Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

Dems move to set limits on Trump’s donor-funded White House ballroom, claiming ‘bribery in plain sight’

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Democrats are seeking to put limits on private donations to foot the bill for President Donald Trump’s new White House ballroom amid what they say are bribery concerns. 

Advertisement

Trump announced in October that construction had started on the ballroom — leading to the demolition of the White House’s historic East Wing — and would be privately funded at an estimated cost of $300 million. That was up from the $200 million estimate first provided in July when the project was unveiled.

But Democrats are concerned the donors — including individuals and other organizations — are footing the bill for the project because they are seeking something in return from the Trump administration, and recently introduced legislation to try to curb it. 

Although the White House released a list of the donors in October, Democrats, including Sens. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Adam Schiff of California, claim that additional oversight is needed and that the White House has not identified all donors, while others have been granted anonymity.

Advertisement

An excavator works to clear rubble after the East Wing of the White House was demolished Oct. 23, 2025, in Washington, D.C. (Eric Lee/Getty Images)

TRUMP JR. BLASTS IRONY OF ‘INSANE’ DEMOCRATIC MELTDOWN OVER WHITE HOUSE BALLROOM PROJECT 

Among those who’ve donated to the ballroom project are Google, Apple, Meta Platforms, Amazon, Microsoft and Lockheed Martin. As a result, lawmakers argue that those who’ve contributed to the project could be doing so to curry favor with the administration, setting up a «pay-to-play» relationship with the Trump administration. 

Advertisement

Specifically, lawmakers pointed to Google agreeing to a $22 million settlement with Trump in September, stemming from Trump’s censorship lawsuit against YouTube for banning him from the platform after the Jan. 6 attacks on the U.S. Capitol. Google, which owns YouTube, is also involved in an antitrust case leveled against it by the Justice Department, and therefore, could benefit from soliciting favor from the Trump administration, the lawmakers claim. 

Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

«Billionaires and giant corporations with business in front of this administration are lining up to dump millions into Trump’s new ballroom — and Trump is showing them where to sign on the dotted line,» Warren said in a statement Tuesday. «Americans shouldn’t have to wonder whether President Trump is building a ballroom to facilitate a pay-to-play scheme for political favors. My new bill will put an end to what looks like bribery in plain sight.»

Advertisement
White House exterior with addition of new ballroom

A McCrery Architects rendering provided by the White House of the exterior of the new ballroom. (White House)

TRUMP CELEBRATES WHITE HOUSE DEMOLITION AS NEW BALLROOM RISES: ‘MUSIC TO MY EARS’ 

Warren, along with the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, spearheaded the legislation. Other lawmakers, including Schiff, Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and others, have also cosponsored the measure. 

Specifically, the legislation would bar donations from organizations or individuals that present a conflict of interest, and would prohibit the president, vice president or their families and staff from soliciting donations. 

Advertisement

Once donations have been made and are cleared by the directors of the National Park Service and the Office of Government Ethics, the measure would then bar displaying donors’ names in recognition of the donation, and would also require a two-year freeze for the donor to lobby the federal government.

SWALWELL MOCKED FOR DEMANDING 2028 DEMOCRATS PLEDGE TO DEMOLISH TRUMP’S BALLROOM 

Additionally, it would prohibit using any remaining donated funds to then go toward personal use, or to benefit the president, vice president or their family and staff. 

Advertisement

Likewise, the measure also would require that donors disclose meetings with the federal government that occur in the year following the donation, and prohibit anonymous donations. 

Trump rose garden

Tables and chairs in the Rose Garden of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Aug. 8, 2025. Trump ordered updates to the Rose Garden in March. (Getty Images)

«President Trump has put a ‘for sale’ sign on the White House—soliciting hundreds of millions of dollars from special interests to fund his $300 million vanity project,» Blumenthal said in a statement Tuesday. «Our measure is a direct response to Trump’s ballroom boondoggle. With commonsense reforms to how the federal government can use private donations, our legislation prevents President Trump and future presidents from using construction projects as vehicles for corruption and personal vanity.» 

Meanwhile, the White House dismissed the measure and Democrats’ efforts to impose new restrictions on donations.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP 

«President Trump is making the White House beautiful and giving it the glory it deserves,» White House spokesman Davis Ingle said in a statement to Fox News Digital on Monday. «Only people with a severe case of Trump Derangement Syndrome would find a problem with that.»

Trump has initiated several renovation projects at the White House during his second term, including adding gold accents to the White House’s Oval Office and paving the Rose Garden. 

Advertisement

white house,donald trump,elizabeth warren,adam schiff,democrats senate

Advertisement

INTERNACIONAL

Modern Love: Un apagón hizo que lo nuestro fuera posible

Published

on



Cuando estaba penosamente soltero entre los 20 y los 30 años y vivía en un garage reconvertido en Chicago, me preocupaba la primera impresión que una posible pareja se llevaría de mí.

La puerta trasera de la cochera era mi puerta principal, lo que significaba que tenía que guiar a la persona con la que tenía una cita por el callejón, pasar junto a los contenedores de basura y atravesar el olor a podrido para llegar a mi casa.

Advertisement

En verano, los olores a veces incluso nos seguían al interior.

Durante un tiempo después de mudarme, la gente llamaba a mi puerta pensando que yo era el inquilino anterior, que al parecer había sido un traficante de drogas local.

No fue exactamente el nuevo comienzo romántico que había imaginado tras una ruptura.

Advertisement

Soy artista y profesor, y la primera habitación de la cochera era mi estudio, lleno de obras en curso, lo que he llegado a considerar un tipo diferente de basura, una muestra visual de mis inseguridades y tendencias neuróticas.

Una metáfora viviente de todo lo que se agitaba en mi mundo privado.

Cuando traía a casa a una cita, siempre me apresuraba a atravesar esa primera habitación para llegar a la segunda, a fin de evitar preguntas innecesarias o posibles retrocesos antes de desvestirme y poner manos a la obra.

Advertisement

Kevin fue uno de los primeros hombres a los que permití entrar en mi espacio.

Era un analista de datos bienintencionado que realmente quería saber a qué me dedicaba.

Cuando echó un vistazo a mi estudio, frunció el ceño.

Advertisement

“¿Este es tu trabajo?”, me preguntó.

“¿Esto es lo que haces todo el día cuando la mayoría de la gente está trabajando?”.

Me reí, pero me morí un poco por dentro.

Advertisement

Durante mucho tiempo, luché con el temor de que si alguien solo veía el callejón, la basura y lo extraño del espacio, asumiría que yo era un perdedor.

Un tipo de unos 30 años que vivía en una cochera reconvertida detrás de un contenedor de basura.

No tenía un trabajo ascendente.

Advertisement

No tenía una narrativa limpia.

Hablo mucho de esto con mis alumnos, de cómo ser artista puede resultar genial a los 20 años, pero a medida que envejeces, el encanto desaparece.

La gente deja de preguntarte por tu proceso y empieza a preguntarse si has fracasado.

Advertisement

Si te quedas el tiempo suficiente, empiezan a darte premios por resistencia, por sobrevivir al estilo de vida.

Pero aún así: ¿por qué alguien que roza los 50, como yo, elegiría vivir en un callejón?

Tardé años en comprender cuál era el ímpetu por el que hacía arte, y para quién.

Advertisement

Cuando era estudiante de posgrado en la Escuela del Instituto de Arte de Chicago, en una presentación de grupo el primer día, todo el mundo pronunciaba sus pulidas frases iniciales.

“Mi obra explora las estructuras posmodernas de la identidad feminista” o “Me interesan las implicaciones del espacio minimalista en el paisaje”.

Cuando llegó mi turno, dije:

Advertisement

“Hago arte porque quiero gustarle a la gente”.

Mi instructor hizo una pausa y dijo:

“Esa es la primera respuesta sincera a esa pregunta”.

Advertisement

Ese anhelo —gustar, no necesariamente ser comprendido— nunca me abandonó del todo.

Sobre todo en lo que respecta a las citas.

El anhelo de aceptación incondicional no se desvanece en el plano personal solo porque el profesional empiece a tener mejor aspecto.

Advertisement

Con el paso de los años, a través de una serie de contactos perdidos y malas citas, arraigó un miedo más silencioso:

Demasiado intenso. Demasiado, bueno, demasiado yo.

En distintos momentos, intenté dar sentido a mi ansia de amor y a mi necesidad creativa de soledad mirando a los demás.

Advertisement

Busqué refugio en mi tía Katie, mi madrina y monja ursulina, que hablaba del empoderamiento y la liberación que se encuentran en el celibato.

Había consuelo en su devoción, en la sensación de que la soledad podía ser sagrada, no vergonzosa.

Pero somos humanos; yo era humano.

Advertisement

Y también cachondo, aunque anhelaba algo más que una conexión rápida.

Al mismo tiempo, mi terapeuta me dio algunos consejos que me acompañaron durante mis citas y mis largos períodos de soledad.

No todo tiene por qué ser perfecto con la persona con la que sales.

Advertisement

Puedes notar las imperfecciones.

Lo que hacemos en las relaciones es practicar, ensayar e incluso sanar nuestras desconexiones anteriores.

Estar en una relación significa que dos personas siguen apareciendo.

Advertisement

Cuando una persona decide no aparecer, es cuando todo se desvanece.

Así que me dije a mí mismo:

Cuando conocí a Ed, realmente quería que funcionara.

Advertisement

Lo que significaba que temía aún más llevarlo a casa.

Si leía las señales demasiado rápido —el callejón de la basura, sin muebles, virutas de lápices de colores bajo mis uñas—, podría pensar que no tenía mi vida resuelta.

Ed era diez años mayor que yo.

Advertisement

Al principio, supuse que se trataba de una situación de amistad.

Era cálido pero comedido.

Puse su nombre en mi teléfono como “Ed, el banquero”.

Advertisement

La falta de apellido lo mantenía informal.

Lo poco que había en juego facilitaba la gestión de mis sentimientos.

La noche que lo llevé a casa, Ed cumplía 50 años.

Advertisement

No había planeado cargar con ese tipo de presión tan pronto, pero se acercaba Halloween y pensé:

¿Por qué no ponerme un disfraz y fingir que era lo bastante adulto para mantener una relación adulta?

Sugirió que fuéramos a comer tacos a su chacinería favorita de Pilsen.

Advertisement

Al parecer, le regalé un poema hablado como regalo de cumpleaños; me carcome la vergüenza al pensar en lo que pude haber dicho.

Cuando nos acercábamos a mi casa, le conté lo de siempre.

El callejón, la cochera reconvertida, el contenedor y el descargo de responsabilidad:

Advertisement

Estos sitios son difíciles de encontrar, ¿sabes? Porque este tipo me gustaba de verdad. Y estaba esperando que me juzgara.

No obstante, esa noche hubo un apagón en todo Chicago. Intenté utilizarlo como pretexto —quizá deberíamos dejarlo para otro día—, pero él dijo que no le importaba.

Nos abrimos paso por el callejón en la oscuridad, y bromeó: “No vas a matarme, ¿verdad?”.

Advertisement

Aquella noche, en la oscuridad, algo cambió.

Sin luces, sin el resplandor de ser observado por alguien nuevo, no me sentí expuesto.

Entramos a trompicones en mi casa y nos acomodamos sin rituales, sin preguntas sobre el arte ni cumplidos forzados por su parte, ni explicaciones a medias sobre por qué vivía así.

Advertisement

Solo había oscuridad y tranquilidad.

Aquella noche ocurrió algo que no esperaba:

En la tranquilidad, en la oscuridad, con alguien a quien de repente no creía tener que impresionar, sentí algo que nunca antes había asociado con el amor.

Advertisement

Tardé años en comprender que los pensamientos acelerados, las vueltas de estómago y la necesidad de actuar que solía interpretar como amor eran en realidad mi cuerpo intentando avisarme.

Era mi sistema nervioso que gritaba:

Recordé los largos viajes en tren a casa durante mis años en Brooklyn, llorando tras una pelea con mi primer amante.

Advertisement

En esos momentos me preguntaba:

¿Por qué no era yo suficiente?

Más tarde pasó a mi siguiente y breve relación.

Advertisement

También aspirante a artista, me señalaba las manchas en los pantalones de jean de una pincelada accidental cuando salíamos a cenar, y sugería que aquel desastre no era encantador, ni presentable.

Seguía confundiendo la ansiedad con mariposas.

La intensidad me resultaba familiar.

Advertisement

La confusión parecía magnética.

Sin embargo, Ed no me confundía.

No me emocionó con distanciamiento ni me mantuvo adivinando.

Advertisement

Escuchaba, se quedaba, respondía con prontitud a mis mensajes de texto.

Se acomodó en el espacio sin empequeñecerlo.

Por eso todo se volvió tan real.

Advertisement

No fueron los tacos, ni el sexo, ni la luz de las velas.

Era estar con alguien que no hacía que mi cuerpo quisiera salir disparado.

Nos protegíamos el uno al otro.

Advertisement

Por la mañana, cuando volvió la luz, nada había cambiado en mi estudio.

Era el mismo desastre, el mismo yo, ahora totalmente visible.

Pero Ed se quedó, y lleva volviendo a mí más de 10 años.

Advertisement

Sigue habiendo demasiado desorden.

Los dibujos cubren el suelo y las paredes.

Apenas hay una línea entre donde acaba el trabajo y donde vivo.

Advertisement

Pero algo en mí ha cambiado.

Los contenedores de basura siguen delante de mi puerta.

Pero ya no me preocupo por eso ni me disculpo por mi vida, o al menos no tanto.

Advertisement

He aprendido que no se trata de arreglar las cosas.

No se trata de ocultar el desorden ni de alisar los bordes.

Se trata de dejar que todo conviva.

Advertisement

Creo que así es el amor.

No es una actuación ni un espectáculo.

Simplemente es estar con alguien que te hace sentir seguro en la luz y en la oscuridad.

Advertisement

c.2026 The New York Times Company

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Pope Leo says he ‘can’t comment’ on 20-year sentence of Hong Kong pro-democracy activist Jimmy Lai

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Pope Leo XIV this week said he «can’t» comment on the 20-year sentence imposed on a democracy activist in Hong Kong. 

Advertisement

«I can’t comment,» the American-born Leo told EWTN News, which covers Catholic news globally, while speaking to reporters in Italy. 

He added, «Let’s pray for less hatred and more peace and work for authentic dialogue. God bless you all.» 

Hong Kong publisher and democracy activist Jimmy Lai, who is a converted Catholic, was sentenced to 20 years by Beijing last month for violating their 2020 national security law, which U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio called «unjust and tragic.»

Advertisement

Pope Leo XIV this week said he «can’t» comment on the 20-year sentence imposed on a democracy activist in Hong Kong.  (Christopher Furlong/Getty Images; Anthony Kwan/Getty Images)

«The conviction shows the world that Beijing will go to extraordinary lengths to silence those who advocate fundamental freedoms in Hong Kong,» Rubio said in a statement. «The United States urges the authorities to grant Mr. Lai humanitarian parole.»

The 78-year-old founded the now-closed Hong Kong-based Apple Daily in 1995, while the island was still under British rule. 

Advertisement

Lai’s sentence closed one of the country’s most consequential national security cases since Beijing imposed the sweeping new law in 2020 in the wake of months-long anti-Chinese Communist Party protests in 2019, which were sparked by fears Beijing was eroding Hong Kong’s promised autonomy. 

Jimmy Lai resting his chin on his hands

Lai has already been in custody since 2020.  (Anthony Wallace/AFP via Getty Images)

They were followed by a sweeping security crackdown that criminalized dissent and reshaped the city’s legal system.

CHINA PHONY CONVICTION OF JIMMY LAI IS A WARNING

Advertisement

Lai had been arrested several times during the 2019 protests, and he was detained at his home in 2020. His newspaper was also raided at the time and closed. 

He was found guilty in December of attempting to undermine national security. 

Free Jimmy posters in LA

Jimmy Lai supporters in Los Angeles last month.  (Apu Gomes/Getty Images)

President Donald Trump said in December that he had personally urged Chinese President Xi Jinping to release Lai. 

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

«I spoke to President Xi about it, and I asked to consider his release,» Trump said. «He’s not well, he’s an older man, and he’s not well, so I did put that request out. We’ll see what happens.»

Advertisement

Related Article

Jimmy Lai is risking everything for democracy. We can't ignore what China is doing



pope leo xiv,china,world,hong kong

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

After the strikes, how would the US secure Iran’s enriched uranium?

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

When War Secretary Pete Hegseth was asked recently whether U.S. forces would ever move to secure enriched uranium reportedly stored at Iran’s Isfahan nuclear complex, he declined to say, citing operational security.

Advertisement

The exchange highlighted a question the U.S. and Israel’s air campaign alone cannot answer: even if U.S. strikes degrade Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, who would physically secure the enriched uranium, and how?

Iran is believed to possess a significant stockpile of uranium enriched to 60%, near weapons-grade. That material could theoretically be used in multiple nuclear devices if further refined. 

Moving from 60% to weapons-grade 90% enrichment requires additional processing, and weaponization would involve further technical steps. But analysts say the more immediate issue is physical control of the material itself.

Advertisement

«If the U.S. wants to secure Iran’s nuclear materials, it’s going to require a massive ground operation,» Kelsey Davenport, director of nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, told Fox News Digital.

Davenport said the highly enriched uranium believed to be stored at Isfahan appears to be deeply buried and contained in relatively mobile canisters. Securing it would likely require locating the full stockpile, accessing underground facilities and safely extracting or downblending the material.

Satellite imagery taken on Jan. 30, 2026 shows a new roof over a previously destroyed building at the Natanz nuclear site. (2026 PLANET LABS PBC/Handout via Reuters)

Advertisement

«It’s not even clear the United States knows where all of the uranium is,» she said, noting that the mobility of storage containers raises the possibility that some material could be moved or dispersed.

The administration repeatedly has said preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon remains a central objective of Operation Epic Fury.

«Ultimately, this issue of Iran’s nuclear pursuit and their unwillingness through negotiations to stop it is something President Trump has said for a long time needs to be dealt with,» Hegseth said.

Advertisement

Senior administration officials have argued that Iran sought to build up its ballistic missile arsenal in part to create a deterrent shield — enabling Tehran to continue advancing its nuclear program while discouraging outside intervention.

So far, however, the bulk of U.S. strikes have focused on degrading missile launchers, air defenses and other conventional military targets.

Experts note that dismantling missile systems may reduce Iran’s ability to shield a potential nuclear breakout. But physically controlling enriched uranium itself presents a separate and more complex challenge.

Advertisement
Iran's Natanz uranium enrichment facility before it was hit with US and Israeli strikes.

This photo released on Nov. 5, 2019, by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran shows centrifuge machines in the Natanz uranium enrichment facility in central Iran.  (Atomic Energy Organization of Iran via AP, File)

Airstrikes versus physical control

Defense officials have acknowledged that degrading nuclear infrastructure from the air is different from safely managing or securing nuclear material. 

Airstrikes can destroy centrifuges, power systems and support buildings. But enriched uranium stored underground may remain intact unless it is physically secured, removed or verifiably downblended.

Striking or extracting nuclear material also carries safety risks that military planners must weigh. 

Advertisement

If storage casks containing uranium hexafluoride gas were compromised, the material could pose chemical toxicity risks to personnel entering the site without proper protective equipment. Analysts say a conventional strike is unlikely to trigger a nuclear detonation, but dispersal of material could create localized hazards and complicate recovery efforts.

Chuck DeVore, a former Reagan-era defense official who worked on nuclear issues, argued that directly targeting the stockpile may not be a priority under current battlefield conditions.

«You don’t want to release the material into the surrounding areas and cause radioactive contamination,» DeVore said, adding that deeply buried facilities are difficult to reach from the air. 

Advertisement

DeVore also downplayed the immediacy of a breakout scenario, arguing that further enrichment, weaponization and delivery would be difficult to execute undetected amid sustained U.S. air operations.

Even if Iran were able to further enrich uranium, he said, assembling a deliverable weapon under active military pressure would present significant technical and operational hurdles.

A map shows nuclear sites in Iran that were struck by the United States during Operation Midnight Hammer.

Trump said that the United States completed a «very successful» strike against Iranian nuclear sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, saying that Iran’s nuclear enrichment installations have been «obliterated.»  (Fox News)

Still, DeVore acknowledged that long-term control of the uranium would ultimately require a political resolution inside Iran and some form of outside oversight.

Advertisement

What would securing it require?

Nonproliferation experts say securing enriched uranium generally involves more than military force. It requires verified accounting of the material, sustained access to storage sites and either removal or downblending to lower enrichment levels suitable for civilian use.

Davenport said internationally monitored downblending would be the safest option if political conditions allow.

«The IAEA remains the best place to go back into Iran to monitor the sites, to try to track down and account for the enriched uranium,» she said, describing downblending as a relatively straightforward technical process compared to attempting to extract and transport highly enriched material in a contested environment.

Advertisement

Both pathways — physical seizure or internationally monitored reduction — depend on conditions that do not currently exist.

Administration officials argue that dismantling Iran’s missile network weakens Iran’s ability to shield a nuclear breakout and reduces the immediate threat to U.S. forces and regional allies.

But suppressing missiles and controlling enriched uranium are separate challenges.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Destroying infrastructure can slow or disrupt a program. Physically locating, accounting for and securing nuclear material requires sustained access, reliable intelligence and — ultimately — political conditions that allow it.

For now, the administration maintains that Iran will not be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon. How the enriched uranium itself would be secured remains a question without a public answer.

Advertisement

Related Article

Iran’s shadowy chemical weapons program draws scrutiny as reports allege use against protesters

war with iran,iran,nuclear proliferation,nuclear disasters

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tendencias