About that White House ballroom and the East Wing
-
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.
How do you get the Commission of Fine Arts to approve your plans? Easy.
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 Washington Post first reported that all members of the Commission of Fine Arts were dismissed on Tuesday.
“On behalf of President Donald J. Trump, I am writing to inform you that your position as a member of the Commission of Fine Arts is terminated, effective immediately,” read an email sent to one of the commissioners, which was obtained by the Post.
A White House official told the Guardian: “We are preparing to appoint a new slate of members to the commission that are more aligned with President Trump’s America First Policies.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/oct/29/trump-fires-arts-board-arc-ballroom
said in About that White House ballroom and the East Wing:
planned “Arc de Trump” in Washington DC.
In case you missed this (I did):
-
More remodeling. The Lincoln Bathroom.
-
"It's a style that is not good. … It is actually art deco and art deco doesn't go with 1850 and civil wars," Trump said at the time.
He hasn't got a clue. What makes him think a marble clad room goes with 'the people's house'. It's not a palace. It's not a gawdy Trump Tower apartment.
-
I think Andrew has already refused to be interviewed by the FBI but don't remember the details.
Fergie's "title" is a courtesy title in the style of a divorced peeress. Diana's title after the divorce was too.
Both outcomes were a result of a Letters Patent signed by the Queen.
It's not a royal title. I don't know how a courtesy title would be stripped.
It's just my opinion but I think Parliament should definitely strip the royal titles from Andrew, Harry and Markle.
Or more precisely I think Parliament should strip the royal titles from Harry, and especially from Andrew, and from Markle.
I haven't been a Markle fan for a long time but her fake tear (and I can prove it) at the Queen's funeral is was when I got off the train.
Andrew should be in prison for the rest of his life.
said in About that White House ballroom and the East Wing:
I think Andrew has already refused to be interviewed by the FBI but don't remember the details.
Fergie's "title" is a courtesy title in the style of a divorced peeress. Diana's title after the divorce was too.
Both outcomes were a result of a Letters Patent signed by the Queen.
It's not a royal title. I don't know how a courtesy title would be stripped.
It's just my opinion but I think Parliament should definitely strip the royal titles from Andrew, Harry and Markle.
Or more precisely I think Parliament should strip the royal titles from Harry, and especially from Andrew, and from Markle.
I haven't been a Markle fan for a long time but her fake tear (and I can prove it) at the Queen's funeral is was when I got off the train.
Andrew should be in prison for the rest of his life.
Update: Charles has stripped Andrew of his prince and duke titles and all honors, de facto. This is according to an official announcement.
He has also required Andrew to vacate his residence and move to a different property. He has required Andrew's ex-wife to provide her own residence.
He is now Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
Queen Elizabeth left Charles to deal with the problem of his brother. History is likely to repeat itself with Charles leaving William to deal with the the problem of his brother. I think the outcome is likely to be similar. William (and Catherine) have taken a hard line.
-
There is a certain amount of gray area in the matter of Andrew's status. And it's complicated! This is a good explanation...
Link to video
-
All honors derive from the Sovereign, or I should say-- all honours derive from the Sovereign.
The marriage of Charles and Camilla is all kinds of unlawful because it violated Parliamentary law.
My view is this doesn't make his marriage illegitimate. It was performed through legal process. It's not illegitimate.
But there will be in asterisk next to it when historians consider it. And I have no doubt there is much to consider.
I think Charles making the changes defacto was his high water mark so far. His "action man" persona wasn't ready for prime time. Everyone's a critic.
It reminded me of the myth about a rope nobody can untie. The hero breaks it in two with his sword.
William will get what he wants from Parliament, if necessary.
There is no other person who could be the next king without the monarchy falling. imo.
I think a lot will be made of the fact he is a new generation, confidence inspiring, whatever.
He can't stand Andrew. They have some negative family history.
Andrew and and Markle are persons he thinks about while being in his "ruthless prince" mode. Catherine shares his opinion.
It doesn't look good for the dastardly duos.
