Donald Trump has fired all six members of an independent federal agency responsible for reviewing his controversial White House ballroom and planned “Arc de Trump” in Washington DC.
The Commission of Fine Arts was established in 1910, and is tasked with “giving expert advice to the President, the Congress and the federal and District of Columbia governments on matters of design and aesthetics”, according to its website.
Its purview includes reviewing designs proposed for memorials and new or renovated government buildings, and the commission is intended to be staffed by experts in art, architecture and urban design. There is no indication about whom Trump plans to appoint to the commission.
I sure hope he draws up plans like they do in Spinal Tap, and that is the “arc” this asshole gets. Along with the dancing dwarfs.
If you guys ever get another Democrat president, you better rename it to the Obama ballroom and the Arc of trans rights
Even a Democrat won’t be able to rename the Epstein Ballroom.
Fuck that shit, we should tear down the ballroom, restore the East Wing and send the Trump criminal family the bill.
Only correct answer. Auction off the chairs and tables and cutlery then burn the building down. Ask the Canadians for help. Nuremberg all the accomplices and demolish any remaining opposing monuments. Erase them from history. Learn your lesson from past mistakes or mercy. Do not give them an inch.
I’d rather turn it into a hall of immigration assistance. Hire tons of people that work on getting people citizenship quickly and easily
And make all the bathrooms gender-neutral. With some Toadstool-themed things in the urinals and toilets. In honor of our “favorite” president.
Maybe it’s just me, but if the president can fire them at a whim and replace them with whoever he wants, they don’t seem very “independent.”
Right now, everyone is terrified of the actual President, Stephen Miller.
Mr. Trump is just a loudmouthed figurehead with dementia that runs interference.
When no one will hold you accountable. There’s nothing you can’t do. Nothing is illegal. Trump has fired thousands of people he had no power or right to. All because Republicans are fascistic sycophantic enablers.
very true. Compare this, to what’s happening in the Fed; Trump is having issues removing multiple figures and being challenged in court.
If we come back from this, we need to codify so many more rules and create significantly more independent bodies so another Republican doesn’t do this shit again.I don’t see us coming back from this with the system we have in place.
Republican
And we know they would be the problem, that’s for sure. Democrats tend to practice decorum and decency, sometimes to a fault.
…
…Arc de Trump…
Misspelling of Epstein Ballroom
Two different things. There’s the Epstein Memorial Ballroom and the “Arc de Trump”.
Oh Misspelling of Arc de’ Epstein. Gotcha.
definitely no triumph there
Arc de Trump? He’s a bigger parody of a dictator than the movie The Dictator.
He didn’t call it that, the media did. But yes, he is.
So what will he call it? The Heroes of January 6th? Jeffrey’s Birthday Arc? Big Beautiful Arc? Whatever it will be called, I’m sure it’ll be made out of plaster but the invoices will say marble.
If that arc gets built…. I will piss on it.
I can’t wait to see the arc de trump get the same treatment the Lee statue in Richmond got back in 2020.
Stephen Miller, Russ Vought, etc are loving dementia donnie playing with this shit while they run the full on fascist takeover
Because they’re both too fucking weird and angry to ever be elected by anyone. Just parasites riding the shark.
more aligned with …
AmericaTrump First PoliciesAt this point I hope this is all just ai slop. Please tell me this is some stupid hallucination?
Nope. This is reality.
Maybe it’s a simulation. Maybe our entire existence is AI hallucination slop. Maybe “trump as president” is the “hands are wrong” of some higher being observing this universe and dismissing it as fake slop.
Maybe when you die, you’ll just see GAME OVER and remove a VR headset and rediscover that you’ve just been a weird squid monster at your local arcade killing 20 minutes while your spaceflight was delayed.
Blips and Chitz!
Breh.
“timelines” or some shit
“Dude, high score!”
Are you sure?
In the context of a lived experience yes.
This isn’t hyperbole it’s reality verbally
Hmm, did they disagree with his plan for a lady justice statue on hands and knees on top of his own monument?
Ofcourse trump is the greatest in knowing anesthetics for buildings and should be considered the bestest authority on artistic design, looks at all the trump buildings he designed himself, no one else can do that!
“Why won’t you just emboss the swastikas like I asked, you terrorist anti-facist?! Get a new one!”
Did the Commission of Fine Arts deliver anything of non-subjective value?
Later, you say:
We shouldn’t have to state our inner thoughts or explain ourselves to pose a question.
Just say what you think. Asking a question like this when you really have an agenda is an attempt to set up a situation where everyone else has to work to answer you and you invest nothing, and then you get to sit atop the mountain as judge of their answer when you have no skin in the game and haven’t done anything to justify your opinion. It comes across as arrogant and haughty.
Look at how this thread turned out: diablexical played your game and you still contributed nothing while remaining disdainful of every reply.
This is why people label this bad faith. It’s also a technique widely applied by the far right, so people on a political forum are right to assume things about people “just asking questions” in order to protect their time.
Just say what you think.
I did: the question. Answer it or don’t. No one owes you more.
haven’t done anything to justify your opinion
Don’t need to: wasn’t stated with a mere question. See how that works? They started drama to try to draw out an irrelevant opinion & you’re blaming the other party: hypocrisy.
Again, having to defensively explain ourselves, because everyone is so insecure & bitter is exhausting, and no one should have to tolerate it, so I’m not. Neither should you.
disdainful of every reply
An unwarranted, hostile predisposition earns contempt.
bad faith
That’s jumping to conclusions. If a question isn’t worth your time, then don’t answer: easy. Speculatively maligning others with mindreading irrationality is the real trouble: no one compels such poor behavior. Treating such irrationality as though they ought to be the rules to govern discussion is peak reddit and might be a better fit for such thinkers.
Questions in an online discussion don’t need justification. Socratic dialectic doesn’t need sincere questions: it questions assumptions until we realize our ignorance. Asking uncomfortable questions is the point. I suspect you would claim Socrates & other philosophers who challenged conventionality by relentlessly questioning “obvious things” are “just asking questions” in “bad faith” & therefore they argue from “the far right”.
It’s bullshit: anyone can & does use the technique of “uncomfortable questions”. You just don’t like them being asked.
They clearly were fired for critical opinions about the 2 vanity projects. If their expert opinions were used to help win lawsuits to prevent them from happening it’d be hundreds of millions of dollars saved.
Anyway all value is subjective, even dollars. If you are trying to say fine arts are not worth it then dont be a coward, come out and say it instead of trying to imply it by “just asking questions” Mr Tucker.
Social workers, engineers, & scientists deliver value beyond subjective opinion. Fine arts mostly seem like refined subjectivity & a racket for the ultra wealthy to store wealth. Why don’t you answer the actual question instead of cranking out hostility?
I don’t see how what appear to be glorified art critics sponsored by the government have any bearing on lawsuits. Is there a justification in terms of tangible benefit for such a government commission?
Ok I’ll take back coward since you came out and said it. I don’t want to hash out the value of government funding the arts here as others have written elsewhere on both sides of the subject more persuasively than either of us will do justice here. Suffice to say we likely differ in opinion.
I’ll research and give you an honest answer to your question if you first answer this: Why do you think Trump fired them?
That wasn’t the question. If you don’t want to answer real questions, then don’t.
You seem to want to pressure everyone to defensively preface their questions with “my opinions of Trump notwithstanding” just so thought-policing maligners like you don’t come at us with their hostile assumptions: it’s tiring & we need to oppose its normalization. We ought to be able to just pose the goddamn question, which I’m doing.
Instead of directly saying what you meant you posed what you thought was a gotcha question. You had an opinion to share which was this:
Fine arts mostly seem like refined subjectivity & a racket for the ultra wealthy to store wealth.
If you’ll allow me to extrapolate, and please correct me if this is wrong, your position boils down to: “good riddance they’re a waste of public spending anyway.”
Which fails to recognize Trump didn’t get rid of the commission, he just fired the 6 members. Theyll be replaced with sycophants and continue to spend whatever money they were before.
Again I’ll research and give you an honest answer to your initial question, but I want you to answer mine because I suspect you’re posting in bad faith and were just trying to hide your opinion (which again if you’re saying they’re a waste of spending they are not being cut just replaced). Why do you think they were fired?
I directly said it: the question.
Justifying the existence of the government commission in terms of a tangible benefit to the public would dispel doubts that it is worth keeping.
Which fails to recognize Trump didn’t get rid of the commission, he just fired the 6 members. Theyll be replaced with sycophants and continue to spend whatever money they were before.
I was aware. In the case that its existence lacks much justification, that would make an argument that Trump’s mistake was not going far enough to just end the commission altogether. We shouldn’t have to state our inner thoughts or explain ourselves to pose a question.
A point of the question is that disapproving of bullshit firings is not enough to justify a government commission. We can disapprove of corruption & still find the commission unworthy. A separate justification would explain why it’s absolutely worth fighting for & that would make a more compelling reason to oppose Trump over it.
I suspect you’re posting in bad faith
The problem is you think you’re psychic. I think we need to oppose the normalization of hostility by malign speculators attempting to suss out “bad faith”.
I would also suggest you look at where we are. Having to remind everyone we oppose Trump where the overwhelming sentiment opposes Trump is absurdly needy & exhausting. I’ve noticed lack of push back against that pernicious tendency, which I think is long overdue.
Justifying the existence of the government commission in terms of a tangible benefit to the public would dispel doubts that it is worth keeping… A point of the question is that disapproving of bullshit firings is not enough to justify a government commission: we may need a separate justification to understand this is absolutely worth fighting for & that would make a more compelling reason to oppose Trump over it.
No one was talking about axing the commission until you showed up. It is not obvious to me from your question the point was about justifying the existence of the commission in a thread about about the firing of the heads of the commission because they had negative review of the 2 vanity projects because sacking the heads does not change its funding status.
We shouldn’t have to state our inner thoughts or explain ourselves to pose a question.
You certainly don’t have to but then it forces others to fave to read into your thoughts to respond. You say I think I’m psychic but it only comes across that way when you’re not sharing what your thoughts are or explaining. We’ve moved past that because you’ve laid out what your thoughts were. Since you have I don’t think it really matters where you stand on the reason for the firings because it seems you’re saying the firing is justified because the commission doesn’t yield objective value (while at the same time acknowledging the firing has no impact on the commissions spending).
Anyway I did some research, here’s a response to your initial question:
- The commission has ensured that taxpayer-funded buildings and infrastructure contribute to the civic environment - often preventing costly design mistakes or preserving assets that would be expensive (or impossible) to recover once lost. This gets to my point earlier that they oppose monstrosities like “Arc de Trump” which is something I think you’d agree with is wasteful.
- They had a pivotal role in transforming Washington, D.C. into a coherent national capital. In the 1900s, Washington’s core was disorganized - eg a railroad ran across the National Mall. The CFA pushed a blueprint to create the National Mall into a broad, open vista linking the Capitol and the Lincoln Memorial. They oversaw the planning of entire complexes like the Federal Triangle and guided a consistent architectural style. This is not just subjective. They helped create a functionally organized city that accommodates public gatherings, national ceremonies, and tourism. Millions visit these well-planned public spaces each year. At the very least, this “objectively” brings millions of dollars from international visitors.
- the CFA played a central role in the creation of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial which is one of the most acclaimed war memorials in the world. Regardless of your view of the military, monuments like that help give it the impression of respect and honor to soldiers which is important for recruitment. They also review designs for military medals and insignia like the purple heart and medal of honor. Here’s a fun idea - under the next 6 commissioners what do you think the next military medal will look like? A gilded profile of Trump?
The CFA mandate is rooted in the understanding that architecture and urban design are matters of public interest, not just subjective taste. You asked for something non-subjective? The buildings are physical objects standing right there in DC, what is more objective and concrete than actual concrete?
Edit - to be fair I did see spending that seems low valued and pretty loosely aligned to their mandate. $400 million for 2024 for these recipients seems pretty steep. But to say there’s no value in the CFA goes too far and funding of the CFA is a different topic entirely that what is focused on by the OP article which is about Trump firing what is supposed to be an independent organization because he didn’t like their report. The government benefits from independent, non-political groups to ground itself in reality and the inference to be gained from the article is that Trump is bulldozing that concept.
