#governmentwaste — Public Fediverse posts

What a magnificent paint job this no-bid contractor is providing us for only $7 million. $1 million for the work, and Trump pockets $6 million.
#TrumpWaste
#WasteFraudAndAbuse
#TrumpSpending
#GovernmentWaste
#TaxpayerMoney

https://www.europesays.com/people/202196/ How much will Andy Burnham’s ‘No. 10 North’ cost British taxpayers? #AndyBurnham #BigGovernment #Economy #England #FOIA #GovernmentSpending #GovernmentWaste #taxpayers #UnitedKingdom

How much will Andy Burnham’s ‘No. 10 North’ cost British taxpayers? https://www.byteseu.com/2307612/ #BigGovernment #economy #England #FOIA #GovernmentSpending #GovernmentWaste #GreatBritain #taxpayers #UnitedKingdom

https://www.europesays.com/uk/1169185/ How much will Andy Burnham’s ‘No. 10 North’ cost British taxpayers? #BigGovernment #Britain #Economy #England #FOIA #GovernmentSpending #GovernmentWaste #GreatBritain #NorthernIreland #Scotland #TaxPayers #UK #UnitedKingdom #Wales

#Border “Security” Construction Paused at #BigBend #NationalPark in #Texas.

Construction of a new #BorderPatrol road & barriers through some of the park’s major attractions has drawn bipartisan criticism & national attention.

Local law enforcement have said the border infrastructure is costly & unnecessary in a desolate & undeveloped area where few migrants have ever crossed, even during times of peak migration.

#law #immigration #PublicLands #Trump #GovernmentWaste
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2026/08/17/us/trump-news?unlocked_article_code=1.6FA.PVP0.cTvOhU-3HC4z&smid=nytcore-ios-share

The Awful Arithmetic Of Our Wars

“DEFENSE ONE” By Peter W. Singer

“The math of current battlefields remains literally orders of magnitude beyond what our budget plans to spend, our industry plans to build, our acquisitions system is able to contract, and thus what our military will deploy.”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 “At the lowest point of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln characterized the core factor between victory and defeat as finding a general who understood the “awful arithmetic” of war. War is a contest of blood and treasure; each can, and must, ultimately be counted and measured. It has been the same for every conflict before and after. 

Yet this arithmetic is constantly changing, and never faster than right now. If the United States cannot update its calculations to properly reflect our new era, our failure will not just cost us blood and treasure, but will drive us toward defeat.

Cost imposition has long been a tenet of U.S. strategy. During the Cold War, the U.S. launched expensive programs such as stealth and Star Wars not just for their tactical value, but to send a strategic signal to the Kremlin: neither your economy nor your war machine can keep up. Gorbachev, persuaded, gave up the decades-long competition with the U.S. 

The very same concept of cost imposition was also elemental to the most celebrated operations of the past year. In Operation Spider’s Web, Ukraine used inexpensive drones, reportedly costing less than $500 each, to damage strategic bombers worth many millions of dollars, degrading Russia’s long-range strike capabilities for years to come. Similarly, in Operation Rising Lion, cheap Israeli drones took out Iranian surface-to-air missiles and radars, paving the way for the destruction of command and nuclear facilities worth tens of billions of dollars. In each, the tactical became the strategic through new operational concepts that leveraged the new math of new technologies. 

Now contrast this with our own approaches, which overwhelmingly rely on sophisticated but costly overmatch.

The most lauded U.S. operation of 2025 was Operation Midnight Hammer, our followup to Rising Lion. One estimate put its cost at $196 million, from combining B-2 bomber’s nearly $160,000 per flight hour and Tomahawk missiles’ rough price of $1.87 million apiece. (It does not count the initial purchase of the seven B-2 Bombers that cost $2.1 billion each, nor the $4.3 billion submarine that launched the missiles.) 

Perhaps it was worth spending one-fifth of a billion dollars to damage Iranian nuclear facilities, but the numbers in Operation Rough Rider—the strikes against the Houthis last spring—illustrate the problem more starkly. The Pentagon spent roughly $5 billion on munitions and operating costs to stop attacks on Red Sea shipping, which simply started back up.

The same awful arithmetic haunts the current operations in the Caribbean against the Venezuela-based, government-connected Cartel de los Soles. The entity was recently designated by the Trump administration as a foreign terrorist organization, as part of its argument that US forces are engaged in an “armed conflict.” The cartel was declared by the Department of Justice to be the hub of a cocaine transport network, shipping a reported street value of between $6.25 billion and $8.75 billion in drugs (the cartel gets an unknown, but clearly lesser, percentage of that overall value in actual profit). 

To battle this foe, the United States has assembled a fleet that cost at least $40 billion to buy in total. The carrier Ford alone cost $4.7 billion to develop and $12.9 billion to build. The fleet is backed by at least 83 aircraft of assorted types, including 10 F-35Bs ($109 million apiece), seven Predator drones ($33 million each), three P-8 Poseidons ($145 million per), and at least one AC-130J gunship ($165 million). To be sure, all of these assets will continue to serve long after Operation Southern Spear is wound down, but this is how we are using the investment. 

But the current cost of operations and expendables hardly tells a better story. The Ford alone costs about $8 million a day to run. The F-35s and AC-130J cost about $40,000 per flight hour; the P-8s, about $30,000; the Reapers, about $3,500.

Analysis of the strike videos on the 21 boats show that U.S. forces have fired AGM-176 Griffins ($127,333 apiece in 2019), Hellfires (running about $150,000 to $220,000) and potentially GBU-39B Small Diameter Bombs ($40,000). In some cases, they are reportedly firing four munitions per strike: “twice to kill the crew and twice more to sink it.”

All this is arrayed to sink motorboats, 21 at last report. One of the boats was described by Pentagon officials as a 39-foot Flipper-type vessel with four 200-horsepower engines. New ones go for about $400,000 on Boats.com, but the old, open top motorbots in the videos are obviously well below that in cost. Their crews have been reported as making $500 per trip.

Put in comparison, the cost of the US naval fleet deployed is at least five times what the cartel makes in smuggling. The air fleet deployed costs at least another two times more.  It is roughly 5,000 times the cost of the suspected drug boats that have been destroyed. Indeed, just the cost of operating the Ford off Venezuela for a single day has still not yet equaled the maximum cost the cartel paid for the boats it has lost.

In the air, the U.S. military spent roughly 66,000 times more to buy each unmanned drone in the operation than the cartel paid each man that the unmanned drones killed. The US spent between 80 to 300 times more for each bomb or missile it has used than the cartel paid each man killed by those bombs or missiles. 

The math is arguably even worse when we’re on the defense. 

In September, a wave of 19 Russian drones crossed into Polish airspace.. The Gerbera-type drones cost as little as $10,000—so cheap that they are often used as decoys to misdirect and overwhelm Ukrainian air defenses. NATO countered with a half-billion-dollar response force of F-35s, F-16s, AWACS radar planes, and helicopters, which shot down four of the drones with $1.6-million AMRAAM missiles. 

This is a bargain compared to how challenging U.S. forces have found it to defend against Houthi forces using this same cheap tech. Our naval forces have fired a reported 120 SM-2, 80 SM-6, and 20 SM-3 missiles, costing about $2.1 million, $3.9 million, and over $9.6 million each. And this is to defend against a group operating out of the 187th-largest economy in the world, able to fire mere hundreds of drones and missiles. Our supposed pacing challenge, China, has an economy that will soon be the largest in the world and a combined national industrial and military acquisition plan to be able to fire munitions by the millions. 

Even in America’s best-laid plans for future battlefields, there is a harsh reality that is too often ignored. The math of current battlefields remains literally orders of magnitude beyond what our budget plans to spend, our industry plans to build, our acquisitions system is able to contract, and thus what our military will deploy. 

As a point of comparison, Ukraine is on pace to build, buy, and use over four million drones this year. The U.S. Army, meanwhile, aims to acquire 50,000 drones next year—about 1.25 percent of the Ukrainian total. In its most optimistic plans, it hopes to be able to acquire 1 million drones “within the next two to three years.” ​​ 

When you spend orders of magnitude more than your foe, you are in what is known as a “losing equation.” And if we don’t change this math, we will need an update to Norm Augustine’s infamous “law” of defense acquisitions. Back in 1979, Augustine calculated that if the Pentagon couldn’t curtail the cost curve of its purchasing, by 2054 we wouldn’t be able to afford a single plane. 

If we don’t master the new math of the battlefield, we won’t be able to afford to win a single battle.”

The awful arithmetic of our wars

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

P.W. Singer is Strategist at New America and the author of multiple books on technology and security, including Wired for War, Ghost Fleet, Burn-In, and LikeWar: The Weaponization of Social Media.

This is quite possibly the most cogent criticism of the DOGE that I have read since last year. The article makes it clear that it had less to do with cutting actual waste (which actually increased during the first year of Trump 2.0) than with scoring political points for the president, likely to the detriment of future, more serious attempts at reducing waste.
https://reason.com/2026/08/06/doge-claimed-110-billion-in-spending-cuts-that-couldnt-be-verified-audit-finds/
#DOGE #audit #DonaldTrump #ElonMusk #GAO #governmentSpending #governmentWaste #TrumpAdministration

What a magnificent paint job this no-bid contractor is providing us for only $7 million. $1 million for the work, and Trump pockets $6 million.
#TrumpWaste
#WasteFraudAndAbuse
#TrumpSpending
#GovernmentWaste
#TaxpayerMoney

How Large Defense Industry Prime Contractors Price Gouge the Pentagon

“THE NATIONAL INTEREST” By Julia Gledhill

“The distillation of the defense industry as the number of prime military contractors shrank from over fifty to just five, bodes poorly for both the military and taxpayer because it produces waste, not to mention a strong profit incentive for war”

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“As a matter of practice, military contractors have overcharged the Pentagon for years—at the expense of both taxpayers and the military.

However, several members of Congress are working to end the practice. Senators Warren (D-MA), Braun (R-IN), and Grassley (R-IA) teamed up with Reps. Garamendi (D-CA) and Deluzio (D-PA) to introduce legislation that will address the legal loopholes that enable military price gouging.

Acquisition experts understand these loopholes well, but unfortunately, most lawmakers are still unaware of how common it is for contractors to overcharge the military. Without a better understanding of the true scale of military price gouging, Congress is unlikely to pass legislation to prevent it.

Due to unchallenged market power, sole-source contractors are well positioned to profiteer. Doggett’s provision would establish a panel to review sole-source military contracts and “determine whether the Department of Defense paid fair and reasonable prices.” By focusing on sole-source contracts, the panel would shine much-needed light on the issue of military price gouging writ large, the scale of which is near impossible to discern because so much of it is legal.

Over the course of decades, military contractors have consolidated and harnessed market power to slowly obscure military price gouging. Industry consolidation began when the Cold War ended, and the Clinton administration slashed defense spending. However, as Richard Loeb—former Executive Secretary and Counsel of the Cost Accounting Standards Board in the Office of Management and Budget—has pointed out, the administration simultaneously catalyzed an era of “acquisition reform” to protect contractor profits even as defense spending plummeted and the number of prime military contractors shrank from over fifty to just five. Merger mania has continued, further concentrating market power among the few. Military contractors wield that power on Capitol Hill, lobbying Congress to gradually chip away at acquisition laws designed to protect the government from unfair pricing schemes on military contracts. In so doing, lawmakers have left the Pentagon in the dark about contract negotiations with the defense industry.

Acquisition reform and industry consolidation have helped contractors overbill the military in pursuit of excess profits. As a result, military contractors have overcharged the Pentagon to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars on a single program, generating nearly 40 percent in excess profits. Indeed, a CBS investigation last year revealed that the Pentagon saved $550 million on the Patriot PAC-3 missile after conducting a 2015 cost review of Lockheed Martin and Boeing’s previous work on the program. Both contractors are repeat offenders, and they have long been among the top five prime contractors dominating the defense industry. The Pentagon’s internal watchdog exposed Boeing for inflating prices on spare parts in 2013 and 2011. In one case, the company charged over 177,000 percent above the fair and reasonable price for a helicopter spare part—$71.01 for a tiny metal pin worth 4 cents at the time. The trend continues. Just last month, two Lockheed subsidiaries agreed to a $70 million settlement with the Navy for doing the same thing—inflating prices on spare parts.

The Pentagon can’t negotiate reasonable prices with military contractors because it doesn’t have sufficient bargaining power. Contractors are often exempt from providing the Pentagon with “certified cost or pricing data.” Without this information, the Pentagon has little idea what companies’ costs are and, thus, what their profit margins might look like. Contracts may be valued below the mandatory disclosure threshold. Contractors may also produce a product that’s considered commercial—and theoretically, price competitive. However, the statutory definition of “commercial” is overly broad, encompassing products that aren’t sold to the public and sometimes never have been. Lawmakers expanded the commercial definition and raised the mandatory disclosure threshold for certified data at the behest of industry and under the guise of cutting red tape.

Without legal requirements for certified data, the Pentagon may ask contractors for historic or uncertified cost and pricing data. Yet, the Pentagon has few tools to ensure that this data meets requisite standards; among them, that they include “the minimum information necessary to permit a determination that the proposed price is fair and reasonable.” According to the Pentagon, current statutory and regulatory requirements discourage officials from requesting uncertified data. Instead, contracting officers often rely on historical cost and pricing data. Still, according to the Pentagon Inspector General, the department cannot evaluate price reasonableness “based solely on historical price comparison.” This is particularly concerning given the watchdog’s extensive analysis of contract pricing in recent years, which shows that price analysis methods like historical cost comparison enable “sole source contractors to earn excess profits without detection by contracting officers.” Effectively, military contractors can provide the Pentagon with any cost figures without consequence—even if they give zero indication of how reasonable current prices are. In other words, contractors can price gouge the military legally, likely under the government’s radar.

Still, the defense industry appears to resist almost any attempt by the Pentagon to evaluate contract price reasonableness. “Sweeping” is a process through which contractors overwhelm the Pentagon with cost and pricing data that was “reasonably available at the time of price agreement” but submitted after the fact. According to Senator Warren, contractors often sweep the Pentagon after price agreements and before contract awards to absolve themselves of the liabilities associated with breaking acquisition law and potentially “to hide data that might give the [Pentagon] a better price.” In other cases, contractors outright refuse to provide the Pentagon cost and pricing data, claim they can’t share it, or delay the provision of such data to the extent that the Pentagon may blindly agree to a contract price due to time sensitivity. So, the Pentagon doesn’t just struggle to obtain certified cost and pricing data. It’s a challenge to get any cost and pricing data—even from sole-source contractors, which are relatively uninhibited by the forces driving price competition.

The Pentagon has admitted that data denials “may be more prevalent [than reported], particularly with respect to sole source commercial items.” This is especially nefarious in a market that looks like a monopsony but operates like a monopoly, where sole-source contractors reign as kings. They have a documented history of refusing to provide even uncertified cost and pricing information. Since 1998, the Pentagon’s Inspector General has published several reports detailing data denials by sole-source contractors. TransDigm, Inc. is the most recent example and perhaps the most notorious. According to the Pentagon, the company “accounted for all Defense Logistics Agency cost and pricing data denials” in FY 2022. The company failed to respond to 401 requests for cost and pricing data from the agency, and that was after the Pentagon Inspector General exposed TransDigm for twice price gouging the Pentagon. The contractor generated a total of nearly $40 million in excess profits.

Ultimately, withholding cost and pricing data bolsters a contractor’s ability to increase profits by charging the Pentagon unfair and unreasonable prices. However, the defense industry already significantly outperforms other industries financially, and this is not just because the United States spends over a trillion dollars annually on national security. In many cases, the Pentagon reimburses contractors for research and development costs. It will even cover some capital costs, including those associated with the depreciation of assets like machinery and equipment. As a result, military contractors enjoy returns on assets and invested capital that are difficult to achieve in other industries where companies make those investments themselves. Still, military contractors leverage special treatment from the government to increase executive compensation and cash paid to shareholders, even at the expense of capital investment and internal research and development.

If the defense industry continues to consolidate, it will only get harder for the Pentagon to negotiate fair prices with military contractors. The department will have to rely on more and more sole-source contractors, which not only increases the risk of overcharging but also presents national security risks, like supply chain vulnerability and reduced availability of certain resources. The entire nuclear triad is already dependent on one company, Northrop Grumman. As far as U.S. contractors go, General Dynamics manufactures a significant portion of tracked combat vehicles. Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman produce the military’s fixed-wing aircraft. The distillation of the defense industry to a handful of companies bodes poorly for both the military and taxpayer because it produces waste, not to mention a strong profit incentive for war.

As the defense industry’s primary customer and a steward of taxpayer dollars, the Pentagon needs to be a stronger buyer. However, never-ending acquisition reform continues to prevent that. Current laws are insufficient even to document price gouging by military contractors, much less prevent or remedy it. If retained in the final defense policy bill, Rep. Doggett’s provision would help the Pentagon better understand the scope of overcharging by sole source contractors—and ultimately, give lawmakers the information they need to hold industry accountable for overcharging the government at the expense of the taxpayer.

Congress does not yet have the tools to investigate and root out the full scale of defense contractor fleecing of the DOD.”

“National Interest” How Defense Industry Price Gouges Pentagon

ABOUT THE AUTHOR:

Julia Gledhill is a Research Associate for the National Security Reform Program at The Stimson Center. She focuses her research and writing on Pentagon spending, military contracting, and acquisition. In previous roles at the Project On Government Oversight and the Friends Committee on National Legislation, Julia worked on various national security issues related to Pentagon accountability, war powers, civilian protection, drone policy, the torture program, and U.S. lethal strikes.

On March 4, days after the start of the #war with #Iran, #Trump personally negotiated the price of concrete [?!?!] to be provided by one of Clark’s wholly owned subsidiaries, according to a summary of the terms that notes his involvement. The summary indicates the price, initially more than $47 million, dropped $2.3 million during the negotiation.

#law #EastWing #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #UrbanPlanning #architecture

After signing the #EastWing contract, Clark officials notified the White House that the company planned to award #NoBid deals to at least 11 subcontractors for demolition, abatement, excavation, fencing & other services, according to copies of correspondence obtained by The Post. Two of those subcontractors are Clark subsidiaries.

#Trump #law #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture

The role of the Executive Residence “does not include maintenance or repair involving structural building elements or major utility systems for those areas, which are handled by GSA or NPS,” acc/to the memorandum, which expires in 2029.

…Clark’s internal construction cost estimates rose from $200 million in July 2025 to $600 million by March 2026, WaPo previously reported.

#Trump #law #EastWing #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UrbanPlanning #architecture

#Trump has repeatedly [falsely] claimed that the #ballroom would be paid for by private donors & once said that Clark executives offered to build it for free.

“They said, ‘Sir, we’ll do it for nothing. This is the greatest honor,” Trump told the NYT in January.

Clark’s internal cost projections show the McLean, Virginia-based company, the largest general contractor in the DC metro area, stands to make tens of millions of dollars from the work.

#law #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight

“I would certainly expect them to compete a project of this size & complexity,” said Anthony Costa, a former GSA official who oversaw complex government real estate projects during a career that spanned four presidential admins.

The estimated #EastWing construction cost has tripled since last July, when the project was first announced, with [at least] half expected to come from #taxpayers, WaPo previously reported.

#Trump #law #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight

Competitive bidding is generally required at most federal agencies. Experts said the Executive Residence is exempt from those rules, & the president has legal authority to hire companies of his choosing to make changes to the executive mansion & the surrounding grounds. Those experts said soliciting bids would have ensured the best price for #taxpayers, especially given the size & cost of the #EastWing project.

#Trump #law #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #architecture

The #EastWing contract is the latest example of the admin turning to #NoBid deals to hasten a Trump-style makeover [ick — Mar-a-Lago face] of the nation’s capital, which has included handpicking firms to upgrade #LafayetteSquare next to the #WhiteHouse & to “renovate” the Lincoln Memorial #ReflectingPool.

#Trump #law #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture

The confidential contract with Clark Construction, along with related correspondence & records obtained by The Post, reveal for the first time how the #Trump admin bypassed norms last summer as it set the #ballroom project in motion.

Records also show that Trump was directly involved in [badly] negotiating some costs for the #EastWing project.

#law #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture

The #WhiteHouse routed the contract through the Executive Residence, the document shows, an office that is exempt from rules that require federal agencies to solicit competitive bids & disclose details to the public. The office is typically responsible for routine repairs, entertainment expenses, & the purchase of furniture, art & other items for the executive mansion.

#Trump #law #EastWing #ballroom #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture

#WhiteHouse officials last year secretly awarded a #NoBid contract worth up to $500 million for the construction of the #EastWing #ballroom in an unusual arrangement that sidestepped typical contracting procedures designed to control costs, acc/to a copy of the agreement obtained by WaPo.


#Trump #law #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture

It’ll probably be as well done as the no-bid #ReflectingPool.

#Trump is using a $500M #NoBid contract to build his White House #ballroom

The secret agreement was routed through a #WhiteHouse office that typically handles repairs & furnishings & is exempt from competitive bidding requirements.

#GiftArticle

#law #TaxPayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #oversight #landmark #UShistory #UrbanPlanning #architecture
https://wapo.st/4vWKurH

Since pieces of peeling paint started floating to the water’s surface earlier this week, the #Interior Dept has not responded to questions about the paint & why the #ReflectingPool surface is separating.

…#Trump blamed the damage on “disgraceful Vandalism,” an accusation he also made earlier this week. “Many additional people” were arrested, he said.

The Park Police did not immediately respond to a request for comment about the number of arrests.

#kakistocracy #TaxpayersMoney #GovernmentWaste

Seriously? Such a dick.

#Trump tries to blame #ReflectingPool woes on “vandalism”, without offering substantiation as usual.

The paint is peeling from Washington’s Reflecting Pool after the renovation ordered by Trump, & he is now alleging that someone damaged it intentionally.

#kakistocracy #TaxpayersMoney #GovernmentWaste #law #landmark #NationalMonument #conservation #planning #architecture
https://apnews.com/article/trump-reflecting-pool-paint-algae-6b7b499ada2701a34bc6bc380013ad04

It would be funny if it weren’t such a colossal waste of #TaxpayersMoney

Blue paint is already peeling off the Lincoln Memorial's #ReflectingPool after Trump's $14 million renovation

An “American Flag Blue” paint sheet was seen floating on Thursday as workers tried to clean the worst algae buildup in at least 5 years from the pool.

#Trump #kakistocracy #GovernmentWaste #law #landmark #NationalMonument #conservation #planning #architecture
https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/06/19/blue-paint-is-peeling-off-reflecting-pool/

…#Trump has not publicly commented on the #ReflectingPool algae problem. On Monday, he posted that he would host a Trump rally on July 4 “with the backdrop of the Lincoln Memorial and surrounding the beautifully new Reflecting Pool.”

#kakistocracy #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney

A higher value of that metric, known as the normalized difference chlorophyll index (NDCI), points to more algae in the water, Menendez said.

Menendez’s analysis detected more algae in the #ReflectingPool in an image taken Saturday — in the week after it reopened — than in any June images going back to 2021. The algae level was among the highest measured in ANY month in the past two years, according to the analysis.

#Trump #kakistocracy #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney

Multiple project summaries provided to the White House by Clark Construction show that internal cost estimates have been significantly higher than admin officials have acknowledged in public comments or court filings. They also show that the work was projected to rely heavily on taxpayer dollars from the moment it was announced.

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney #Trump #ballroom

Since first announcing the East Wing project last July, #Trump has repeatedly said that the price tag would not exceed $400 million & that private donations routed through a nonprofit would cover its entire cost. At other times, he has said that the #SecretService & the #military would contribute #security enhancements, without elaborating on the price of those upgrades.

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney #ballroom

By the time #Trump made his comments in March, the federal government had already approved more than a dozen payments to the contractor overseeing the work, Clark Construction, totaling tens of millions of dollars in #PublicFunds, acc/to a log of the contractor’s invoices….

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney #ballroom

But a detailed project summary prepared for the White House by the contractor more than 3 weeks before Trump’s comments estimated the total construction cost at $600 million—with more than half coming from #taxpayers, according to a copy of the contractor estimate obtained by WaPo.

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney #Trump #ballroom

Five months after the demolition of the White House’s #EastWing, #Trump claimed that the project to construct a massive #ballroom & a bunker in its place would cost up to $400 million & that private donors would pay for all of it.

“This is taxpayer-free. We have no taxpayer putting up 10 cents,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on March 31, describing the project as including bomb shelters & major medical facilities.

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste #TaxpayersMoney

Records reveal $600M estimate for Trump’s #ballroom project, with MORE THAN HALF coming from #TAXPAYERS

An internal cost estimate in March by the project’s contractor ran $200 million more than #Trump has said publicly & counters his claims that no #TaxpayersMoney will be spent.

#FactCheck #TrumpLies #scam #fraud #GovernmentWaste
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2026/06/16/records-reveal-600m-estimate-trumps-ballroom-project-with-half-taxpayers/

Pedestrians were not permitted to walk on the grass, and a Park Service helicopter circled overhead.

…This month, a federal judge prohibited the National Park Service from taking action against the organization #AccountabilityNOW USA, which displayed an “#8647” flag as part of an ongoing permitted demonstration in Washington. The Secret Service started an investigation into a volunteer with the organization after the flag was displayed.

#idiocracy #Trump #GovernmentWaste #law #FirstAmendment

The numerals were not discernible to people on the #NationalMall, who could only see a few brownish patches of grass near the WWII Memorial. The numerals seemed visible only from a tall vantage point, such as the top of the Washington Monument.

Multiple emergency vehicles could be seen encircling the grass around 1PM. A team of officers stood over brown patches in the grass, wearing gloves, & appeared to be testing the grass with materials from a yellow case.

#idiocracy #Trump #GovernmentWaste

The numerals 8, 6 & 7 were visible, but the 4 wasn’t clearly etched into the grass. It remains unclear how the markings were made. The term “#86” is restaurant industry slang that generally refers to the unavailability of an item or a customer’s removal. #Trump & his allies have argued it means to kill someone [never been used that way before they started claiming it as far as I know]. Trump is the 47th POTUS, so the digits have been used to show opposition to Trump.

#idiocracy #GovernmentWaste

So dumb

US #ParkPolice, the DC fire department [#DCFD] & members of the #NationalGuard were seen responding Thursday to what appeared to be large-scale etchings of the numerals “#8647” on the ‌grounds of the #NationalMall.

#idiocracy #Trump #GovernmentWaste
https://www.washingtonpost.com/style/2026/06/11/apparent-etchings-86-47-seen-trump-threat-spotted-national-mall/

Good news for #anticorruption & #GovernmentWaste

#Senate #Republicans have formally removed #funding for #Trump’s #ballroom security as part of their sprawling #immigration funding package [cuz seriously wtf?], acc/to revised #legislative text released Wednesday.

The decision to drop the ballroom funding, which had sparked significant debate among lawmakers, is not a complete surprise, though it is likely to frustrate #Trump [call the waaaahhhmbulance].

#law #vanity
https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/03/politics/trump-ballroom-funding-senate-republicans