Jackie Kennedy's White House Rose Garden Might Be Getting Another Trump Makeover
Jacqueline Kennedy's iconic rose garden at the White House might be getting a serious makeover during Donald Trump's second administration. Yes, the rose garden did receive a controversial renovation by Melania Trump in 2020, but it looks like it's going to happen again.
The president apparently has an issue with the grass in the middle of the White House Rose Garden. He wants to add a patio just like he has at his 'Winter White House' at Mar-a-Lago. Donald Trump was asked by Fox News on March 19 if the pavement rumor was true and he confirmed it during the broadcast.
More from SheKnows
Insiders Reveal Barron Trump Takes After Mom Melania Trump in All Ways Except One
'What was happening is that that's supposed to have events. Every event you have is soaking wet. It's soaking wet,' he explained. 'The women with the high heels. It's just too much. The grass, it just doesn't work. We use it for press conferences, and it just doesn't work because people fall into the wet.' To be clear, the roses will remain, but the grass in the center of the courtyard will be paved over.
The rumor first began in February when The New York Times leaked Donald Trump's White House reconstruction plans. There have been ongoing discussions as to whether to make it 'limestone or an easily interchangeable hard surface, with the possibility of installing hardwood floors for dancing,' per the outlet's sources. While the president might be thinking of this renovation from a practical standpoint, White House traditionalists aren't exactly pleased with this idea.
'This is beyond disrespectful 😡 but I suppose we shouldn't expect anything less,' said one X user. Another added, 'Sounds like a waste of money. Where is @DOGE to stop this fraud and abuse?!' One social media user wrote, 'I can't help but hear Joni Mitchell singing Paved Paradise.'
The New York Times indicated that Donald Trump is looking for a space to entertain guests, similar to his 'member-only club and home in Palm Beach, Fla.' The first lady has not chimed in about her husband's plans, but she received significant criticism for her treatment of the rose garden five years ago.
NBC News presidential historian Michael Beschloss shared his thoughts on her renovation, posting on X in 2021, 'Evisceration of White House Rose Garden was completed a year ago this month, and here was the grim result—decades of American history made to disappear.' Melania's office fired back after his critical words hit the internet.
'@BeschlossDC has proven his ignorance by showing a picture of the Rose Garden in its infancy,' the Office of Melania Trump wrote on her X account. 'The Rose Garden is graced with a healthy & colorful blossoming of roses. His misleading information is dishonorable & he should never be trusted as a professional historian.'
Melania had 10 crab apple trees removed and planted elsewhere on the White House grounds. People were hoping Dr. Jill Biden would restore Jackie's vision, but she did not touch it in the four years she was there. Jill often shared images of the rose bushes in bloom without making any note of Melania's changes.
Still, Donald Trump's patio is going to be hard to ignore and it will be the end of an era for Jackie's rose garden as fans knew and loved it.Best of SheKnows
48 Times Celebrities Rocked the Exact Same Look
Harry Potter Alum Jessie Cave, & More Celebrities Who Joined OnlyFans
Pete Davidson's Entire Dating History: From Ariana Grande to Elsie Hewitt
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
27 minutes ago
- USA Today
See photos: The last large-scale military parade in Washington DC in 1991
See photos: The last large-scale military parade in Washington DC in 1991 Show Caption Hide Caption Armored tanks arrive in DC for Trump's military birthday parade As Washington, D.C. prepares for the 250th anniversary of the U.S. Army, armored tanks have begun to arrive ahead of Saturday's celebration. Thousands of soldiers, military equipment, musical performances and more are set for this weekend in Washington D.C. for the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary celebration. Happening along the National Mall on Saturday, June 14, the event is also falling on the same day as President Donald Trump's 79th birthday, but the administration has insisted that the Army's anniversary and Trump's birthday are a coincidence and that the parade is justified to honor soldiers' sacrifice. Army parachutists jumping from aircraft are set to land and give Trump an American flag for his birthday, Pentagon officials said, according to Axios. A rare sight in Washington D.C., the last major military parade was held in 1991 to celebrate the end of the first Gulf War. Before 1991, large-scale military parades were held following the American victory in World War I and World War II. According to the National Park Service, "debates over military policy" that occurred during the Korean and Vietnam wars forced parades to be more "subdued." Photos: The last large military parade in Washington DC Contributing: Kathryn Palmer and staff, USA TODAY Fernando Cervantes Jr. is a trending news reporter for USA TODAY. Reach him at and follow him on X @fern_cerv_.
San Francisco Chronicle
28 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Israeli strikes on Iran lead to new test of Trump's ability to deliver on 'America first' agenda
WASHINGTON (AP) — Just hours before Israel launched strikes on Iran early Friday, President Donald Trump was still holding onto tattered threads of hope that a long-simmering dispute over Tehran's nuclear program could be resolved without military action. But with the Israeli military operation called 'Rising Lion' now underway — something Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu says will go on for 'as many days as it takes' — Trump will be tested anew on his ability to make good on a campaign promise to disentangle the U.S. from foreign conflicts. 'I gave Iran chance after chance to make a deal,' Trump said in a Friday morning social media post. 'I told them, in the strongest of words, to 'just do it,' but no matter how hard they tried, no matter how close they got, they just couldn't get it done." The administration's first reaction to the Israeli assault came not from Trump but from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who is doubling as Trump's national security adviser. He sought to make clear that the U.S. was 'not involved' and that the Republican administration's central concern was protecting U.S. forces in the region. 'Israel advised us that they believe this action was necessary for its self-defense,' Rubio said in a statement. "President Trump and the Administration have taken all necessary steps to protect our forces and remain in close contact with our regional partners. Let me be clear: Iran should not target U.S. interests or personnel.' As Israel stepped up planning for strikes in recent weeks, however, Iran, had signaled that the United States would be held responsible in the event of an Israeli attack. The warning was issued by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi even as he engaged in talks with Trump special envoy Steve Witkoff over Tehran's rapidly advancing nuclear program. On Thursday, just hours before the strikes, Trump made the case that there was still time for diplomacy — but it was running out. The White House had even planned to dispatch Witkoff to Oman on Sunday for the next round of talks with Araghchi. It was unclear how the strikes would affect plans for those discussions. But Trump on Friday urged Iran to make a nuclear deal 'before there is nothing left and save what was once known as the Iranian Empire." He added that the moment is offering Iran 'perhaps, a second chance.' 'No more death, no more destruction, JUST DO IT, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE,' Trump said. Trump is set to meet with his National Security Council in the Situation Room on Friday to discuss the tricky path ahead. Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., offered rare words of Democratic praise for the Trump administration after the attack 'for prioritizing diplomacy' and 'refraining from participating" in the military strikes. But he also expressed deep concern about what the Israeli strikes could mean for U.S. personnel in the region. Iranian officials made clear that they intended to retaliate with decisive action after the Israeli strikes targeted Iran's main enrichment facility in Natanz and the country's ballistic missile program, as well as top nuclear scientists and officials. In response, Iran fired more than 100 drones at Israel, with both Iraq and Jordan confirming they had flown over their airspace. Israel said the drones were being intercepted outside its airspace, and it was unclear whether any got through. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said the U.S. Senate 'stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region and, first and foremost, to defend the American people from Iranian aggression, especially our troops and civilians serving overseas.' Trump in the hours before the attack still appeared hopeful that there would be more time for diplomacy. The president, in an exchange with reporters, again urged Iran to negotiate a deal. He warned that a 'massive conflict' could occur in the Middle East without it. He later took to social media to emphasize that his 'entire Administration has been directed to negotiate with Iran.' As long as there was a chance for an agreement, Trump said of Israel, 'I don't want them going in because I think it would blow it.' But it was clear to the administration that Israel was edging toward taking military action against Iran. The State Department and U.S. military on Wednesday directed a voluntary evacuation of nonessential personnel and their loved ones from some U.S. diplomatic outposts in the Middle East. 'I don't want to be the one that didn't give any warning, and missiles are flying into their buildings. It's possible. So I had to do it,' Trump explained. Before Israel launched the strikes, some of Trump's strongest supporters were raising concerns about what another expansive conflict in the Mideast could mean for the Republican president, who ran on a promise to quickly end the brutal wars in Gaza and Ukraine. Trump has struggled to find an endgame to either of those conflicts and to make good on two of his biggest foreign policy campaign promises. And after criticizing President Joe Biden during last year's campaign for preventing Israel from carrying out strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, Trump found himself making the case to the Israelis to give diplomacy a chance. The push by the Trump administration to persuade Tehran to give up its nuclear program came after the U.S. and other world powers in 2015 reached a long-term, comprehensive nuclear agreement that limited Tehran's enrichment of uranium in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. But Trump unilaterally withdrew the U.S. from the Obama-administration brokered agreement in 2018, calling it the 'worst deal ever.' The way forward is even more clouded now. 'No issue currently divides the right as much as foreign policy,' Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA and an ally of the Trump White House, posted on X on Thursday. 'I'm very concerned based on (everything) I've seen in the grassroots the last few months that this will cause a massive schism in MAGA and potentially disrupt our momentum and our insanely successful Presidency.' Jack Posobiec, another prominent Trump supporter, warned a 'direct strike on Iran right now would disastrously split the Trump coalition.' Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East program at Defense Priorities, said the job ahead for Trump and his team is to protect U.S. forces who are highly vulnerable to Iranian retaliation. 'Israel's strike on Iran must not become the United States' war," Kelanic said. 'The U.S. public overwhelmingly opposes another military engagement in the Middle East for good reason — an open-ended military campaign in Iran would risk repeating the catastrophic mistakes of the 2003 war in Iraq, which inadvertently strengthened Tehran's influence there.'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition
Donald Trump needs better enemies. More accurately, the American people need the president and his allies to have a higher quality opposition. In office, President Trump has embraced some truly terrible—and occasionally dangerous—policies, including federalizing National Guard troops and mobilizing U.S. Marines to deal with riots that really should be left to California officials to handle or fumble as their abilities allow. But his opponents insist on embracing lunacy and ineffectiveness and making the president look reasonable by comparison, effectively giving his actions a pass. "Donald Trump, without consulting with California's law enforcement leaders, commandeered 2,000 of our state's National Guard members to deploy on our streets. Illegally, and for no reason," complained Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom after the president turned local rioting into a federal issue. Newsom expanded on his objections in a glitch-filled speech that focused more on Trump than the riots. It played into the reputation for incompetence he's gained over years of ignoring his state's problems, including all of the missteps that led to the recent wildfires in and around Los Angeles. Those fires didn't exactly cover Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass in glory either, and neither has her response to the chaos. She's alternated between supporting demonstrators protesting the federal immigration raids that sparked the riots and vowing crackdowns on violence. One minute she touts her work with "community organizations, legal advocates, and local leaders to ensure that every resident knows their rights" and the next she reminds Angelenos that downtown is under curfew. That's unfortunate, because the feckless California officials raise legitimate concerns about the president's actions. There are good reasons to object to a president responding to local events with federal troops. "Preemptive nationwide deployment of the military is the very opposite of using the military as a 'last resort,'" warns Elizabeth Goitein of the Brennan Center's Liberty and National Security Program. "It is so wildly out of keeping with how the Insurrection Act and 10 U.S.C. § 12406 have been interpreted and applied that it should be entitled to no deference by the courts." The law that President Trump relied on—10 U.S.C. § 12406—allows the president to "call into Federal service members and units of the National Guard of any State" to repel invasions, suppress rebellions, or enforce the law when regular forces are insufficient. Invoking that law over local disorder before state and local officials have had much of a chance to do anything is a stretch of the law's intent as well as a slap at federalism. The law says nothing authorizing the use of regular military forces, leaving the impression that the Marines Trump dispatched are just hitching a ride on his presidential memorandum to bypass the Posse Comitatus Act's restrictions on the domestic use of the military. Which means that Newsom and Bass had a great opportunity to show their chops and object to federal interference—if they were up to the demands of that role. They're not. Worse, though, are the rioters themselves. As Matthew Ormseth and James Queally described the scene for Los Angeles Times readers, "some in the crowd lobbed bottles and fireworks at the LAPD," "vandals set fire to a row of Waymos," and "people wearing masks flung chunks of concrete—and even a few electric scooters—at" California Highway Patrol officers. That speaks for itself—but not as loudly as the idiots throwing Molotov cocktails at police. Rioting understandably became the dominant news story, overshadowing the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids that originally set off protests before they turned violent. Smarter protesters would have kept demonstrations peaceful and attention focused on arrests that we were told would target violent criminals but too often ensnare harmless people. "Federal immigration officials appeared to target day laborers in raids Monday at a Home Deport in Santa Ana," the Los Angeles NBC affiliate reported this week. Traditional gathering places for immigrants seeking work—and not so many vicious gangbangers—have been targeted across the country. "Stephen Miller, a top White House aide and architect of the president's immigration agenda, asked ICE officials to step up the pace of immigrant deportations, including in Home Depot parking lots and at 7-Eleven Stores," according to The Wall Street Journal. ICE has also gone after immigrants navigating the bureaucratic path to legal immigration and even citizens who were wrongly detained. Those outrages were pushed into the background when rioting inevitably grabbed the headlines. Not that Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson gives a damn about keeping the message straight. As violent protests spread across the country, he urged his constituents to "rise up" and "resist." Apparently, he doesn't want to miss out on the excitement of watching parts of his city burn. Not everybody is impressed by this version of opposition to the Trump administration. "I unapologetically stand for free speech, peaceful demonstrations, and immigration—but this is not that," Sen. John Fetterman (D–Penn.) warned this week. "This is anarchy and true chaos. My party loses the moral high ground when we refuse to condemn setting cars on fire, destroying buildings, and assaulting law enforcement." Fetterman has, somewhat surprisingly, emerged as a voice of sanity for his party. He's called Democrats to account over the antisemitism of the party's progressive wing and now for confusing tantrums in the street with effective opposition. A few more Democrats like him would go a long way towards rescuing the party from its self-inflicted wounds and giving the U.S. a functioning political opposition. The country could really use a functioning opposition. The Trump administration's turn towards economic nationalism, unilateral power, authoritarianism, and xenophobia cry out for criticism and alternative solutions. That criticism should be peaceful and those alternatives should be sensibly presented. Ideally, they should also advance liberty and limit government. For the moment, though, that may be too much to ask of Democrats. Many of them are still wrestling with the temptations of appearing to be either inept or dangerous lunatics. The post The Trump Administration Needs Better Opposition appeared first on
