Latest

    News

    Home News

    Trump Goes To Bat For Baseball Legend With Medal Of Freedom Announcement

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2

    President Donald Trump is going to bat for Roger Clemens — announcing that the pitching legend, still shut out of Cooperstown, will receive the nation’s highest civilian honor.

    Speaking at a campaign rally in San Antonio on Wednesday night, Trump said he plans to award Clemens the Presidential Medal of Freedom. He also renewed his push for the seven-time Cy Young Award winner to enter the National Baseball Hall of Fame.

    “I’m pleased to announce that we are taking it into our own hands. Forget about the Hall of Fame; he’ll get there someday. I mean, I don’t know how they can keep him out,” Trump said, according to The Hill.

    The president described the Medal of Freedom as a “big step up” from the baseball honor that has repeatedly eluded Clemens.

    A Presidential Salute To “The Rocket”

    Clemens had introduced Trump at the Freeman Coliseum rally, where the president was campaigning for Republican Senate nominee Ken Paxton ahead of November’s election. Trump praised the retired pitcher as “one of the greatest athletes and maybe the greatest pitcher of all time,” UPI reported.

    The Texas-raised baseball star returned to the stage after the announcement, thanked Trump and called the recognition a “huge honor,” according to The Hill.

    “There wouldn’t be another president I’d want to get it from,” Clemens said.

    Earlier, Clemens had praised Trump as a “man that loves our country” and urged the crowd to remember that “he put his life on the line for us.”

    Known as “The Rocket,” Clemens compiled numbers that place him among baseball’s most accomplished pitchers. He finished his major league career with 354 victories, 4,672 strikeouts and a 3.12 earned run average. His seven Cy Young Awards remain a record, according to the Hall of Fame’s own career profile.

    A Career Overshadowed By Allegations

    Those achievements have yet to secure Clemens a place in Cooperstown.

    Allegations involving performance-enhancing drugs have dogged his Hall of Fame candidacy for years. Clemens has denied using them, and a federal jury acquitted him in June 2012 of all six charges stemming from his testimony to Congress. The charges involved obstruction of Congress, perjury and false statements — rather than a prosecution for drug use itself.

    The Houston Chronicle reported that Clemens failed to win election during his years on the baseball writers’ ballot and was passed over again in the most recent era committee vote.

    Trump had publicly pressed for Clemens’ induction in December, arguing that allegations should not outweigh his career achievements and pointing to his acquittal. In a Truth Social post quoted by The Hill, the president called Clemens’ exclusion a “total travesty.”

    Wednesday’s announcement gives that support a new dimension: a pledge to recognize Clemens with an honor Trump can bestow himself.

    If presented, the medal would put Clemens alongside other sports figures Trump has honored, including Tiger Woods, Mariano Rivera, Roger Staubach and Lou Holtz, the Houston Chronicle reported.

    Trump Approves Firing Squad — Army Sets Execution Date For Fort Hood Terrorist

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    8
    President Donald Trump holds a press conference with Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in the James S. Brady Press Briefing Room on Friday, June 27, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

    More than 17 years after the Fort Hood massacre, the terrorist who murdered 13 people at the Texas Army post is scheduled to face a firing squad at the same installation.

    The Army has set December 3, 2026, at 1 p.m. Central for the execution of Nidal Malik Hasan, following President Donald Trump’s approval of his death sentence. Acting Army Secretary Adam Telle announced the time and location in an order issued Tuesday, according to Army Times and ABC News.

    Trump approved the execution order on October 2. The Pentagon publicly announced the decision Monday, saying Secretary of War Pete Hegseth had recommended that Hasan be put to death by an Army firing squad.

    If carried out, the execution would be the first by the U.S. military since 1961.

    “Judgement day for Hasan has finally come,” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in announcing the president’s approval.

    A Massacre At The Post He Served

    Hasan was an Army major and psychiatrist when he opened fire at Fort Hood’s Soldier Readiness Processing Center on November 5, 2009. The attack killed 12 soldiers and one civilian and wounded 32 others.

    Witnesses reported that Hasan shouted “Allahu Akbar” before opening fire. Among those killed was a pregnant soldier.

    At his court-martial, Hasan admitted carrying out the shooting. Military Times reported that he sought to argue he had acted in defense of the Taliban leadership in Afghanistan.

    A military jury convicted him of 13 counts of premeditated murder and 32 counts of attempted murder in 2013. He was sentenced to death and sent to the military prison at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

    Hegseth’s Push Reaches A New Milestone

    The execution order follows Hegseth’s September 2025 push for Trump to approve Hasan’s death sentence.

    “The victims and survivors deserve justice without delays,” Hegseth said at the time, according to The Daily Wire’s reporting.

    After Monday’s announcement, Hegseth responded with a single word on social media: “Justice.”

    The Army’s decision to carry out the sentence at Fort Hood would return Hasan to the installation where he committed the murders. The last U.S. military execution took place in 1961, when Army Pvt. John Bennett was hanged at Fort Leavenworth after being convicted of rape and attempted murder.

    Legal Challenges Could Still Delay Execution

    The December date does not guarantee that the execution will proceed as scheduled.

    An analysis published in the Army Lawyer in May explains that presidential approval allows a military death-row prisoner to seek review in the civilian federal courts through a habeas corpus petition challenging the legality of the conviction or confinement.

    A prisoner can also ask a federal judge to stay the execution while that challenge proceeds. If granted, a stay would prevent the military from carrying out the sentence until the court proceedings conclude or the stay is lifted.

    Trump’s approval and the Army’s order move Hasan’s case toward an execution after years on death row.

    Republican Senator Has A Message For Trump After Phone Number Leak

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    1
    Photo via Gage Skidmore Flickr

    Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) had a pointed warning for President Donald Trump after the president publicly shared another Republican senator’s phone number during a weekend policy feud.

    “With all due respect, I got his number too,” Tillis said Monday during an appearance on ABC’s “The View.”

    The remark came after co-host Ana Navarro suggested Trump could retaliate against Tillis by publishing his phone number, particularly as the retiring North Carolina senator promotes a new book detailing his increasingly contentious relationship with the president.

    Trump had done exactly that to Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) just days earlier.

    The president posted what appeared to be Cotton’s personal cellphone number on Truth Social on Saturday while pressuring the Arkansas Republican to support the Sunshine Protection Act, legislation aimed at ending the twice-yearly clock change and allowing permanent daylight saving time.

    “Almost everybody wants ‘The Sunshine Protection Act’ to pass, except for Tom Cotton,” Trump wrote, before encouraging Arkansas voters to contact the senator.

    Trump included Cotton’s number in another post and urged supporters to tell him to “GET IT DONE!”

    Fox News Digital reported that it called the number Trump posted, which carried an Arkansas area code, but did not reach Cotton. The Washington Post similarly reported that a call to the number went directly to a full voicemail inbox.

    Cotton refused to budge.

    “No one likes changing the clock, me included, but Congress has enacted permanent Daylight Saving Time multiple times before and repealed it each time once Americans experienced absurdly late sunrises in the winter,” Cotton wrote on X.

    “Arkansans don’t want their kids going to school in the pitch dark, and I’ll always put Arkansas first.”

    The dispute has put two normally aligned Republicans on opposite sides of an unusual policy fight.

    The House passed its version of the Sunshine Protection Act in July by a bipartisan 308-117 vote, but the measure has stalled in the Senate, where Cotton is among several Republicans opposed to the change. The Senate is currently out of session until Nov. 3, meaning lawmakers cannot act on the measure before the midterm elections.

    Tillis, meanwhile, appeared amused by the possibility that he could become Trump’s next target.

    The North Carolina Republican was appearing on “The View” to promote his new book, “How to Lose Friends and Antagonize Presidents,” which recounts his clashes with Trump and members of the president’s administration.

    After Tillis discussed private exchanges with Trump included in the book, Navarro quipped that the president might “give your phone away after this.”

    Tillis immediately fired back.

    “With all due respect, I got his number too.”

    When asked whether he feared retaliation from Trump over the book, Tillis said, “Not at all.”

    The senator, who is not seeking reelection, has become increasingly willing to criticize the administration as his time in Washington winds down.

    His book describes his vote to confirm Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth as the “biggest regret” of his congressional career. During Monday’s interview, Tillis went even further when asked about an effort to impeach Hegseth.

    “I hope he gets fired,” Tillis said.

    Still, Tillis offered Trump some praise, calling him a “great political force” who demonstrated an ability to assemble an unusual coalition of voters.

    But he warned Republicans that some of those gains may be slipping away heading into the midterms.

    “The support among Hispanics has almost evaporated,” Tillis said. “So the very coalitions that the president … was able to pull together are falling apart.”

    Tillis’s warning over the phone-number episode also carries a bit of history.

    Trump has used the tactic before. During his first presidential campaign in 2015, he publicly read out then-Sen. Lindsey Graham’s cellphone number at a South Carolina rally after Graham criticized him.

    Ted Cruz Blasts ‘Insecure’ JD Vance As 2028 Rivalry Heats Up

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America,

    The midterms aren’t over, but Ted Cruz and JD Vance are already trading punches over what comes next.

    The Texas Republican fired back at the vice president Saturday, accusing him of “political bomb-throwing” after Vance suggested Cruz was already running for president.

    “In my experience, people engage in political bomb-throwing when they’re feeling insecure,” Cruz told Politico in a Saturday interview, according to The Hill’s report.

    “So he’s welcome to make whatever comments he likes,” Cruz continued. “I’m going to keep focusing on the midterms and helping us win on Election Day in the next 30 days.”

    That sharp response came after Vance questioned the senator’s priorities in an interview with NBC News Thursday.

    “It is really obvious to me that, at this very moment, Ted Cruz is running for president,” Vance said.

    “At this moment, I’m not. I’m trying to help elect Republicans. That’s what I’m going to keep on doing.”

    Cruz Reminds Vance Who Helped Him Win

    Cruz countered by pointing to his own work campaigning for Republican candidates — and reminding Vance that those efforts once included him.

    The senator told Politico he helped Vance during his successful 2022 Senate campaign in Ohio, according to The Hill.

    “I was very glad he won that race,” Cruz said. “I was very glad to help him.”

    The message was pointed: Before Vance was questioning Cruz’s political ambitions, Cruz was helping him climb the ladder.

    Both men insist November is their immediate priority. But their public exchange is putting the competition to succeed President Trump on display more than two years before the next presidential election.

    A Front-Runner, But No Coronation

    Vance is widely viewed as the early front-runner for the 2028 Republican nomination. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also figured prominently in speculation about Trump’s successor.

    Cruz, however, has made clear he isn’t ready to concede the field.

    “I’ll certainly be part of the discussion,” he told MS NOW in August, while suggesting Republicans had not settled on Vance as their next nominee.

    Cruz previously sought the nomination in 2016, losing to Trump. His recent campaign travel has included Iowa and South Carolina, states with prominent roles in the presidential nominating process, Mediaite reported in its coverage of Vance’s NBC interview.

    Vance, meanwhile, acknowledged in that interview that the midterm results could help inform his own decision about a presidential run, according to Mediaite. He declined to say whether major Republican losses would discourage him from entering the race.

    Karoline Leavitt’s Next Role Officially Unveiled

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    By Gage Skidmore from Surprise, AZ, United States of America - Karoline Leavitt, CC BY-SA 2.0,

    Karoline Leavitt is trading the White House lectern for a Fox News microphone.

    After weeks of speculation about her television future, President Donald Trump’s former press secretary has landed an on-air contributor role at the network, Fox announced Monday, according to The New York Times.

    Leavitt, 29, starts Nov. 1 and is expected to provide commentary across both news and opinion programming. The announcement comes roughly two months after she left the administration to spend more time with her young children. The U.S. Sun also reported the move Monday, citing the Times.

    For viewers who caught Sean Hannity’s recent conversations with Leavitt, the destination may sound familiar.

    Hannity Dropped A Big Hint

    During a September episode of his Hang Out with Sean Hannity podcast, the longtime Fox host openly encouraged Leavitt to consider a television career.

    “I see a future for you in television if you want one,” Hannity told her, according to Mediaite.

    He even floated a possible show title: “The Briefing with Karoline Leavitt.” Leavitt acknowledged that the two had discussed the possibility before, but stopped short of announcing a deal.

    Now, the Fox job is official. The announced position is a contributor role, with appearances across the network’s programming.

    Leavitt said in a statement that she would bring “the unique perspective and candor that defined my tenure with the Trump administration,” the Times reported.

    Fox News Media CEO Suzanne Scott pointed to Leavitt’s experience working alongside the president.

    “Karoline’s firsthand experience in the White House and on the presidential campaign trail gives her a distinct understanding of today’s political landscape,” Scott said in a statement quoted by the Times.

    A Familiar Path With A Trump Twist

    Leavitt became the youngest White House press secretary in history and quickly emerged as one of Trump’s most recognizable defenders. Her briefings regularly featured sharp exchanges with reporters, while her access to the president made her a central voice for the administration.

    After giving birth to her second child in May, she took maternity leave before announcing her departure. She pledged at the time to “remain a vocal advocate for MAGA and the Republican Party,” according to the Times.

    She follows a familiar path. Former Trump press secretary Kayleigh McEnany joined Fox as a contributor in 2021 before becoming an Outnumbered co-host. George W. Bush’s former spokeswoman Dana Perino also built a television career at the network.

    But Leavitt arrives amid fresh friction between Trump and Fox. The president recently accused the channel of airing “a completely negative narrative” and criticized Fox & Friends, the Times reported, putting one of Trump’s most familiar advocates inside a network he both watches and often publicly needles.

    Trump Says He Regrets All Three Of His Supreme Court Picks

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    2
    President Donald Trump answers questions from members of the media aboard Air Force One en route to Mount Pocono, Pennsylvania, for a rally on the economy, Tuesday, December 9, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

    President Donald Trump spent years celebrating the Supreme Court majority he helped build. Now, he says he regrets choosing all three of his appointees.

    In a September 28 interview with Time magazine, Trump was asked whether he regretted nominating Justices Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett.

    “Yeah. Yeah. What can I do? I put them in,” Trump replied. “They voted against me too often.”

    The blunt admission follows a string of clashes between the president and the court over his administration’s policies on tariffs, birthright citizenship and mail voting.

    Trump appointed Gorsuch in 2017, Kavanaugh in 2018 and Barrett in 2020. Those selections helped establish the court’s 6–3 conservative majority — a transformation he has repeatedly touted as one of his biggest accomplishments.

    But the president now says his nominees have fallen short of his expectations.

    ‘Very Disappointing’

    During the Time interview, Trump complained that his appointees had received the “position of a lifetime” but nevertheless frequently ruled against his administration.

    “They vote for me too,” he acknowledged.

    Still, Trump contrasted their decisions with those of the court’s three liberal justices, whom he described as more consistent in voting together.

    “The Democrats stick like glue — those three, they virtually never vary,” Trump said.

    Although he criticized that approach, he added that “there’s something I admire about it: there’s loyalty.”

    Asked whether he wanted loyalty from his own nominees, Trump rejected that characterization.

    “No, I don’t want loyalty,” he said. “I want good decisions.”

    His assessment of the justices he selected remained harsh.

    “I put these people in. It is what it is,” Trump told Time. “Very disappointing, very disappointing for the country — their decisions.”

    Mail Voting Clash Fueled His Anger

    Trump had already publicly attacked his three appointees in September after the court blocked his administration’s attempt to restrict mail voting ahead of the midterm elections.

    In that criticism, he said the justices “are not the people I interviewed to serve” and called them “shells of their former selves.”

    The court’s order did not disclose a complete vote breakdown, leaving each justice’s position unclear. Kavanaugh wrote a concurring opinion, while Gorsuch and Barrett did not publicly join the dissent from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

    Trump praised Thomas and Alito as “legends both” while directing his frustration at the broader court.

    Tariffs And Citizenship Remain Flashpoints

    The president also singled out rulings involving his tariff policies and effort to narrow birthright citizenship.

    “The tariff decision was disastrous for the country,” Trump told Time, calling it “an absolute crying shame.”

    He argued that the court should have protected the substantial revenue collected under his trade policies.

    Trump also criticized the court’s decision involving his attempt to restrict automatic citizenship for some children born in the United States — an executive action challenged under the 14th Amendment.

    “It’s unfortunate what they did — not to me, to our country,” he said.

    A Court He Once Celebrated

    Trump’s frustration marks a striking turn in his public assessment of the court.

    His appointees helped deliver major conservative victories, including overturning Roe v. Wade, expanding Second Amendment protections and restricting the use of race in college admissions.

    Trump has repeatedly claimed credit for those outcomes, particularly the reversal of Roe.

    But Supreme Court justices hold lifetime appointments and remain independent of the presidents who nominate them. Their selection carries no obligation to support an administration’s policies.

    That independence has now become a recurring source of frustration for the president who helped shape the current bench.

    Asked whether he regretted his three choices, Trump’s answer was unequivocal: “Yeah. Yeah.”

    Supreme Court Gives Trump Green Light To Resume Third-Country Deportations

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0

    President Donald Trump’s deportation campaign just got a green light from the Supreme Court — with a bigger legal showdown still ahead.

    The justices on Tuesday, September 29, allowed the administration to resume its contested third-country removal policy, pausing a Massachusetts federal court judgment that had blocked it. The apparent 6–3 split left Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson opposing the stay.

    The policy allows immigration officials to send people with final removal orders to countries other than those specified in their orders, often nations other than their homelands. The Court also agreed to hear the case in December, setting up a full review of the administration’s authority.

    DHS Celebrates The Ruling

    DHS General Counsel James Percival welcomed the decision, saying the department’s third-country removal policy was back in effect and calling it the administration’s second Supreme Court victory in less than a week.

    “A bad day for criminal illegals and open borders activists alike,” Percival wrote on X, according to The Daily Wire.

    The administration argues that third-country removals provide a way to deport people whose home countries will not accept them, including individuals convicted of serious crimes.

    In its September 24 emergency application, Solicitor General D. John Sauer described the policy as “an essential tool to remove certain aliens, including some of the worst criminal aliens.”

    A Dispute Over Notice And Safety

    The fight centers on what protections migrants must receive before being sent to another country.

    U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy in Boston found that the administration’s procedures did not provide adequate notice or a meaningful chance to raise fears of torture or persecution at the proposed destination, NPR reported.

    The administration contends that credible assurances from a receiving country that it will not persecute or torture deportees can permit prompt removal. Its court filing says that, without those assurances, the policy provides notice and an opportunity to raise fears of mistreatment.

    Government lawyers also said the lower-court ruling had forced officials to cancel a flight carrying 70 people with criminal convictions to three countries, triggering additional diplomatic negotiations. Those assertions were part of the administration’s request for emergency relief.

    Attorneys challenging the policy argue that removing people without meaningful notice can expose them to serious harm. Their court papers described allegations of arbitrary detention, beatings, sexual assault and people being sent onward to countries from which they had already received protection, according to NPR.

    December Brings The Larger Showdown

    Tuesday’s order gives Trump an immediate enforcement victory, but the policy’s ultimate legality remains unresolved.

    The justices will consider whether the district court had jurisdiction, whether it could grant relief covering the entire class of migrants, and whether the government’s policy violates federal immigration law, constitutional due process or protections against torture.

    For now, the lower-court judgment remains paused while the Supreme Court proceeds toward a final decision.

    Kristi Noem Files for Divorce After 34 Years of Marriage

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    The White House, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

    Former Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has filed for divorce from her husband, Bryon, bringing a 34-year marriage to court after months of public speculation about the couple.

    The case appeared in Hamlin County, South Dakota, court records this week. The filing cites irreconcilable differences, according to NewsNation’s report on the documents. The Noems married on May 23, 1992, and have three adult children.

    The public filing gives no further explanation for the split. Bryon Noem told Nexstar’s KELO on Tuesday, “I can’t comment right now,” according to the NewsNation account. The outlet said it was unable to reach Kristi Noem.

    Months of speculation

    The marriage had drawn attention since late March, when the Daily Mail published photos and messages it said showed Bryon Noem interacting with online fetish performers. A representative for Kristi Noem said at the time that the family had been “blindsided” and asked for privacy and prayers. The public divorce filing does not establish what prompted Noem’s decision.

    In July, Kristi Noem’s mother, Corinne Arnold, told the Daily Mail the couple was headed for divorce. Bryon was absent from the August unveiling of a statue honoring Kristi’s time as South Dakota governor. At the event, she said her family, including Bryon, had supported her during her years in office.

    The Trump administration connection

    The filing also renews attention on Noem’s final weeks at the Department of Homeland Security. During a March House Judiciary Committee hearing, a Democratic lawmaker asked about reports of a romantic relationship between Noem and Corey Lewandowski, a former Trump campaign manager who worked as an adviser at DHS. Noem dismissed the question as “tabloid garbage.” Both Noem and Lewandowski have denied the allegations. The divorce filing offers no evidence about those claims. cbsnews.com

    Lewandowski’s authority at DHS had separately come under congressional scrutiny. ProPublica reported that agency records contradicted Noem’s testimony denying he had a role in approving contracts. That dispute concerned government oversight, separate from the couple’s divorce.

    President Donald Trump removed Noem from DHS in March and named her special envoy for the Shield of the Americas, a Western Hemisphere security initiative. She previously served as South Dakota’s governor from 2019 until joining Trump’s Cabinet in 2025.

    For now, neither Noem has publicly explained the divorce filing beyond the irreconcilable differences stated in the court record.

    Supreme Court Hands Trump A Major Election-Year Win

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Duncan Lock, Dflock, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

    The Supreme Court handed President Donald Trump a significant victory Friday, clearing the way for his administration to revive an expanded federal database that states can use to check voters’ citizenship ahead of the November midterms.

    In a 6–3 order, the justices paused a lower court ruling that had shut down the administration’s overhaul of the Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements program, known as SAVE. The move allows the Department of Homeland Security to operate the expanded system while the legal fight continues.

    The decision gives Trump a boost in his push to tighten voter eligibility checks. It does not authorize a broad, last-minute purge of voter rolls, and the Court has yet to issue a final ruling on the program’s legality.

    What the ruling changes

    SAVE dates to 1986 and originally drew mainly on immigration records. Following a March 2025 executive order, the administration connected it to Social Security Administration records and added the ability to search multiple names at once. State and local election officials can use the expanded system to check whether people registering or already on voter rolls are citizens.

    The League of Women Voters, several affiliates and a privacy group challenged those changes. A federal district judge in Washington set aside the overhaul in June, finding violations of the Social Security Act, the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act. A divided federal appeals court then refused to put that ruling on hold.

    The Supreme Court took a different view. Its unsigned majority opinion said federal law likely permits the information sharing at issue and that the government would be harmed if it could not use the system it considers best suited to helping states verify citizenship. As ABC News reported, the ruling lifts the lower court’s block for now.

    Federal law requires states to finish programs designed to systematically remove ineligible voters at least 90 days before a federal election. The majority acknowledged that the rule limits the immediate effect of its decision, but said election officials may still make individualized inquiries during that period. The Court left for a separate case the question of how the 90-day rule applies to programs targeting noncitizens.

    A sharp dissent

    Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, joined by Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, warned that outdated citizenship information could put eligible voters at risk. The majority itself noted the case of a naturalized citizen whose Social Security records did not accurately reflect her citizenship, though it concluded the challengers’ legal claims were unlikely to succeed.

    The administration argues the expanded tool helps states identify ineligible registrations. In its Supreme Court filing, it said the system had confirmed more than 65 million voters as citizens across 26 states and flagged 28,635 potential noncitizens. That latter figure is not a count of proven illegal votes. ABC News has reported that documented noncitizen voting is exceedingly rare.

    Trump’s Arch Plan Pushes Ahead After Preservation Talks Break Down

    By
    Madeleine Jackson
    -
    0
    Reflecting Pool

    President Donald Trump’s planned triumphal arch has hit a new stage in its fight with preservation officials: A federal council is ending talks aimed at resolving objections to the 250-foot monument near Arlington National Cemetery.

    The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation told the National Park Service Thursday that it was “terminating consultation” under the National Historic Preservation Act. The move follows months of disagreement over the arch’s effect on historic views around Memorial Circle, Arlington Memorial Bridge and the approach to the cemetery.

    That does not give the project final approval. The council plans to send advisory comments to Interior Secretary Doug Burgum by October 7. Burgum must consider and respond to them before making a final decision under this preservation review. The public and consulting parties have until September 29 to submit their views.

    A fight over historic views

    The Park Service identified 42 historic properties that could be affected by the project, including six National Historic Landmarks. Its assessment found that the arch would have adverse effects on historic settings and sightlines by adding a prominent structure to the commemorative landscape.

    In the council’s letter, the Park Service said further talks on the existing proposal were unlikely to produce an agreement. It also said alternatives that would avoid or reduce the adverse effects would change the project’s fundamental nature and prevent it from meeting its goals.

    Virginia officials pushed back. In a letter described by ABC News, state preservation official Samantha Henderson argued that the proposed measures would “further highlight how this undertaking has marred rather than added to these spaces.” She said public and local-government concerns had not been directly addressed in a way that showed an effort to reach agreement.

    The administration says the arch would celebrate American triumphs and beautify the capital. Opponents argue that its scale would overwhelm the solemn route between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. The proposed site is Memorial Circle on Columbia Island, at the Washington, D.C., end of Arlington Memorial Bridge.

    Trump adds a military twist

    Trump has also given the project a new purpose. In a Sunday Truth Social post, he said that “at the strong request of the United States Military” he had agreed to turn the arch into a “top grade Military Complex/Triumphal Arch.” He said it would hold drones, provide positions for snipers and store sniper ammunition. The Pentagon declined to comment when ABC News asked about the announcement.

    The National Capital Planning Commission approved preliminary site and building plans in July. It requested more information about the arch’s height, traffic effects and aviation-related lighting before final review. That final approval has yet to be granted.

    The preservation dispute now moves from negotiations toward a decision at Interior.

    123...150Page 1 of 150
    © Great America News Desk 2022