Tag: white house correspondents' association
Trump's 'Donor-Funded' Ballroom Is Quickly Turning Into A Scam On Taxpayers

Trump's 'Donor-Funded' Ballroom Is Quickly Turning Into A Scam On Taxpayers

Some years ago, I was president of an organization called the Association of Opinion Journalists. Every year we would run a convention in a different city and end it with a celebration in the hotel's ballroom space. Our speaker on that closing night was usually some well-known political opinionator.

Members often talked about inviting the president to give that address, as had happened before. In 1947, Harry Truman spoke to the group (formerly called the National Conference of Editorial Writers), as did Lyndon Johnson in 1966. Other prominent government officials included Vice President Richard Nixon, then-Gov. Ronald Reagan and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

In later years, however, members argued against having the president as speaker because it would subject the attendees to oppressive security checks. After slogging through days of seminars, they wanted to cut loose. The party was for us.

Now consider the recent White House Correspondents' Association Dinner, cut short by an apparent assassination attempt. The target appeared to be the evening's speaker, President Donald Trump, who used the fiasco to hawk his controversial $400 million White House ballroom as a more secure alternative to the Washington Hilton.

A federal judge has frozen the construction for lacking clear legal authority and congressional approval. Congress now has an opportunity to ditch the grandiose plan, saving taxpayers hundreds of millions.

Yes, Trump said it would be paid for by donations, not the taxpayers. The known donor list is heavy with big Wall Street, tech and law firm names. All have business before the federal government. Trump repaying their "kindness" could end up costing taxpayers a great deal. More troubling, some donor identities have been kept secret.

Of course, any events at a palatial White House ballroom would require extra security, and who would pay for that? The taxpayers, of course.

Enter Sen. Lindsey Graham. The South Carolina Republican is pushing a bill to tack another $400 million to the national debt to finish what donors were to pay for — and build a security infrastructure, a Secret Service annex, underneath the ballroom.

As Alabama Republican Sen. Katie Britt, a co-sponsor, explained unconvincingly, "This is about our nation having a place to gather."

The White House already has a State Dining Room that seats about 140 guests, and if more room is needed, the East Room can accommodate as many as 300. Why must the president's residence include a ballroom able to hold, according to Trump, nearly 1,000?

The biggest indoor banquet space at the French royal palace of Versailles — the Gallery of Battles — can serve "only" 650 diners max. That happens to be a lot of people.

Meanwhile, why must taxpayers be billed to provide a catering hall big enough for the White House correspondents' annual bash? They are an independent organization, just like the Association of Opinion Journalists was. We paid for our convention space, the big dinner and, yes, security, through dues, contributions, and participation fees. Had the taxpayers funded us, I'm sure several members would have written editorials or columns and nowadays produce TikToks condemning the use of public money for a private group.

A word about the correspondents' dinner itself. Over the years, it's morphed into a red-carpet event crafted to glamorize what should be working journalists who cover the president. Now there's a ton of "pregame" coverage of who is going, who is not, who got invited to the Vanity Fair magazine party. And don't leave out the Hollywood celebrities.

In his 1678 Christian allegory, The Pilgrim's Progress, John Bunyan introduced Vanity Fair as an unseemly marketplace for pleasure, status and worldly ambition. "The name of that Town," Bunyan wrote, "is Vanity."

Sounds a lot like Washington, D.C.

Froma Harrop is an award winning journalist who covers politics, economics and culture. She has worked on the Reuters business desk, edited economics reports for The New York Times News Service and served on the Providence Journal editorial board.

Reprinted with permission from Creators.

Donald Trump WHCA

How Uncool And Humorless Donald Trump Killed The Funny

Authoritarians aren't known for their senses of humor. But the terminally unfunny and uncool Donald Trump has taken it to a new low. Out of fear of Trump’s thin-skinned resentment and bottomless appetite for reprisal, the White House Correspondents Association has canceled the comedy performance at the annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner on April 26.

The association caved following criticism of scheduled comedian Amber Ruffin by the White House for her critical jokes about the administration, with an added Trumpian slight that she was a "second-rate comedian.” Said the head of the WHCA in response, “At this consequential moment for journalism, I want to ensure the focus is not on the politics of division but entirely on awarding our colleagues for their outstanding work.” Translation: We are completely cowed by the prospect of offending the maximum leader, who, already departing from traditional practice, again won't even be attending the dinner.

While this may be absurd, and even pitiful, it is not funny.

First, I've been to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner and as anyone who has been there will tell you, the comedic performance is the highlight—if not the only bright spot—in a pretty dreary evening of people in formal wear looking over each other's shoulders to see who is coming into the room.

The whole evening really is forgettable—except for the comedy high points as by Stephen Colbert in 2006, Keegan-Michael Key playing Obama’s anger translator in 2015, and the all-time classic: Obama’s send up of Trump himself in 2011, which some see as the genesis of the whole Trump plague to get back at political leaders, the media, and elites everywhere for his humiliation.

Second, and more importantly, the White House correspondents’ obvious flinch once again illustrates Trump's improbable and pernicious influence on broad sectors of civil society—here the media.

And while the immediate loss may be just a few jokes, the broader principle is horrendous. The ability to criticize our leaders is not merely protected by the First Amendment, it is at its very heart. As Justice Frankfurter wrote 80 years ago, "[o]ne of the prerogatives of American citizenship is the right to criticize public men and measures."

And it's not simply a matter of freedom in the abstract. It's critical to the whole American experiment that Trump is in the process of putting through the meat grinder. Chief Justice Rehnquist, who was hardly known as a civil libertarian, spelled out the fundamental principle in an opinion upholding the right to lampoon the proud and famous, "[t]he freedom to speak one's mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty—and thus a good unto itself—but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole."

Conversely, societies whose citizens and media fear criticizing their leaders are not true democracies. Most typically, they are repressive autocracies governed by fear. We wouldn’t be surprised to learn that Russian citizens feel nervous—or worse—when criticizing Putin, but we would see it as the soul of tyranny. It's time to hold the mirror up to our own quickly eroding democracy.

Trump is not only humorless; he's a killer of humor. He belongs in the same category as grim, ruthless, and fundamentally boring figures like Putin and Orbán. They are about as funny as a gray November afternoon in East Germany, circa 1980.

In fact, Trump is our most humorless president since Nixon. Both of them call to mind Paduk in Vladimir Nabokov’s Bend Sinister, a man bullied and ostracized and whose totalitarian rule is in some pathetic way an attempt at revenge for those grade-school slights.

So, no highlights this year of a comedian skewering the president. To make up for it, I am attaching a few classic clips from White House Correspondents’ Dinners in fully functioning democracies of years past, ending with Obama’s hilarious and standard-setting mockery of The Donald, which remains a riot to listen to, even if we may in some way still be paying the price for the skewering of this petty and puerile man by a President who was light-years more composed, wise, clever, and self-assured.

Talk to you later.

Last Week’s Talking Five Winner!

Another week, another batch of razor-sharp entries in our Caption This contest—proof that no matter how bleak the political landscape gets, at least we still have gallows humor.

Last week’s prompt: After Paul Weiss caved, the administration tacked on a few extra terms to their agreement. What’s the next minor-yet-entirely-autocratic requirement they’ll impose?

And wow, you all delivered. From Putin-Trump bro-mance jabs to nods at Melania’s modeling days to multiple demands for Brad Karp’s first-born grandchild, the competition was fierce.

In the end, we looked for something singularly absurd yet perfectly in character for this cartoonishly corrupt era. Rick Dortch took the crown with:

“Paul/Weiss Accepts Trump Crypto Only”

Wouldn’t even be the most dystopian thing they’ve pulled.

Congrats, Rick! A member of our team will reach out soon to get you your Talking Feds mug.

Reprinted with permission from Talking Feds Substack.

What To Do About Fox? Stop Treating It As A 'News' Organization

What To Do About Fox? Stop Treating It As A 'News' Organization

Ever since Fox News Channel launched in 1996 with a slogan that was an aggressive lie – “Fair and Balanced” – most viewers have understood that Rupert Murdoch and his lackey Roger Ailes created a propaganda operation, not a news channel.

And yet the latest revelations of deception, hypocrisy, and greed among the network’s management and “stars,” unbound by any journalistic principle, are nevertheless stunning. Perhaps we still expect a measure of self-respect even from our villains. But here we see an essential and sometimes noble democratic endeavor – delivering the news to a self-governing people – degraded beyond redemption.

There is no way to regain the trust so wantonly forfeited by Murdoch and his minions in misleading their audience about “fraud” in the 2020 election. No other media company is as culpable in relentlessly goading the attempted coup and insurrectionary violence at the Capitol on January 6, 2021 – a deadly assault on the republic that Fox still insists on whitewashing, even after the humiliating exposure of its knowing promotion of the “Big Lie.”

The unavoidable question that Americans and their institutions now confront is how to excise this diseased organ from our body politic.

As Murdoch is the first to remind us, Fox News can shield itself behind the First Amendment, even as its operations undermine the United States and the Constitution itself. Fox is free to lie, if not to defame, and everyone else is free to ignore its spew. Outside the courts, where Dominion Voting Systems may soon impose a heavy price on the network’s chicanery, there are few means to punish or isolate the Murdoch outfit. For the most part, that’s a very good thing.

What we should have learned from the Dominion lawsuit and other glaring episodes, however, is that America needs to establish barriers against disinformation and propaganda masquerading as “news.” A free government may have a limited role here, focused on curbing the incursions of hostile foreign powers. But in a media universe where privately held entities predominate, it is those outlets that must establish the boundaries – and sanction the malefactors who grossly and repeatedly violate them.

In Washington, D.C., where the nation witnessed the terrible havoc wrought by Fox’s recklessness, there are a few organizations with the clout to whack the Murdochs and their enablers. The White House Correspondents Association, which credentials journalists who cover the president and administration, can expel Fox from its ranks (and deny access to its vaunted annual dinner). The Congressional Press Galleries, which perform the same function on Capitol Hill, can do likewise.

And so they should.

Beyond all the text messages exposing the snide duplicity of Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and their bosses, the exhibits in the Dominion lawsuit prove beyond doubt that Fox is not a news organization at all, but a partisan propaganda machine with no allegiance to the ideals of a free press.

The documents show Murdoch handing over Biden campaign ads, not yet aired, to Jared Kushner for the benefit of the Trump campaign -- an unlawful in-kind donation that provides the basis for a complaint to the Federal Election Commission. They depict the contempt expressed by him, his son Lachlan, and Fox executives for honest reporting that might harm ratings. Indeed, the lawsuit unearthed countless instances of conscious mendacity in election coverage.

What those incriminating documents don’t show is any commitment at Fox to the “health of the republic,” to “excellence in journalism,” to “robust news coverage” or to any of the aspirations that the correspondent’s groups claim to hold dear. No, what they show is precisely and undeniably the opposite.

It is worth noting that on the board of the White House Correspondents Association sits Jacqui Heinrich, a star witness to those Fox abuses. When the Emmy-winning Heinrich tweeted a fact-checking correction to Trump’s lies about election fraud – and specifically noted the lies emanating from Hannity as well – she infuriated powerful figures at the network who could crush her.

“Please get her fired,” the bullying Carlson urged Hannity. “Seriously…What the [expletive]? I’m actually shocked. It needs to stop immediately, like tonight. It’s measurably hurting the company. The stock price is down. Not a joke.”

Rather than brush off that bullying rant, Fox executives forced Heinrich to delete her tweet – which had unforgivably reported plain and vital facts: “There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised.” (In an email to me after this column was published, Heinrich notes that she posted a second tweet correcting Trump that didn't include his tagging of her deceitful Fox colleagues, and later posted a couple more tweets correcting Trump election falsehoods.)

Heinrich got away without losing her job. At Fox, telling the truth is unacceptable and will likely get you fired, however – as Chris Stirewalt, the former Fox election analyst dumped for calling Arizona correctly on Election Night, discovered when Murdoch dumped him (and lied about the reason).

Whatever may happen if the Dominion lawsuit finally goes to trial, the nation’s leading journalists have the authority to register their disgust with Murdoch’s mockery of their vocation. To uphold their own professed standards, they have no other choice.

White House Ignored Distancing Guidelines At Briefing Because 'It Looked Better'

White House Ignored Distancing Guidelines At Briefing Because 'It Looked Better'

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

President Donald Trump held a press briefing in the White House Rose Garden on Friday — and according to an official statement from the White House Correspondents Association, the event was inconsistent with the administration's own social distancing guidelines.

WHCA President Jonathan Karl explained: "Today, the White House press office positioned seating for the president's Rose Garden' 'news conference' in a way that violated the federal government's guidelines on social distancing and needlessly put reporters' health at risk."


According to Karl, the Trump White House was more concerned about visuals than the journalists' wellbeing.

"The chairs were initially positioned in a way that was consistent with social distancing guidelines but were moved closer together by White House staff shortly before the event started. When we asked for an explanation, the White House press office told us the decision to move the chairs close together was made because 'it looks better.'"Karl ended the statement on an angry note, asserting, "The health of the press corps should not be put in jeopardy because the White House wants reporters to be a prop for a 'news conference' where the president refused to answer any questions."


Shop our Store

Headlines

Editor's Blog

Trending

World