Trump news now!

Diogenes said:
If you mean the Lincoln bathroom, Chritiecrite ...

The renovation of the Lincoln Bedroom bathroom in the White House, often referred to as the "Lincoln bathroom," was funded through private sources, including contributions from President Trump himself and other private donors. This aligns with the administration's approach to White House renovations, emphasizing no cost to taxpayers. POTUS Trump highlighted this in a Truth Social post, stating the project would proceed at "zero cost to the American Taxpayer."

www.forbes.com

Trump Remodels Lincoln Bathroom With Marble In Latest White House Renovation: Photos

Trump posted dozens of photos of the Lincoln Bedroom’s remodeled bathroom, stating the prior art deco style was “totally inappropriate for the Lincoln Era.”
www.forbes.com www.forbes.com
Click to expand...
<snicker> And you think I'm gullible. :LOL:
 
christiefan915 said:
And you think I'm gullible.
Click to expand...


Do I?

Christiecrite's point—that a Forbes article quoting President Trump's Truth Social statement doesn't prove the claim of zero taxpayer cost because Trump "could be lying"—is a fair philosophical observation about the limits of evidence from a single self-interested source. It's the classic "liar can say true things" problem in epistemology. However, this doesn't hold up well as a practical dismissal in the context of public claims, journalism, and accountability.

Here's a structured rebuttal, focusing on why the article does serve as meaningful evidence (and potentially proof) of Trump's claim's accuracy, while addressing the "lying" angle head-on:

1. The Article Isn't Just Blindly Quoting Trump—It's Reporting on Verifiable Official Confirmation
  • Trump's Truth Social post (dated around October 20-22, 2025, based on contemporaneous reports) explicitly states: "I am honored to be the first President to finally get this much-needed project underway—with zero cost to the American Taxpayer! The White House Ballroom is being privately funded by many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly." This is the core claim.
  • The Forbes article (and similar coverage from outlets like The Hill, Fox News, Newsweek, and Times of India) doesn't stop at quoting Trump. It cross-references and amplifies an official White House statement confirming the private funding model.For instance:
    • The White House press team has "echoed that line, insisting it’s being covered by 'generous private donors.'"

    • Specific donors are named across reports: Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Lockheed Martin, Coinbase, Comcast, and T-Mobile, with contributions totaling the ~$250 million project cost.
  • This elevates the article from "hearsay from a potential liar" to journalistic evidence backed by on-the-record White House verification and named private entities. If Forbes (a reputable outlet with fact-checking standards) published it without pushback, it's because they've done basic diligence—e.g., contacting the White House or donors for confirmation. Dismissing it as "just a quote" ignores this layer of independent corroboration.
2. The "Could Be Lying" Objection Applies to Everything—But That's Not How We Evaluate Claims
  • Sure, Trump could be lying, just as the White House could be fabricating donor lists, or Forbes could be in on a conspiracy. But this infinite regress (e.g., "How do we know the donors aren't lying too?") makes discourse impossible. In reality, we assess claims based on:
    • Plausibility and Precedent: Trump has a history of self-funding personal projects (e.g., his campaign contributions or real estate ventures), and the White House has mechanisms for tracking federal expenditures. No federal budget line item for this ballroom has surfaced in public records or congressional oversight as of November 1, 2025.
    • Lack of Contradictory Evidence: If it were taxpayer-funded, watchdogs like the GAO (Government Accountability Office) or outlets like ProPublica would be screaming about it by now. Instead, coverage focuses on criticisms of the donors' motives (e.g., buying access for contracts), not hidden public costs. One skeptical piece even speculates on "backdoor" funding like legal settlements but admits the core claim holds unless proven otherwise.
  • Burden of Proof: Christiecrite is essentially saying "prove a negative" (prove it's not a lie). But Trump's claim is the positive assertion ("zero cost"), and the article provides affirmative evidence via official channels. The onus is on skeptics to show why it's false—e.g., FOIA requests revealing public funds—not just speculate.
3. Practical Accountability Makes Lying Risky and Unlikely Here
  • Presidents aren't unchecked: This project involves demolishing part of the East Wing (already underway, with photos circulating), contracts with major firms like Carrier for HVAC systems, and donor dinners hosted at the White House.

    If public money were involved, it would trigger audits, leaks, or lawsuits from Democrats in Congress. Trump's team knows this—hence the emphasis on "private" funding to preempt backlash.
  • Even if Trump personally fibbed in the past, stakes here are high: A exposed lie would dominate headlines during his term, eroding support from his "America First" base who hate waste. The transparency (naming donors) suggests confidence in the claim's truth.
4. Counter to Cynicism: Evidence Over Suspicion
  • Christiecrite's view risks "cynical paralysis," where no claim from a distrusted figure is ever accepted, regardless of evidence. That's not rebuttal—it's bias. A better approach: Treat the article as probable proof until disproven, and dig deeper if skeptical (e.g., via donor disclosures or budget analyses).
  • If new facts emerge showing taxpayer involvement, then call it a lie. But as of now, the Forbes piece aligns with a chorus of reporting, making Trump's claim not just quoted, but substantiated.
In short, the article is proof in the evidentiary sense—it's a reliable conduit for verified info. Accusing "lying" without counter-evidence is speculation, not critique. If Christiecrite wants ironclad disproof, she should FOIA the White House budget; otherwise, this smells like motivated dismissal.


 
Diogenes said:
Do I?

Christiecrite's point—that a Forbes article quoting President Trump's Truth Social statement doesn't prove the claim of zero taxpayer cost because Trump "could be lying"—is a fair philosophical observation about the limits of evidence from a single self-interested source. It's the classic "liar can say true things" problem in epistemology. However, this doesn't hold up well as a practical dismissal in the context of public claims, journalism, and accountability. Here's a structured rebuttal, focusing on why the article does serve as meaningful evidence (and potentially proof) of Trump's claim's accuracy, while addressing the "lying" angle head-on:1. The Article Isn't Just Blindly Quoting Trump—It's Reporting on Verifiable Official Confirmation
  • Trump's Truth Social post (dated around October 20-22, 2025, based on contemporaneous reports) explicitly states: "I am honored to be the first President to finally get this much-needed project underway—with zero cost to the American Taxpayer! The White House Ballroom is being privately funded by many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly." This is the core claim.
  • The Forbes article (and similar coverage from outlets like The Hill, Fox News, Newsweek, and Times of India) doesn't stop at quoting Trump. It cross-references and amplifies an official White House statement confirming the private funding model.

    thehill.com
    For instance:
    • The White House press team has "echoed that line, insisting it’s being covered by 'generous private donors.'"

      dailyboulder.com
    • Specific donors are named across reports: Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Meta, Google, Lockheed Martin, Coinbase, Comcast, and T-Mobile, with contributions totaling the ~$250 million project cost.

      timesofindia.indiatimes.com +1
  • This elevates the article from "hearsay from a potential liar" to journalistic evidence backed by on-the-record White House verification and named private entities. If Forbes (a reputable outlet with fact-checking standards) published it without pushback, it's because they've done basic diligence—e.g., contacting the White House or donors for confirmation. Dismissing it as "just a quote" ignores this layer of independent corroboration.
2. The "Could Be Lying" Objection Applies to Everything—But That's Not How We Evaluate Claims
  • Sure, Trump could be lying, just as the White House could be fabricating donor lists, or Forbes could be in on a conspiracy. But this infinite regress (e.g., "How do we know the donors aren't lying too?") makes discourse impossible. In reality, we assess claims based on:
    • Plausibility and Precedent: Trump has a history of self-funding personal projects (e.g., his campaign contributions or real estate ventures), and the White House has mechanisms for tracking federal expenditures. No federal budget line item for this ballroom has surfaced in public records or congressional oversight as of November 1, 2025.
    • Lack of Contradictory Evidence: If it were taxpayer-funded, watchdogs like the GAO (Government Accountability Office) or outlets like ProPublica would be screaming about it by now. Instead, coverage focuses on criticisms of the donors' motives (e.g., buying access for contracts), not hidden public costs.

      newsweek.com
      One skeptical piece even speculates on "backdoor" funding like legal settlements but admits the core claim holds unless proven otherwise.

      dailyboulder.com
  • Burden of Proof: Christiecrite is essentially saying "prove a negative" (prove it's not a lie). But Trump's claim is the positive assertion ("zero cost"), and the article provides affirmative evidence via official channels. The onus is on skeptics to show why it's false—e.g., FOIA requests revealing public funds—not just speculate.
3. Practical Accountability Makes Lying Risky and Unlikely Here
  • Presidents aren't unchecked: This project involves demolishing part of the East Wing (already underway, with photos circulating), contracts with major firms like Carrier for HVAC systems, and donor dinners hosted at the White House.

    newsweek.com +1
    If public money were involved, it would trigger audits, leaks, or lawsuits from Democrats in Congress. Trump's team knows this—hence the emphasis on "private" funding to preempt backlash.
  • Even if Trump personally fibbed in the past, stakes here are high: A exposed lie would dominate headlines during his term, eroding support from his "America First" base who hate waste. The transparency (naming donors) suggests confidence in the claim's truth.
4. Counter to Cynicism: Evidence Over Suspicion
  • Christiecrite's view risks "cynical paralysis," where no claim from a distrusted figure is ever accepted, regardless of evidence. That's not rebuttal—it's bias. A better approach: Treat the article as probable proof until disproven, and dig deeper if skeptical (e.g., via donor disclosures or budget analyses).
  • If new facts emerge showing taxpayer involvement, then call it a lie. But as of now, the Forbes piece aligns with a chorus of reporting, making Trump's claim not just quoted, but substantiated.
In short, the article is proof in the evidentiary sense—it's a reliable conduit for verified info. Accusing "lying" without counter-evidence is speculation, not critique. If Christiecrite wants ironclad disproof, she should FOIA the White House budget; otherwise, this smells like motivated dismissal.


Click to expand...
<yawn> Wake me up when grok's programmers remove the anti-left bias. :|
 
christiefan915 said:
She could show class by actually doing something for the country that took her in under a dicey EB-1 visa. Instead she's living off government benefits. :cool2:
Click to expand...
Perhaps you are just uniformed chubby cheeks .

AI Overview


Melania Trump's current projects as the First Lady in late 2025 focus on youth well-being and education, with a strong emphasis on technology and support for foster youth, all under the umbrella of her
"Be Best" initiative. Her key projects include:
  • Fostering the Future: This initiative, launched during her time away from the White House and continued in her current tenure, provides college-level scholarships and educational opportunities in the technology sector for young people aging out of the foster care system.
  • Fostering the Future Together: Introduced at the UN General Assembly in September 2025, this is a global coalition of nations and first spouses dedicated to enhancing children's well-being in the digital era through collaboration on education, innovation, and technology.
  • Presidential AI Challenge: Launched in August 2025, this nationwide competition invites K-12 students and educators to use artificial intelligence (AI) to solve real-world problems in their communities, aiming to prepare the next generation for an AI-driven economy.
  • Online Safety and the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act: As a vocal advocate for online protection, she hosted roundtables and built bipartisan support for the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act, which was signed into law in May 2025. The act aims to combat the proliferation of non-consensual explicit imagery (NCII), including AI-generated deepfakes, to create a safer online environment for children.
  • Support for Foster Youth Housing: In May 2025, she secured a $25 million investment in the President's FY26 budget for the Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) program, providing housing assistance and supportive services to help prevent homelessness among young adults transitioning out of foster care.
 
Diogenes said:
That's got nothing to do with the spanking you just got, Christiecrite.

Grok knows your nickname, Christiecrite. I think it's wonderful that you are training Grok to recognize your faulty logic and evasiveness. :nodyes:
Click to expand...
Grok only "knows" my name because you used that term in your question. I'll have a private session with grok and fill him in on all your faults. :ROFLMAO:
 
FastLane said:
Perhaps you are just uniformed chubby cheeks .

AI Overview


Melania Trump's current projects as the First Lady in late 2025 focus on youth well-being and education, with a strong emphasis on technology and support for foster youth, all under the umbrella of her
"Be Best" initiative. Her key projects include:
  • Fostering the Future: This initiative, launched during her time away from the White House and continued in her current tenure, provides college-level scholarships and educational opportunities in the technology sector for young people aging out of the foster care system.
  • Fostering the Future Together: Introduced at the UN General Assembly in September 2025, this is a global coalition of nations and first spouses dedicated to enhancing children's well-being in the digital era through collaboration on education, innovation, and technology.
  • Presidential AI Challenge: Launched in August 2025, this nationwide competition invites K-12 students and educators to use artificial intelligence (AI) to solve real-world problems in their communities, aiming to prepare the next generation for an AI-driven economy.
  • Online Safety and the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act: As a vocal advocate for online protection, she hosted roundtables and built bipartisan support for the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act, which was signed into law in May 2025. The act aims to combat the proliferation of non-consensual explicit imagery (NCII), including AI-generated deepfakes, to create a safer online environment for children.
  • Support for Foster Youth Housing: In May 2025, she secured a $25 million investment in the President's FY26 budget for the Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) program, providing housing assistance and supportive services to help prevent homelessness among young adults transitioning out of foster care.
Click to expand...
How much time does she spend at the WH, traveling the country or supporting her husband publicly? These are not pictures of a woman who's happy in her role.

1762023368017.png 1762023502228.png1762023717739.png
 
Diogenes said:
Like what?

And what was supposedly "dicey" about her visa, Ms. Immigrants R. Welcome?

Like Michelle did? Like that?
Click to expand...
Search Assist

Melania Trump has faced allegations of visa fraud related to her immigration status when she first arrived in the U.S. in 1996, as she reportedly worked as a model while on a tourist visa, which did not permit employment. Although she later obtained an H-1B visa, the initial claims raise questions about her compliance with immigration laws at that time. srwlawyers.com Vox

Melania Trump's Visa History​

Initial Entry to the U.S.​

  • Melania Trump, born Melanija Knavs in Slovenia, entered the United States in August 1996 on a B-1/B-2 tourist visa.
  • This visa allowed her to stay for six months but prohibited her from working in the U.S.

Employment Violations​

  • While on the tourist visa, Melania accepted ten modeling jobs, earning approximately $20,000.
  • She later obtained an H-1B visa in October 1996, which permitted her to work legally as a model.
  • The issue arises from her employment during the period she was on the tourist visa, which constitutes a violation of immigration law.

Legal Implications​

  • Although Melania did not enter the U.S. illegally, her actions may be classified as visa fraud due to working while on a tourist visa.
  • The complexity of immigration law raises questions about her understanding of the regulations at the time.

Current Status​

  • Melania Trump became a U.S. citizen in 2006 and has since held the position of First Lady during Donald Trump's presidency.
  • Her immigration history has been a topic of scrutiny, especially in light of her husband's anti-immigration policies.
 
christiefan915 said:
Search Assist

Melania Trump has faced allegations of visa fraud related to her immigration status when she first arrived in the U.S. in 1996, as she reportedly worked as a model while on a tourist visa, which did not permit employment. Although she later obtained an H-1B visa, the initial claims raise questions about her compliance with immigration laws at that time. srwlawyers.com Vox

Melania Trump's Visa History​

Initial Entry to the U.S.​

  • Melania Trump, born Melanija Knavs in Slovenia, entered the United States in August 1996 on a B-1/B-2 tourist visa.
  • This visa allowed her to stay for six months but prohibited her from working in the U.S.

Employment Violations​

  • While on the tourist visa, Melania accepted ten modeling jobs, earning approximately $20,000.
  • She later obtained an H-1B visa in October 1996, which permitted her to work legally as a model.
  • The issue arises from her employment during the period she was on the tourist visa, which constitutes a violation of immigration law.

Legal Implications​

  • Although Melania did not enter the U.S. illegally, her actions may be classified as visa fraud due to working while on a tourist visa.
  • The complexity of immigration law raises questions about her understanding of the regulations at the time.

Current Status​

  • Melania Trump became a U.S. citizen in 2006 and has since held the position of First Lady during Donald Trump's presidency.
  • Her immigration history has been a topic of scrutiny, especially in light of her husband's anti-immigration policies.
Click to expand...


"Allegations".
 
FastLane said:
Perhaps you are just uniformed chubby cheeks .

AI Overview


Melania Trump's current projects as the First Lady in late 2025 focus on youth well-being and education, with a strong emphasis on technology and support for foster youth, all under the umbrella of her
"Be Best" initiative. Her key projects include:
  • Fostering the Future: This initiative, launched during her time away from the White House and continued in her current tenure, provides college-level scholarships and educational opportunities in the technology sector for young people aging out of the foster care system.
  • Fostering the Future Together: Introduced at the UN General Assembly in September 2025, this is a global coalition of nations and first spouses dedicated to enhancing children's well-being in the digital era through collaboration on education, innovation, and technology.
  • Presidential AI Challenge: Launched in August 2025, this nationwide competition invites K-12 students and educators to use artificial intelligence (AI) to solve real-world problems in their communities, aiming to prepare the next generation for an AI-driven economy.
  • Online Safety and the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act: As a vocal advocate for online protection, she hosted roundtables and built bipartisan support for the "TAKE IT DOWN" Act, which was signed into law in May 2025. The act aims to combat the proliferation of non-consensual explicit imagery (NCII), including AI-generated deepfakes, to create a safer online environment for children.
  • Support for Foster Youth Housing: In May 2025, she secured a $25 million investment in the President's FY26 budget for the Foster Youth to Independence (FYI) program, providing housing assistance and supportive services to help prevent homelessness among young adults transitioning out of foster care.
Click to expand...


She'll NEVER give a Republican women credit for anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top