- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:24 pm to BugAC
quote:
So you believe a tent in the lawn is nicer than a formal ballroom?
That’s not the argument
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:24 pm to Decatur
quote:
Yeah Obama putting basketball goals on the tennis court is basically the same
Your standard for objection was "but no congressional approval". Or are you waffling already?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:25 pm to Decatur
You didn’t answer the questions:
Was the tennis court part of the original build?
If not, who paid for it?
Lastly, if privately funded, did Congress approve?
Was the tennis court part of the original build?
If not, who paid for it?
Lastly, if privately funded, did Congress approve?
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:25 pm to lepdagod
quote:
That’s not the argument
What is the argument? I gave a list of several projects constructed at the white house with private money, without congressional approval.
So the only argument you really have left is "Orange man bad".
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:26 pm to BugAC
quote:
Your standard for objection was "but no congressional approval". Or are you waffling already?
Decayed terd is moving the goal post because he has been exposed. He is a goose-stepper with terminal TDS.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:26 pm to jimmy the leg
Totally not lawfare!
-you know who
-you know who
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:26 pm to BugAC
quote:
So you believe a tent in the lawn is nicer than a formal ballroom?
Absolutely.
And who doesn't love shitting in a porta-potty while wearing a tuxedo or your finest dress? High class.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:27 pm to Vacherie Saint
Lawfare doesn't exist slowBoasbergPro.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:27 pm to Ailsa
BS
Impeach the judge…….
Impeach the judge…….
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:32 pm to BugAC
quote:
If your premise is "must have congressional approval" then again, i cite these examples of White House construction projects that did not have Congressional approval.
Retrofitting basketball goals on an existing tennis court is not the erection of a building or structure for the purposes of 40 USC 8106 so Obama did not need congressional approval.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:32 pm to BugAC
quote:
What is the argument?
Nothing about Obama to begin with
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:38 pm to Decatur
quote:
Are you really trying to draw a comparison with the ballroom?
A basketball court is a personal accommodation. I don't have an issue with the president adding things for personal benefit, like a pool, theater, bowling alley, or basketball court. It is a stressful job, and people need ways to wind down. But they offer no benefit to conducting official business and no benefit to American citizens.
A ballroom offers a benefit to all future administrations and is a project of need.
The only reason it is objected to is that Trump is the one having it built.
Let's not pretend all the people taking issue with it have some great attachment to the East Wing. The vast majority of Americans have never seen the White House in person, let alone been inside.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:41 pm to frankthetank
quote:Dem's are pissed that DJT came in and wiped out the national architectural and planning committee and reloaded with people (firms) HE wanted to oversee White House projects.
So one branch of government has to ask another for permission to build something that is privately funded? That makes no sense.
Some of these judges need to be removed for incompetence.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:45 pm to RT1941
quote:
Dem's are pissed that DJT came in and wiped out the national architectural and planning committee and reloaded with people (firms) HE wanted to oversee White House projects
That alone probably saved billions of dollars from being funneled into their slush funds.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:48 pm to Nurbis
The east wing is crap, . The tents are crap. The trust is is consumed by TDS. The judge should be impeached. All of the POTUS have had the power to make changes . The east wing is just that a wing to the side of the WH. Putting in a ballroom makes the complex much much better.
TDS should be grounds for removal……
TDS should be grounds for removal……
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:49 pm to Decatur
quote:
40 USC 8106
That covers new buildings, not renovations to existing buildings.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:53 pm to TigerBaitOohHaHa
quote:
OMG that judge looks like a bad guy in a Harry Potter film.
I have seen handlebar moustaches but never handlebar eyebrows.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:56 pm to Nurbis
quote:
That covers new buildings, not renovations to existing buildings.
Ok, which is why Trump needs congressional approval for the ballroom.
The Obamas paying to put in some basketball goals did not require congressional approval.
Posted on 3/31/26 at 3:59 pm to alphaandomega
Interesting if you go to AI and type in the question it gives this answer:
However, the judge ruling seems to say that since it is public land, nothing can be done without authorization from congress.
Prudent action was to get authorization but that also requires funding. If argued as privately funded "renovation" to already approved land it becomes much less clear.
Kind of hard to get congress to approve something that does not involve any expenditure on their part.
quote:
Congress does not need to approve all work done at or on the White House grounds. While Congress has a formal role in approving major renovations and funding for federal projects, it does not control privately funded work. The President and the Executive Office of the President hold ultimate authority over the White House, and several advisory bodies and oversight committees can review and influence projects after the fact. This means that while Congress provides oversight and sets conditions for federal funding, it does not directly approve every aspect of the work done on the White House grounds.
However, the judge ruling seems to say that since it is public land, nothing can be done without authorization from congress.
Prudent action was to get authorization but that also requires funding. If argued as privately funded "renovation" to already approved land it becomes much less clear.
Kind of hard to get congress to approve something that does not involve any expenditure on their part.
Page 4 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News