Category: Unpresidential

Trump’s Ballroom Plans Spark Demolition Controversy at White House

The White House has initiated demolition work on the East Wing, aiming to make way for a new ballroom proposed by Donald Trump, although no official plans have been submitted yet to the National Capital Planning Commission (NCPC), which oversees federal construction projects. Despite the ongoing demolition, the White House has assured that this action is permitted without prior approval from the commission.

Trump’s ambitious plans for the 90,000 square foot ballroom were disclosed earlier in the summer, with Trump pledging to personally fund the estimated $200 million project. However, criticism has emerged regarding the legality and regulatory adherence of the demolition process, particularly from the National Trust for Historic Preservation, which has emphasized that public review is necessary before such actions can occur.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, addressed the public backlash, framing it as exaggerated. She defended Trump’s proactive approach to construction, highlighting his reputation as “builder-in-chief” and suggesting that he had a mandate from the public to make these changes to the White House.

Concerns raised by preservationists include the potential overwhelming scale of the new structure and its impact on the classical design integrity of the White House. The critique was underscored by a recent letter from the National Trust for Historic Preservation urging Trump to cease demolition until a thorough review can be conducted.

During Trump’s first term, the NCPC was engaged for smaller projects, raising questions about the consistency of adhering to protocol for significantly larger developments like the proposed ballroom. Despite assurances from Trump that the new construction would respect the existing structure, the current state of the East Wing has led to skepticism among critics.

George Santos Avoids Restitution After Trump’s Clemency Order

Former Representative George Santos (R-N.Y.) will avoid any additional fines or restitution following his clemency order, released on Monday. The order came after President Donald Trump signed a commutation of Santos’s 87-month prison sentence, which he began serving three months ago.

The clemency order stipulates that Santos will serve no additional fines, restitution, probation, or supervised release conditions. Santos had previously pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, which resulted in a court sentence that included over $370,000 in restitution and two years of supervised release.

During an interview on CNN’s “State of the Union,” host Dana Bash questioned Santos regarding potential restitution payments. Santos expressed uncertainty about any obligations, stating he would comply with the law’s requirements. He emphasized his intention to act candidly and openly in the interview.

Initially sentenced to seven years for his offenses, Santos was expelled from Congress after reports surfaced revealing his fabricated résumé and misleading campaign finance disclosures. Trump took to Truth Social to commend Santos, commenting on his alleged mistreatment during incarceration and wishing him luck after signing the commutation.

Santos’s attorney, Joe Murray, confirmed that the former congressman was released from prison late Friday evening. This development adds to the ongoing narrative surrounding Santos’s legal troubles and his controversial relationship with higher political figures.

Trump Posts AI Video Depicting Feces Dropping on Protestors

On October 19, 2025, President Donald Trump shared an AI-generated video on his Truth Social account that portrayed him, adorned with a crown, in a fighter jet labeled “King Trump,” dropping what appeared to be feces on protesters. This video, which lasts 19 seconds, was released following nationwide “No Kings” rallies that protested against Trump and his administration.

The clip features left-wing influencer Harry Sisson among the protesters gathered in a setting resembling Times Square. In response to the video, Sisson tweeted asking reporters to pose the question of why Trump posted such content. Vice President JD Vance acknowledged Sisson’s request and said he would ask Trump on his behalf.

This recent video is part of a series of AI-produced content Trump has shared, particularly targeting his critics. A review by NBC News indicated that Trump has been active in posting these types of videos on his social media platform over the past months, with a noticeable frequency in August and September. Many of these videos originate from other accounts before being promoted by Trump.

The video utilizes the track “Danger Zone” by Kenny Loggins, who later requested that his music be removed from the video, condemning its use in a context designed to provoke division among the American public. Loggins expressed a desire for unity among Americans, emphasizing shared values over divisive narratives.

According to organizers of the “No Kings” protests, approximately 7 million people attended over 2,700 rallies across the U.S., marking a significant increase in participation compared to previous protests held in June. During a subsequent interview, Trump dismissed any claims that he is behaving as a monarch, asserting that he does not identify with the title.

Trump Calls for Investigation of Adam Schiff

President Donald Trump publicly urged authorities to investigate Senator Adam Schiff, claiming he violated numerous laws. His statement came in a post on Truth Social, where Trump characterized Schiff’s actions during the Ukraine impeachment process as a massive illegal scheme, likening it to Watergate.

Trump’s demand for an investigation of Schiff follows recent indictments of former FBI Director James Comey and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Comey faces charges for allegedly lying under oath, while James has been indicted for bank fraud and false statements. Both cases were presented to a grand jury by U.S. Attorney Lindsey Halligan, appointed to her position last month.

In a previous message intended for Attorney General Pam Bondi, Trump expressed frustration with inaction on cases against Comey, Schiff, and James, labeling them as “guilty as hell.” He criticized the legal system’s perceived delay in addressing these allegations, arguing that it has damaged his credibility and reputation.

Trump’s rhetoric continues to mirror his administration’s approach to political adversaries, where he accuses opponents of corruption even as he faces multiple legal challenges himself. The former president’s call for an investigation reflects an ongoing pattern of targeting political rivals through the judiciary.

The implications of Trump’s demand raise questions about the weaponization of justice against political opponents, as his commentary highlights a divisive climate in U.S. politics, affecting legal interpretations and actions.

Trump’s Fossil Fuel Favoritism

The Trump administration is offering exclusive assistance to fossil fuel companies, specifically oil and coal, described as a “concierge, white glove service,” to expedite project approvals. This new initiative starkly contrasts the administration’s treatment of renewable energy projects, which face significant slowdowns and blockades. Such preferential treatment raises concerns about the administration’s commitment to transitioning towards green energy and adhering to climate goals.

The “concierge service” was reportedly confirmed by an energy official, who highlighted how this initiative aims to streamline fossil fuel project approvals while renewable projects undergo rigorous scrutiny. This development reflects a troubling alignment with corporate interests, particularly evident under the influence of the Trump administration, known for its pro-fossil fuel stance.

This strategy targets established fossil fuel companies, likely jeopardizing future investments in solar and wind energy. The retreat from supporting clean energy initiatives echoes policies implemented during Trump’s tenure, suggesting a continued prioritization of fossil fuel profits over sustainable environmental policies.

Critics argue that this approach undermines the administration’s climate commitments and could lead to significant setbacks in reducing carbon emissions. The apparent favoritism towards fossil fuel firms showcases a broader trend of pandering to wealthy corporate interests, reminiscent of Trump’s dealings with oil executives, which included promises to act according to their demands.

As the Trump administration continues down this path, it risks alienating the very voters who supported a clean energy promise in exchange for political power. The implications of this fossil fuel favoritism extend beyond environmental concerns, potentially entrenching existing power dynamics that favor the wealthy and undermine equitable policies for the working class.

Trump Pledges National Guard Deployment to Chicago Amid Protests

President Donald Trump’s escalating confrontation with Chicago’s leadership reached a new level as he ordered the deployment of approximately 500 National Guard troops near the city. This controversial move came despite vocal opposition from both Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who condemned the militarization of their city as an unwarranted provocation. In response to their resistance, Trump callously suggested that both officials should face jail time, underscoring his authoritarian tendencies as he targets political opponents.

The National Guard presence, which included soldiers from both Texas and Illinois, was characterized by Trump and his administration as necessary for protecting federal personnel and property, particularly in the context of his aggressive immigration enforcement policies. However, recent protests against immigration actions in Chicago have predominantly been peaceful, contrasting sharply with Trump’s alarmist rhetoric about “violence” and “lawlessness,” which lacks factual backing.

Large protests emerged in Chicago, with many residents expressing rage against the deployment of National Guard troops and the broader implications of Trump’s immigration policies. Protesters chanted in solidarity with a recent victim of ICE violence, signifying community anger towards federal enforcement actions perceived as unjust and harmful. Such demonstrations highlight the divide between Trump’s narrative and the experiences and sentiments of local communities, particularly within Latino neighborhoods.

In an alarming trend, the Constitution is being leveraged by Trump as he threatens to sidestep judicial oversight regarding the National Guard’s deployment, indicating a disregard for checks and balances that are fundamental to American democracy. Legal challenges against these actions are underway, emphasizing the delicate balance of power and the resistance against Trump’s increasingly aggressive tactics, which mimic authoritarian regimes.

The ongoing situation in Chicago is emblematic of Trump’s broader strategy against Democratic leaders who oppose his fascistic agenda. This pivot towards militarization and intimidation reflects a national trend of targeting opposition, indicating a dangerous shift away from democratic norms and a troubling embrace of coercive governance that threatens the very fabric of civil liberties in America.

Pentagon Investigates Nearly 300 Personnel After Charlie Kirk Death

The Pentagon has launched a sweeping investigation into nearly 300 Defense Department personnel—including both military members and civilian contractors—following the controversial killing of Charlie Kirk, a prominent right-wing activist. This measure underscores the lengths to which the Trump administration is willing to go to silence dissent and shield its allies from criticism.

Documents obtained by The Washington Post reveal that individuals are being scrutinized for their online comments regarding Kirk’s tragic death. This expansive inquiry appears to serve a dual purpose: it both intimidates potential critics of Kirk and reinforces the culture of loyalty demanded by Trump and his allies.

Kirk’s death has been leveraged by right-wing figures to rally their base and vilify their opponents, portraying any negative commentary as an attack on a revered conservative martyr. While the administration pursues these investigations, it continues to suppress free speech under the guise of national security, fundamentally eroding democratic norms.

The investigation raises serious questions about the integrity of free expression within the armed forces and the implications of punishing employees for their opinions, especially when those opinions pertain to political figures affiliated with the Republican Party. Such actions illustrate a disturbing trend toward authoritarianism, aligning with Trump’s broader strategy of creating a compliant political environment.

Overall, the interrogation of personnel reflects a growing concern regarding the Trump administration’s increasing authoritarian grip, targeting dissent while elevating extremist ideologies under the banner of patriotism.

Stephen Miller Attacks Judges, Declares ‘Legal Insurrection’

Stephen Miller, the White House Deputy Chief of Staff, faced intense scrutiny regarding his inflammatory remarks about U.S. District Court judges. In a recent press briefing, he provocatively labeled a legal ruling as a “legal insurrection,” prompting a reporter to question whether he was suggesting President Trump should take punitive action against judges with whom he disagrees. Miller’s response was adamant, claiming that such judicial rulings constitute a usurpation of powers intended for the presidency, which he described as an “illegal insurrection.”

Miller’s comments followed a specific court ruling made by Judge Karin Immergut, who denied Trump’s directive to deploy troops to the Oregon city. Amidst his confrontation with the press, Miller dismissed the authority of district judges, arguing that they have issued numerous “flagrantly unlawful and unconstitutional” rulings that contradict the laws and Constitution of the United States. This rhetoric, steeped in a blatant disregard for judicial oversight, raises concerns about the Trump administration’s commitment to uphold democratic principles and the rule of law.

Critics were quick to condemn Miller’s assertions as dangerous, viewing them as an attack not only on Judge Immergut but on the judiciary as a whole. This reflects a broader trend within the Trump administration, where there is a troubling pattern of undermining checks and balances essential for maintaining a healthy democracy. Such dismissals of judicial authority are symptomatic of authoritarian tendencies, aligning with a disturbing strategy to delegitimize any opposing legal interpretation as a threat.

In defending his position, Miller contended that there has been an “ongoing legal insurrection” facilitated by judges challenging Trump’s policies. These comments echo a fascistic undercurrent prevalent in current Republican discourse, where authority is often challenged and attacked rather than respected. This continual rhetoric may further incite division and hostility toward the judicial system, emboldening supporters to disregard legal rulings that conflict with their agenda.

Ultimately, Miller’s defiance underscores a worrisome trajectory for American governance, as the erosion of respect for judicial processes threatens the foundations of democracy. As Trump’s administration pushes back against institutional norms, it becomes increasingly clear that the commitment to an equitable legal framework is being sacrificed in favor of maintaining authoritarian control over dissenting voices.

The U.S. Treasury Department is considering minting a coin

The U.S. Treasury Department is considering minting a coin featuring Donald Trump’s image to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States. This proposal has faced scrutiny for potentially violating legal standards regarding the portrayal of living individuals on currency. The suggestion has drawn criticism from various quarters concerned about the appropriateness of honoring Trump, whose presidency has been marred by controversy and corruption.

The proposal comes amid ongoing conversations about Trump’s significant impact on American politics. Trump’s presidency has been characterized by lies, racist rhetoric, and attempts to dismantle democratic norms, raising questions about the implications of such a commemoration. Critics argue that celebrating Trump’s controversial legacy could undermine the values that the anniversary is meant to represent.

Furthermore, the idea reflects a troubling trend in Republican politics, where loyalty to Trump often overshadows commitment to constitutional principles. The potential coin symbolizes an ingrained aspect of fascism within the Republican party—elevating one individual’s image over the collective ideals of democracy and unity in America.

This proposal not only represents a personal tribute to Trump but also blurs the line between political governance and the commodification of presidential legacy. The Trump administration’s focus on image and spectacle continues to divert attention from pressing national issues, reinforcing a culture that prioritizes authoritarianism over democratic values.

Ultimately, the proposal to mint a coin bearing Trump’s likeness serves as a stark reminder of the ongoing struggles against the erosion of democratic integrity in the United States, driven by a leadership that is increasingly authoritarian and disconnected from the founding principles of the nation.

Trump Calls Democrats ‘Little Gnat’ That Have To Be Taken Care Of

President Donald Trump is facing widespread criticism after referring to Democrats as a “little gnat” during a speech onboard a U.S. Navy vessel in Norfolk, Virginia, marking the Navy’s 250th anniversary. In his remarks, Trump accused Democrats of prioritizing illegal immigration over military pay, a comment that many viewed as inappropriate given the military context of the event. Lawmakers from both parties condemned his rhetoric, suggesting it undermined the distinction between military duties and political discourse.

The backlash included comments from Representative Yassamin Ansari, who remarked that Trump’s language blurred the lines between military involvement and political rivalry, labeling it “unacceptable.” Additionally, Gregg Nunziata, a former domestic policy adviser, called Trump’s remarks “repugnant and un-American,” highlighting the harmful implications of such divisive language in a military setting.

Trump’s remarks echo a troubling trend; just days prior at Quantico, he suggested using U.S. cities as military “training grounds” while characterizing domestic opponents as an “enemy within.” This militaristic tone has sparked concerns over the increased politicization of the armed forces, with critics emphasizing the need for a clear separation between military operations and partisan politics.

Supporting his position, Trump defended the deployment of National Guard troops to various U.S. cities while attempting to alleviate concerns about the ongoing government shutdown, which he blamed on Democrats. He affirmed that service members would receive their pay despite the shutdown, aiming to position himself as a protector of military interests amid political strife.

The use of military ceremonies for partisan attacks raises critical questions about the integrity of the armed forces and their role in American society. Trump’s rhetoric serves to reveal the increasing normalization of divisive language in political discourse, prompting calls from civic leaders for all political factions to denounce such destructive narratives in order to safeguard the country’s democratic values.

1 2 3 4 5 … 414