logo
Trump's fresh White House portrait sparks interest amid controversy over National Portrait Gallery leadership

Trump's fresh White House portrait sparks interest amid controversy over National Portrait Gallery leadership

Fox News2 days ago

Nearly six months into his second term, President Donald Trump has a new portrait posted to the White House website.
White House officials posted an eight-second video to social media on Monday, showing the new portrait being hung on the wall at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building on the White House Campus.
In his previous presidential portrait, which was unveiled just days before taking the oath of office for his second term, Trump could be seen wearing a blue suit coat, white button-up shirt and blue tie.
The president showed no expression in the previous portrait, compared to an official portrait taken of him in 2017, in which he was smiling.
In the portrait unveiled on Monday, Trump is wearing a blue suit coat, white button-up shirt and a red tie. In both images, he has an American Flag pinned to his coat.
The president also shows little expression in the new portrait.
White House officials told Fox News Digital the photo was taken by White House photographer Daniel Torok.
As of Monday evening, the photo is hanging in the Eisenhower Executive Office Building, and it will eventually start rolling out to other offices and federal buildings.
Trump's new portrait was unveiled just days after he announced that he was firing Kim Sajet, the director of the National Portrait Gallery, for being a "strong supporter" of diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI).
He announced Sajet's termination in a post on Truth Social on Friday afternoon.
"Upon the request and recommendation of many people, I am hereby terminating the employment of Kim Sajet as Director of the National Portrait Gallery," the president wrote. "She is a highly partisan person, and a strong supporter of DEI, which is totally inappropriate for her position. Her replacement will be named shortly. Thank you for your attention to this matter!"
A White House official told Fox News Digital that Sajet had donated $3,982 to Democrats, including the presidential campaigns of former President Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton. Sajet also reportedly donated to other Democrats, including former Vice President Kamala Harris.
The White House also pointed to the gallery's photo of Trump, which was curated by Sajet.
The caption of the photo reads, "Impeached twice, on charges of abuse of power and incitement of insurrection after supporters attacked the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, he was acquitted by the Senate in both trials. After losing to Joe Biden in 2020, Trump mounted a historic comeback in the 2024 election. He is the only president aside from Grover Cleveland (1837-1908) to have won a nonconsecutive second term."

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'
Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

Fox News

time15 minutes ago

  • Fox News

Rep. Alford to introduce congressional stock trading ban mirroring Senate's 'PELOSI Act'

FIRST ON FOX: Rep. Mark Alford, R-Mo., on Wednesday will introduce legislation that would ban congressional stock trading, serving as the House companion bill to Sen. Josh Hawley's, R-Mo., "PELOSI Act" in the Senate. Alford's proposed bill would ban lawmakers and their spouses from holding, purchasing or selling individual stocks while in office, but it allows investments in diversified mutual funds, exchange-traded funds or U.S. Treasury bonds. If passed, current lawmakers would have 180 days to comply with the legislation. Likewise, newly elected lawmakers must achieve compliance within 180 days of entering office. "As public servants, we should hold ourselves to a higher standard and avoid the mere appearance of corruption," Alford said in a statement. "Unfortunately, too many members of Congress are engaging in suspicious stock trades based on non-public information to enrich themselves." "These gross violations of the public trust make clear: we must finally take action to ban members and their spouses from owning or selling individual stocks," he added. Under the proposed legislation, lawmakers who continue to make wrongful transactions would be required to hand over any profits they made to the U.S. Treasury Department. The House or Senate ethics committees could also impose a fine on such lawmakers amounting to 10% of each wrongful transaction. House Speaker Mike Johnson endorsed a stock trading ban on Wednesday, saying "a few bad actors" have ruined Americans' trust in lawmakers on the issue. "You want me to tell you my honest opinion on that? I'm in favor of that, because I don't think we should have any appearance of impropriety here," he told reporters during a press conference. President Donald Trump himself endorsed the same ban for members of Congress in an interview with Time magazine last month. "I watched Nancy Pelosi get rich through insider information, and I would be okay with it. If they send that to me, I would do it," he said of a trading ban. "You'll sign it?" the reporter pressed. "Absolutely," Trump responded. Democrats in the House of Representatives have also expressed support for a ban, with House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., throwing his weight behind the proposal last week.

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map
Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

CBS News

time16 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Tarrant County citizens file lawsuit against new redistricting map

Less than a day after Tarrant County commissioners approved a controversial redistricting proposal, a group of citizens filed a lawsuit claiming intentional discrimination. According to the Lone Star Project, the lawsuit claims that Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare and his followers engaged in intentional racial discrimination in violation of the Voting Rights Act and the U.S. Constitution by drawing the new district lines. "Intentional discrimination is still against the law," said lead legal counsel for the citizen plaintiffs, Chad Dunn. "The map they drew, the process they used to draw it, and the animosity shown to the citizens of Tarrant County violate the Voting Rights Act and the Constitution." Hundreds of residents speak out for, against the redistricting More than 200 people spoke out about redrawing boundary lines during public comment Tuesday night. The majority who spoke were against redistricting, including the mayors of Arlington, Mansfield and Forest Hills. There were still several speakers who expressed their support. Several used the phrase "don't Dallas my Tarrant." Tarrant County "I want to say that I fully support deterring redistricting efforts. These lines haven't been updated since 2010," said Carlos Turcios, the community development committee chairman for the Tarrant Republican Party. Commissioners moved into executive session around 3 p.m. on Tuesday after some tense moments between the two Democrats and the three Republicans. As Commissioner Alisa Simmons expressed all the reasons she is against redistricting, Judge Tim O'Hare abruptly moved to executive session in an effort to limit her comments. O'Hare is spearheading this process and has been clear that it's about partisan politics. He wants another Republican seat on the court to ensure conservative leadership for the next decade. "It's a very divided country and the parties, I'm not sure, have never been further apart in their beliefs," O'Hare said. "I don't apologize for being a Republican. I don't apologize for being a conservative." "It's not partisan. It is racism." Critics believe the redistricting is racial gerrymandering, saying it goes beyond partisan politics and say it dilutes the voting power of minorities. "Absolutely, it's not partisan. It is racism," Simmons said during the meeting. The new map does appear to take areas with high Black and brown populations from precinct two and put them in precinct one. SMU political science professor Calvin Jillson said what the court did is not unusual, but the legality of the new lines comes down to intentions. "Oh, this absolutely gerrymandering – it is the redrawing of electoral boundaries for partisan purposes," Jillson said. "The question is whether the purposes behind the redrawing were actually political, in which case gerrymandering is legal, or racial discrimination, in which case it would not be legal." Check out more on the CBS News Texas YouTube page: contributed to this report.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store