…if the abominations are ever built.
This is the “Trump is playing 4D chess” theory again. It’s far more likely that it was just incoherent babble because he has no filter left and says whatever pops into his head - in this case grandiose proclamations about a ballroom that doesn’t exist and might never exist. And not very coherent ones either - his exact words were “It’s, you know, after realizing we’re gonna do the inauguration in that building, it’s all bulletproof glass, it’s all drone, they call it drone-free roof, it’s drones, won’t touch it.”
We’ve already seen the Trump admin’s best attempt at ignoring the results of an election. It was a spectacular failure. If there were some “declare martial law and Trump gets to stay president” forever button, they would have pressed it five years ago.
And further, denying Trump a legacy is not why Democrats would want the potential east wing ballroom torn down. (Democrats would probably not waste the resources tearing it down.)
But why they might want it torn down is that Trump is not a king. Trump the criminal does not get to destroy the east wing because he feels like it.
This seems like it should be obvious.
I’m missing something.
It’s obvious to me that Trump did get away with tearing down the East Wing. In the very unlikely event he is ever sent to prison, it will not be for that.
As to rebuilding, maybe it will happen, maybe not. I see no reason to even make a long-term guess, although my short-term guess is no. I read somewhere that they supposedly had detail photos made before it was torn down, but, if so, a lot of those will go missing – so a new East Wing won’t be some historical reconstruction.
And it bears repeating that not a single member of SCOTUS, including the three justices Trump appointed, ruled in his favor on the merits of his challenge to the 2020 election results.
They might want it torn down because it’s badly built and not remotely up to code, which appears to be the direction current construction is going.
Probably full of security issues. Bugs.
This seems likely, given Donald’s demonstrated indifference to security issues. (It appears impossible for him to believe that he has to ‘take care’ to prevent negative consequences; the concept of consequences to himself is simply beyond his ability to grasp.)