on asbestos risks from East Wing
The White House said it had mitigated risks associated with the building material, which was widely used at the time of the East Wing’s construction and can be hazardous.
Updated October 30, 2025
By Dan Diamond and Olivia George
Democratic senators and public health advocates are demanding that the White House and its contractors prove their rapid demolition of the East Wing last week did not expose workers and passersby to asbestos, a construction material that has been linked to cancer and lung disease...
“Construction workers on the East Wing site, nearby office workers and tourists, and passersby could now be at heightened risk of developing lung cancer, asbestosis, or mesothelioma from the inhalation of demolition dust,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) wrote in a letter Thursday to ACECO, the contractor handling demolition of the White House annex.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/30/east-wing-demolition-asbestos-abatement/
+1
Which is great — and as it should be. Democrats in Congress — a federal body — are the ones in a position to put forth demands, rather than a local mayor of a city that has an inappropriately high level of presidential oversight and vulnerability.
Or a mayor who known for her timidity.
“Known” by anonymous internet warriors who risk zero consequences for running their mouths. Shrug.
Bowser has been in office for a decade and the only things she will be remembered for are painting the street outside the White House and banning kids from going to school for a year and a half because she refused to stand up to the teachers union.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 20:07
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The DC municipal government has no jurisdiction over the WH grounds. They can’t even enter the property without an invite.
wtf are you talking about OP?
Exactly. This whole thread is ridiculous.
The White House is subject to the city's environmental regulations. You think the administration can just do anything it wants? You think they could set up an oil refinery on the South Lawn and no one could say boo?
Federal enclaves are exempt from any local regulations. Yeah, they could.
Oh stop. Even Bowser's own advisers are pissed she's looking the other way on this.
Is it because they’re excellent muni lawyers, or because they’re dumb and angry?
The entire Department of Energy and Environment is really unhappy with the mayor.
And yet, DOEE has zero jurisdiction over the white house.
Of course, it has jurisdiction. It would be pretty weird if our air quality laws didn't apply to federal lands, given the massive amount of federal land in DC.
Why do you keep posting this stuff? Puerto Rico had a bombing range they hated and couldn’t do anything about. The locals can’t tell the feds what to do.
There was a big fight within the Bowser administration over whether to confront the White House on this stuff. If DC doesn't have jurisdiction (though it does), it sort of begs the question of why Bowser didn't warn the public that Trump was ignoring every environmental regulation on the books with the destruction of the East Wing. Reminder: asbestos causes cancer.
It would be great if all the Bowser defenders here could answer this. They won't of course. The administration knew from the get-go what was happening.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 20:05
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Stupid thread. DC has no authority or oversight over White House construction projects.
All of the subject matter experts within the Bowser administration would disagree.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 17:59
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Every single argument in favor of Bowser taking action is just vaguely that people were mad inside her office. Not a single post cites to any statutory or regulatory authority.
Your anger does not create oversight authority.
Your anger does not create oversight authority.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 17:52
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Stupid thread. DC has no authority or oversight over White House construction projects.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 17:02
Subject: Re:Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At least Democrats in Congress are on the case, even if Bowser is cowering in a corner somewhere.
Senators, advocates demand explanation on asbestos risks from East Wing
The White House said it had mitigated risks associated with the building material, which was widely used at the time of the East Wing’s construction and can be hazardous.
Updated October 30, 2025
By Dan Diamond and Olivia George
Democratic senators and public health advocates are demanding that the White House and its contractors prove their rapid demolition of the East Wing last week did not expose workers and passersby to asbestos, a construction material that has been linked to cancer and lung disease...
“Construction workers on the East Wing site, nearby office workers and tourists, and passersby could now be at heightened risk of developing lung cancer, asbestosis, or mesothelioma from the inhalation of demolition dust,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) wrote in a letter Thursday to ACECO, the contractor handling demolition of the White House annex.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/30/east-wing-demolition-asbestos-abatement/
+1
Which is great — and as it should be. Democrats in Congress — a federal body — are the ones in a position to put forth demands, rather than a local mayor of a city that has an inappropriately high level of presidential oversight and vulnerability.
Or a mayor who known for her timidity.
“Known” by anonymous internet warriors who risk zero consequences for running their mouths. Shrug.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 16:29
Subject: Re:Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At least Democrats in Congress are on the case, even if Bowser is cowering in a corner somewhere.
Senators, advocates demand explanation on asbestos risks from East Wing
The White House said it had mitigated risks associated with the building material, which was widely used at the time of the East Wing’s construction and can be hazardous.
Updated October 30, 2025
By Dan Diamond and Olivia George
Democratic senators and public health advocates are demanding that the White House and its contractors prove their rapid demolition of the East Wing last week did not expose workers and passersby to asbestos, a construction material that has been linked to cancer and lung disease...
“Construction workers on the East Wing site, nearby office workers and tourists, and passersby could now be at heightened risk of developing lung cancer, asbestosis, or mesothelioma from the inhalation of demolition dust,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) wrote in a letter Thursday to ACECO, the contractor handling demolition of the White House annex.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/30/east-wing-demolition-asbestos-abatement/
+1
Which is great — and as it should be. Democrats in Congress — a federal body — are the ones in a position to put forth demands, rather than a local mayor of a city that has an inappropriately high level of presidential oversight and vulnerability.
Or a mayor who known for her timidity.
Anonymous
11/09/2025 15:12
Subject: Re:Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:At least Democrats in Congress are on the case, even if Bowser is cowering in a corner somewhere.
Senators, advocates demand explanation on asbestos risks from East Wing
The White House said it had mitigated risks associated with the building material, which was widely used at the time of the East Wing’s construction and can be hazardous.
Updated October 30, 2025
By Dan Diamond and Olivia George
Democratic senators and public health advocates are demanding that the White House and its contractors prove their rapid demolition of the East Wing last week did not expose workers and passersby to asbestos, a construction material that has been linked to cancer and lung disease...
“Construction workers on the East Wing site, nearby office workers and tourists, and passersby could now be at heightened risk of developing lung cancer, asbestosis, or mesothelioma from the inhalation of demolition dust,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) wrote in a letter Thursday to ACECO, the contractor handling demolition of the White House annex.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/30/east-wing-demolition-asbestos-abatement/
+1
Which is great — and as it should be. Democrats in Congress — a federal body — are the ones in a position to put forth demands, rather than a local mayor of a city that has an inappropriately high level of presidential oversight and vulnerability.
Anonymous
11/08/2025 23:12
Subject: Re:Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:At least Democrats in Congress are on the case, even if Bowser is cowering in a corner somewhere.
Senators, advocates demand explanation on asbestos risks from East Wing
The White House said it had mitigated risks associated with the building material, which was widely used at the time of the East Wing’s construction and can be hazardous.
Updated October 30, 2025
By Dan Diamond and Olivia George
Democratic senators and public health advocates are demanding that the White House and its contractors prove their rapid demolition of the East Wing last week did not expose workers and passersby to asbestos, a construction material that has been linked to cancer and lung disease...
“Construction workers on the East Wing site, nearby office workers and tourists, and passersby could now be at heightened risk of developing lung cancer, asbestosis, or mesothelioma from the inhalation of demolition dust,” Sen. Edward J. Markey (D-Massachusetts) wrote in a letter Thursday to ACECO, the contractor handling demolition of the White House annex.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/10/30/east-wing-demolition-asbestos-abatement/
+1
Anonymous
11/08/2025 23:09
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The DC municipal government has no jurisdiction over the WH grounds. They can’t even enter the property without an invite.
wtf are you talking about OP?
Exactly. This whole thread is ridiculous.
The White House is subject to the city's environmental regulations. You think the administration can just do anything it wants? You think they could set up an oil refinery on the South Lawn and no one could say boo?
Federal enclaves are exempt from any local regulations. Yeah, they could.
Oh stop. Even Bowser's own advisers are pissed she's looking the other way on this.
Is it because they’re excellent muni lawyers, or because they’re dumb and angry?
The entire Department of Energy and Environment is really unhappy with the mayor.
And yet, DOEE has zero jurisdiction over the white house.
Of course, it has jurisdiction. It would be pretty weird if our air quality laws didn't apply to federal lands, given the massive amount of federal land in DC.
Why do you keep posting this stuff? Puerto Rico had a bombing range they hated and couldn’t do anything about. The locals can’t tell the feds what to do.
There was a big fight within the Bowser administration over whether to confront the White House on this stuff. If DC doesn't have jurisdiction (though it does), it sort of begs the question of why Bowser didn't warn the public that Trump was ignoring every environmental regulation on the books with the destruction of the East Wing. Reminder: asbestos causes cancer.
I'm sure there WAS a massive fight btw people who were angry and wrong vs people who understand what power the DC Mayor actually has over WH projects. TDS strikes again.
Ok, then why didn't Bowser warn the public about what was happening? The mayor knew immediately what was happening. They sent people down to the White House to take pictures of the demolition.
Anonymous
11/08/2025 23:07
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why in the world do you think it’s wise for someone in Bowser’s position to antagonize Trump?
I'm not terribly invested in this particular issue, but it's important to always push back against this administration whenever possible. Their corruption is so blatant and total.
“Always”? Really? That’s a very privileged take — especially when you’re talking about say, dealing with psychopaths that have a lot of power over people who have entrusted you with their well-being. First up, if you “Always” do something reflexively, that suggests that you’re not bothering with any sort of cost benefit analysis in specific situations. That’s not what I, personally, want to see from my elected officials. Second, Trump and Miller will delight in having opportunities to declare some sort of military control, and the poorest and the people of color will be targets in ways that others will not be. Good on elected officials who recognize the reality that pushing back against this administration may be standing up for principles knowing that other people will have to pay the price. Push back needs to be done judiciously.
tldr: There’s a saying: Don’t write a check that your ass can’t cash. In this case, be careful about pushing back — when other, vulnerable people will have to pay the price for your actions.
Who knew the sky would fall if Bowser told Trump he's not allowed to spread carcinogens in the air in downtown DC?
Anonymous
11/08/2025 22:05
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why in the world do you think it’s wise for someone in Bowser’s position to antagonize Trump?
I'm not terribly invested in this particular issue, but it's important to always push back against this administration whenever possible. Their corruption is so blatant and total.
Keep in mind DC in particular has been targeted because so many of its residents had that mindset the first time around. DC is meant to be a neutral capital.
DC was targeted because of who its residents voted for. And who they are. To pretend otherwise is to attribute more logic to Trump than he merits.
Anonymous
11/08/2025 19:13
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The DC municipal government has no jurisdiction over the WH grounds. They can’t even enter the property without an invite.
wtf are you talking about OP?
Exactly. This whole thread is ridiculous.
The White House is subject to the city's environmental regulations. You think the administration can just do anything it wants? You think they could set up an oil refinery on the South Lawn and no one could say boo?
Federal enclaves are exempt from any local regulations. Yeah, they could.
Oh stop. Even Bowser's own advisers are pissed she's looking the other way on this.
Is it because they’re excellent muni lawyers, or because they’re dumb and angry?
The entire Department of Energy and Environment is really unhappy with the mayor.
And yet, DOEE has zero jurisdiction over the white house.
Of course, it has jurisdiction. It would be pretty weird if our air quality laws didn't apply to federal lands, given the massive amount of federal land in DC.
Why do you keep posting this stuff? Puerto Rico had a bombing range they hated and couldn’t do anything about. The locals can’t tell the feds what to do.
There was a big fight within the Bowser administration over whether to confront the White House on this stuff. If DC doesn't have jurisdiction (though it does), it sort of begs the question of why Bowser didn't warn the public that Trump was ignoring every environmental regulation on the books with the destruction of the East Wing. Reminder: asbestos causes cancer.
I'm sure there WAS a massive fight btw people who were angry and wrong vs people who understand what power the DC Mayor actually has over WH projects. TDS strikes again.
Anonymous
11/08/2025 19:10
Subject: Bowser could have stopped the East Wing demolition and chose not to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Why in the world do you think it’s wise for someone in Bowser’s position to antagonize Trump?
I'm not terribly invested in this particular issue, but it's important to always push back against this administration whenever possible. Their corruption is so blatant and total.
“Always”? Really? That’s a very privileged take — especially when you’re talking about say, dealing with psychopaths that have a lot of power over people who have entrusted you with their well-being. First up, if you “Always” do something reflexively, that suggests that you’re not bothering with any sort of cost benefit analysis in specific situations. That’s not what I, personally, want to see from my elected officials. Second, Trump and Miller will delight in having opportunities to declare some sort of military control, and the poorest and the people of color will be targets in ways that others will not be. Good on elected officials who recognize the reality that pushing back against this administration may be standing up for principles knowing that other people will have to pay the price. Push back needs to be done judiciously.
tldr: There’s a saying: Don’t write a check that your ass can’t cash. In this case, be careful about pushing back — when other, vulnerable people will have to pay the price for your actions.