There’s a fourth funding option: force the companies and individuals who illegally paid for it as political bribes to pay to restore it.
I think the next president probably needs to be comfortable wielding power in this way as we undo the damage. Otherwise the corrections will come too slow and too mildly to prevent this happening again
I completely agree and also - this is a broader issue around priorities for a reconstituted DOJ, one of which needs to be cracking down on the corruption of this Administration including punishing those who funneled money into it. And this can start in 2027 if Democrats gain control of either chamber of Congress with oversight hearings. We can expect stonewalling from the Administration (see Trump 2019-21) but private actors may think twice before ignoring Congressional subpoenas. It still may not be worth tearing down the Obama Ballroom, but we should definitely be taking names and collecting huge restitution checks as a curative to the lawlessness of the current moment (and to help fund the construction of a new government.)
It's not how we want to operate, but the dynamic where there are consequences for not kissing the Republican ring and zero consequences for doing so - it's what got us here and it has to stop immediately once we gain any power. That starts with the imposition of consequences and the evening of that playing field. Not weaponizing it, but evening it. Gavin Newsom has played this exactly right with both Prop 50 and the colleges and universities thing IMO.
Who said sue? The [Newsom] administration has a policy that before [FCC Licenses/Desired Mergers/Federal permits/etc] are granted, the debts from these illegal bribes must be [donated to the committee to restore the white house]. We literally just watched the mechanism happen.
Call the EO “restoring a fair and impartial US government” and start it “whereas a number of private companies knowingly and illegally paid bribes to the prior president, the government cannot transact business in these companies interest until those bribes are paid back”
Or don't write it down and just threaten it on the talk shows.
The point is anyone who thinks the above tactics are "below us" is advocating for a world where we continue the power imbalance I described above - where democrats act like adults and are subject to all kinds of old world rules and Republicans just take whatever they want and get away with it. Whatever leader we get needs to have a strategy for changing that balance. "The US attorney would never let us do that" = old world thinking = unfit for this moment.
As far as mergers, I didn’t like how the Biden White House slow walked the JetBlue and Spirit merger (killing it and likely Spirit) and yet let Hawaiian and Alaska’s merger sail through.
It seems to me that they were picking winners and losers based on partisan connections with the Hawaiian government instead of any kind of durable and principled rule. Just my opinion.
When I heard Gallego’s suggestion about renaming it the Barack Obama Ballroom I literally jumped off the sofa and yelled “YES!”. Renaming it the Michelle Obama Office is equally good. It’s a very large structure - maybe we could do both 😁
I agree with JVL. If you don't have the political will to do something easy like tear down the ballroom, you are not going to have the political will to do the hard stuff like dismantling ICE and holding people accountable for all of the lawlessness.
Petty retaliation? Nothing petty about it. Garland's abject failure to vindicate the rule of law promptly and aggressively has led to this. It's no longer taken seriously by any Republican or a dangerously large portion of the electorate. We're going to havevl to come down on these people like the Wrath of God.
And what IS the source of people's problems? The power of these same people, their wealth, their corruption, their self-dealing, and their sociopathic recklessness.
Which voter told you the source of problems was that list? None.
My point was that many people in this country have real problems and those they put in office are expected to address them. Petty arguments over who built a building and who’s going to rear it down will look far out of touch.
We need to see things through the eyes of swing voters among others.
When swing voters actually see that monstrosity, it's going to bother them. It will make concrete and viisible all the damage Trump and ungoverned, rapacious, wealth has done.
Believe JVL of the Bulwark said, if you're not prepared to tear down a building, people will conclude you're not prepared to tear down corrupt institutions either.
As Empty Wheel put it (Let Them Eat Ballroom, You Tube), it's a metonym.
Sorry, it doesn’t seem to be breaking through with the average voter. Polls show only about 25% feeling outrage. It’s an issue that outrages the usual apoplectic pearl clutchers.
Swing voters bet on Trump over economic issues; nothing has changed, and they’ll vote on economic calamity again.
It’s always tempting to paint those issues that outrage us personally as triggering or divisive in an election. But I am not seeing it anywhere that I trust to track voter sentiment. The echo chambers of MSNBC or the anti-Trump Republicans are frothing at the mouth, but they have a lot of airtime to fill.
Democrats have to start with finding the political will to stand up to the (understandably) angry Twitter mob or the party will never win another majority. Let alone the 60 Senate seats needed to pass something with meat on the bone.
Dan is trying to stand up to the Twitter mob here.
I can only imagine the hate emails and comments flooding in rewarding him for his attempt.
In fact, the opposite is true. Democrat's perceived weakness is a major deficit in the eyes of the electorate. This is widely understood and commented on.
We got the "reasonable" vote. Not enough, was it? Particularly the vote gained by being "reasonable" in the eyes of capital.
I guess I am not too worried that some folks--especially politicians--are pledging today to tear down Trump's Ballroom. Go ahead. That's fine. But that is something to worry about way down the road. We will be fortunate to have that option if it comes around. Let's worry about all the other things that Trump is wrecking, realizing that the East Wing destruction is an apt metaphor for a nation in the throes of demolition-and surely substantiates a truth about his life and career: despite his "success" Trump destroys everything and everyone he touches.
As someone once said, tearing down the East Wing on a unilateral whim is the perfect metaphor for Trump’s arrogant contempt for law and tradition. Building Mar a Lago-on-the-Potomac is the perfect metaphor for his vulgarity.
If Democrats ever recapture power in Washington, they need to GOVERN aggressively, to prove democracy works for the working people.
Renaming it the Barack Hussein Obama ballroom is a brilliant retort. Ad would be hosting regular events for working people.
Meanwhile: early voting in NJ until 11/2. If you or someone you know is a voter here, please encourage them to get their ballot in! Information available on county locations at mikiesherrill.com
Perhaps the ballroom could be modified. Perhaps the roof could be fitted with solar panels. Perhaps a greenhouse could be installed. Perhaps have parts refitted for offices involved with immigration policy.
Also, is a bunkhouse for emergencies being constructed underneath it to replace a smaller structure to protect the president in such situations? That may change the calculus of the situation.
You're absolutely right, Dan, it should not be our focus. But I will have my moment of outrage and heartbreak. I grew up in DC; my father, @Sara Danver (she/her) ‘s grandfather worked for the CIA for 25 years, and helped tear down the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall. This is the physical symbol of tearing down the democracy my family has always fought for. When the moment comes, that ballroom monstrosity will be a monument to the fragility of human rights and democracy.
That's an apt comparison to the Berlin Wall. But let's remember that the Berlin Wall stood for decades, and Trump's Fancy hasn't even been built yet. Talk of tearing it down is premature. Let's focus on not letting it get that far.
Okay, but I also think this is being overthought. It doesn't need to be a priority but a message must be made clear that this won't be allowed to stand. This ballroom will be a huge symbol of a Presidency that had no regard for the people, the law, the Constitution and zero respect for our shared history and the People's house. And if these jackalopes have taught us anything it's that symbols matter. Marketing matters (more than product it seems). So to leave it standing, or ignoring it, says it was okay to do this in the manner in which it was done. And it wasn't. I'm a little tired of people saying we can't express intention or feelings about certain things because there are too many things. Fuck that.
You're assuming the ballroom will be completed before Trump leaves office. Building a huge new building takes a long time even when well-managed. And who thinks that project will be managed competently? I'm extremely skeptical that there are even real architectural drawings for it, much less a project plan.
So maybe the real question, what should the next president do with a messy construction site that lacks drawings, a project plan, and essential contractors?
I do believe the priority for the next president is to rebuild / reconstitute the republic. To that end, leave the ballroom and rename it “The People’s Place” or solicit names from the people. Then redecorate it minus the bling - perhaps have pictures on the wall of the evolution of White House architecture. Last - hold all kinds of events that bring people together - not just state events. So have plans for Black History Month, Pride Month, Grandparent’s Day - I could go on.
So you're OK with a balls-room that dwarfs the White House itself? More important -- expecting the next president to "rebuild/reconstitute the republic" sounds like a page from the "unitary executive" playbook. Let's at least pretend that the Constitution provides for three branches of government, and this time let's pay closer attention to the unelected fourth branch: economic power, i.e., what's wielded by corporations and the über-wealthy.
I agree with you that the 3 branches of government need to function as intended and the next president needs to make that the priority not tearing down a ballroom.
In practical terms, what does that mean? The next president can do a lot to clean up the executive branch, e.g., by appointing competent cabinet members and other top advisers, but replacing those at lower levels who've left will be harder. At present, SCOTUS is fixed at 9 members. Increasing the number to, e.g., 15, would be great, but that's a very heavy lift. Persuading any of the far-right 6 to either resign or at least pretend to be pro-democracy seems almost as unlikely. It's crucial that the Dems take back at least the House (and maybe even the Senate?) in 2026, but is reining in corporate and $$$ power (what I call the unelected fourth branch of government) possible with the current SCOTUS majority? I doubt it.
There’s a fourth funding option: force the companies and individuals who illegally paid for it as political bribes to pay to restore it.
I think the next president probably needs to be comfortable wielding power in this way as we undo the damage. Otherwise the corrections will come too slow and too mildly to prevent this happening again
I completely agree and also - this is a broader issue around priorities for a reconstituted DOJ, one of which needs to be cracking down on the corruption of this Administration including punishing those who funneled money into it. And this can start in 2027 if Democrats gain control of either chamber of Congress with oversight hearings. We can expect stonewalling from the Administration (see Trump 2019-21) but private actors may think twice before ignoring Congressional subpoenas. It still may not be worth tearing down the Obama Ballroom, but we should definitely be taking names and collecting huge restitution checks as a curative to the lawlessness of the current moment (and to help fund the construction of a new government.)
It's not how we want to operate, but the dynamic where there are consequences for not kissing the Republican ring and zero consequences for doing so - it's what got us here and it has to stop immediately once we gain any power. That starts with the imposition of consequences and the evening of that playing field. Not weaponizing it, but evening it. Gavin Newsom has played this exactly right with both Prop 50 and the colleges and universities thing IMO.
Not to be a wet blanket, but I’m not sure what a future US Attorney could sue for that would stand up.
Who said sue? The [Newsom] administration has a policy that before [FCC Licenses/Desired Mergers/Federal permits/etc] are granted, the debts from these illegal bribes must be [donated to the committee to restore the white house]. We literally just watched the mechanism happen.
Call the EO “restoring a fair and impartial US government” and start it “whereas a number of private companies knowingly and illegally paid bribes to the prior president, the government cannot transact business in these companies interest until those bribes are paid back”
Or don't write it down and just threaten it on the talk shows.
The point is anyone who thinks the above tactics are "below us" is advocating for a world where we continue the power imbalance I described above - where democrats act like adults and are subject to all kinds of old world rules and Republicans just take whatever they want and get away with it. Whatever leader we get needs to have a strategy for changing that balance. "The US attorney would never let us do that" = old world thinking = unfit for this moment.
As far as mergers, I didn’t like how the Biden White House slow walked the JetBlue and Spirit merger (killing it and likely Spirit) and yet let Hawaiian and Alaska’s merger sail through.
It seems to me that they were picking winners and losers based on partisan connections with the Hawaiian government instead of any kind of durable and principled rule. Just my opinion.
I’m not familiar with statute nor case law to know if that EO would pass SCOTUS, so I’ll take your word for it.
If it likely wouldn’t pass SCOTUS and instead President Newsom is “getting caught trying” then I’m against the idea.
Being rational does not make you a wet blanket.
Yes very good point
Or why not just turn it back into office space? And call it the Michelle Obama Office Wing?
When I heard Gallego’s suggestion about renaming it the Barack Obama Ballroom I literally jumped off the sofa and yelled “YES!”. Renaming it the Michelle Obama Office is equally good. It’s a very large structure - maybe we could do both 😁
It should be left standing and become the US Museum of Fascism. Most European nations have a reminder not to do this again and so should we.
Another very good idea.
Ruben Gallego for the win 😂😂
I agree with JVL. If you don't have the political will to do something easy like tear down the ballroom, you are not going to have the political will to do the hard stuff like dismantling ICE and holding people accountable for all of the lawlessness.
Is that the signal that we want to send our voters? “Screw your problems. Our first priority is petty retaliation”?
Petty retaliation? Nothing petty about it. Garland's abject failure to vindicate the rule of law promptly and aggressively has led to this. It's no longer taken seriously by any Republican or a dangerously large portion of the electorate. We're going to havevl to come down on these people like the Wrath of God.
And what IS the source of people's problems? The power of these same people, their wealth, their corruption, their self-dealing, and their sociopathic recklessness.
Which voter told you the source of problems was that list? None.
My point was that many people in this country have real problems and those they put in office are expected to address them. Petty arguments over who built a building and who’s going to rear it down will look far out of touch.
We need to see things through the eyes of swing voters among others.
When swing voters actually see that monstrosity, it's going to bother them. It will make concrete and viisible all the damage Trump and ungoverned, rapacious, wealth has done.
Believe JVL of the Bulwark said, if you're not prepared to tear down a building, people will conclude you're not prepared to tear down corrupt institutions either.
As Empty Wheel put it (Let Them Eat Ballroom, You Tube), it's a metonym.
Sorry, it doesn’t seem to be breaking through with the average voter. Polls show only about 25% feeling outrage. It’s an issue that outrages the usual apoplectic pearl clutchers.
Swing voters bet on Trump over economic issues; nothing has changed, and they’ll vote on economic calamity again.
It’s always tempting to paint those issues that outrage us personally as triggering or divisive in an election. But I am not seeing it anywhere that I trust to track voter sentiment. The echo chambers of MSNBC or the anti-Trump Republicans are frothing at the mouth, but they have a lot of airtime to fill.
Democrats have to start with finding the political will to stand up to the (understandably) angry Twitter mob or the party will never win another majority. Let alone the 60 Senate seats needed to pass something with meat on the bone.
Dan is trying to stand up to the Twitter mob here.
I can only imagine the hate emails and comments flooding in rewarding him for his attempt.
In fact, the opposite is true. Democrat's perceived weakness is a major deficit in the eyes of the electorate. This is widely understood and commented on.
We got the "reasonable" vote. Not enough, was it? Particularly the vote gained by being "reasonable" in the eyes of capital.
I don’t understand what you mean, sorry.
I guess I am not too worried that some folks--especially politicians--are pledging today to tear down Trump's Ballroom. Go ahead. That's fine. But that is something to worry about way down the road. We will be fortunate to have that option if it comes around. Let's worry about all the other things that Trump is wrecking, realizing that the East Wing destruction is an apt metaphor for a nation in the throes of demolition-and surely substantiates a truth about his life and career: despite his "success" Trump destroys everything and everyone he touches.
As someone once said, tearing down the East Wing on a unilateral whim is the perfect metaphor for Trump’s arrogant contempt for law and tradition. Building Mar a Lago-on-the-Potomac is the perfect metaphor for his vulgarity.
Absolutely!
100% agree.
If Democrats ever recapture power in Washington, they need to GOVERN aggressively, to prove democracy works for the working people.
Renaming it the Barack Hussein Obama ballroom is a brilliant retort. Ad would be hosting regular events for working people.
Meanwhile: early voting in NJ until 11/2. If you or someone you know is a voter here, please encourage them to get their ballot in! Information available on county locations at mikiesherrill.com
Perhaps the ballroom could be modified. Perhaps the roof could be fitted with solar panels. Perhaps a greenhouse could be installed. Perhaps have parts refitted for offices involved with immigration policy.
Also, is a bunkhouse for emergencies being constructed underneath it to replace a smaller structure to protect the president in such situations? That may change the calculus of the situation.
I, too, immediately thought of a greenhouse.
Love this idea. I thought it would make a great College of Antifa.
You're absolutely right, Dan, it should not be our focus. But I will have my moment of outrage and heartbreak. I grew up in DC; my father, @Sara Danver (she/her) ‘s grandfather worked for the CIA for 25 years, and helped tear down the Iron Curtain and the Berlin Wall. This is the physical symbol of tearing down the democracy my family has always fought for. When the moment comes, that ballroom monstrosity will be a monument to the fragility of human rights and democracy.
That's an apt comparison to the Berlin Wall. But let's remember that the Berlin Wall stood for decades, and Trump's Fancy hasn't even been built yet. Talk of tearing it down is premature. Let's focus on not letting it get that far.
It shouldn’t be a priority, but the next president should right-size it and make Trump pay for it.
Okay, but I also think this is being overthought. It doesn't need to be a priority but a message must be made clear that this won't be allowed to stand. This ballroom will be a huge symbol of a Presidency that had no regard for the people, the law, the Constitution and zero respect for our shared history and the People's house. And if these jackalopes have taught us anything it's that symbols matter. Marketing matters (more than product it seems). So to leave it standing, or ignoring it, says it was okay to do this in the manner in which it was done. And it wasn't. I'm a little tired of people saying we can't express intention or feelings about certain things because there are too many things. Fuck that.
You're assuming the ballroom will be completed before Trump leaves office. Building a huge new building takes a long time even when well-managed. And who thinks that project will be managed competently? I'm extremely skeptical that there are even real architectural drawings for it, much less a project plan.
So maybe the real question, what should the next president do with a messy construction site that lacks drawings, a project plan, and essential contractors?
There’s a concept of drawings…
Not if you build it cheap enough.
Agree and well said. Repurpose the building. If it is indeed going to be as large as proposed, that will make it an eyesore.
It could be used as a voting location for whatever precinct the White House is in.
Ok I wasn’t exactly on board until the end. Yes name the ballroom after Obama.
I do believe the priority for the next president is to rebuild / reconstitute the republic. To that end, leave the ballroom and rename it “The People’s Place” or solicit names from the people. Then redecorate it minus the bling - perhaps have pictures on the wall of the evolution of White House architecture. Last - hold all kinds of events that bring people together - not just state events. So have plans for Black History Month, Pride Month, Grandparent’s Day - I could go on.
So you're OK with a balls-room that dwarfs the White House itself? More important -- expecting the next president to "rebuild/reconstitute the republic" sounds like a page from the "unitary executive" playbook. Let's at least pretend that the Constitution provides for three branches of government, and this time let's pay closer attention to the unelected fourth branch: economic power, i.e., what's wielded by corporations and the über-wealthy.
I agree with you that the 3 branches of government need to function as intended and the next president needs to make that the priority not tearing down a ballroom.
In practical terms, what does that mean? The next president can do a lot to clean up the executive branch, e.g., by appointing competent cabinet members and other top advisers, but replacing those at lower levels who've left will be harder. At present, SCOTUS is fixed at 9 members. Increasing the number to, e.g., 15, would be great, but that's a very heavy lift. Persuading any of the far-right 6 to either resign or at least pretend to be pro-democracy seems almost as unlikely. It's crucial that the Dems take back at least the House (and maybe even the Senate?) in 2026, but is reining in corporate and $$$ power (what I call the unelected fourth branch of government) possible with the current SCOTUS majority? I doubt it.
Well said.
Leaving it up would also remind people what happened and what we went through. Name change could be enough.