Donald Trump Calls JFK's Memorial the 'Trump/Kennedy Center' as He Previews Annual Arts Awards: 'Whoops'
President Donald Trump ramped up his campaign to take over the Kennedy Center on Tuesday, Aug. 12, as he previewed the annual Kennedy Center Honors on social media.
"GREAT Nominees for the TRUMP/KENNEDY CENTER, whoops, I mean, KENNEDY CENTER, AWARDS. They will be announced Wednesday," Trump wrote on Truth Social. "Tremendous work is being done, and money being spent, on bringing it back to the absolute TOP LEVEL of luxury, glamour, and entertainment."
"It had fallen on hard times, physically, BUT WILL SOON BE MAKING A MAJOR COMEBACK!!!," the president continued, seemingly speaking about the Kennedy Center building, which is located on the eastern bank of the Potomac River in Washington, D.C.
Just a few days into his second presidential term, Trump announced his plans to "make the Kennedy Center great again." He installed himself as chairman and purged most of its so-called "woke" leadership, installing a new board of conservative supporters in their place.
He also appointed Richard Grenell, a member of his administration, as the institution's president and interim director.
'I want to make sure it runs properly,' Trump said at the time. 'We don't need woke at the Kennedy Center, and we don't need — some of the shows were terrible. They were a disgrace that they were even put on.'
https://people-app.onelink.me/HNIa/kz7l4cuf
After Trump changed the Kennedy Center's leadership and programming, his supporters expressed interest in updating the name of the cultural institution.
On July 22, the Republican-led House Appropriations Committee voted 33-25 to approve an amendment that calls to rename the Kennedy Center Opera House — one of the center's three main theaters — for first lady Melania Trump.
The amendment is folded into a larger bill that's intended to allocate funding for the Interior Department, the Environmental Protection Agency and related agencies during the upcoming fiscal year. The bill has not yet been approved by the full House, which is now on an extended summer break.
The following day, Missouri Rep. Bob Onder introduced a bill that proposed to rename the entire Kennedy Center for Trump, making it the Donald J. Trump Center for Performing Arts.
Dubbed the 'Make Entertainment Great Again Act," Onder's bill said that Trump has 'entertained audiences for decades,' citing his reality show, The Apprentice, cameos in movies like Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, and the fact that he is the only U.S. president to host Saturday Night Live.
'You would be hard pressed to find a more significant cultural icon in the past 40 years than President Trump,' the congressman wrote. 'President Trump's love and mastery of entertainment has stood the test of time and allowed him to capture Americans' attention for decades. I cannot think of a more ubiquitous symbol of American exceptionalism in the arts, entertainment, and popular culture at large than President Trump.'
Plans for the Kennedy Center, originally set to be named the National Cultural Center, began in the 1950s, however, by the time ground was broken to begin construction in December 1964, it had been rededicated as a "living memorial" for JFK, who was assassinated the year prior.
The institution officially opened as the John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts on Sept. 8, 1971, and is home to the National Symphony Orchestra and the Washington National Opera, as well as dozens of performances each year.
Each year, the Kennedy Center Honors recognize a handful of actors, musicals, cultural institutions, and more, "paying tribute to our nation's preeminent artists," according to the center's website.
"Throughout its 47-year history, the Kennedy Center Honors has redefined America's perception of its artistic legacy and reinvented the way this nation rewards its artists. The Honors have been compared to a knighthood in Britain, or the French Legion of Honor -- the quintessential reward for a lifetime's endeavor."
Trump's fixation on the Kennedy Center has drawn plenty of ire from members of JFK's family, who see the institution as an important part of the late president's legacy.
In July, Jack Schlossberg, JFK's only grandson, shared a post on Instagram highlighting a federal law that aims to prevent the renaming of any part of the famous institution.
The statute that Schlossberg shared states that as of Dec. 2, 1983, "no additional memorials or plaques in the nature of memorials shall be designated or installed in the public areas of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts."
"Plain reading of the statute makes clear — YOU CAN'T DO THAT," Schlossberg, 32, wrote in the caption of his post.
Never miss a story — sign up for to stay up-to-date on the best of what PEOPLE has to offer.
Another Kennedy family member, Maria Shriver, 69, posted on X about Onder's bill, saying it made her "blood boil."
"This is insane," she wrote. "It's so ridiculous, so petty, so small-minded. Truly, what is this about? It's always about something. 'Let's get rid of the Rose Garden. Let's rename the Kennedy Center.' What's next?"
Read the original article on People
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Court Lets Trump Block Billions of Dollars in Foreign Aid
(Bloomberg) -- The Trump administration can cut billions of dollars in foreign assistance funds approved by Congress for this year, a US appeals court ruled. Sunseeking Germans Face Swiss Backlash Over Alpine Holiday Congestion To Head Off Severe Storm Surges, Nova Scotia Invests in 'Living Shorelines' New York Warns of $34 Billion Budget Hole, Biggest Since 2009 Crisis Five Years After Black Lives Matter, Brussels' Colonial Statues Remain For Homeless Cyclists, Bikes Bring an Escape From the Streets In a 2-1 decision on Wednesday, the appellate panel reversed a Washington federal judge who found that US officials were violating the Constitution's separation of powers principles by failing to authorize the money to be paid in line with what the legislative branch directed. The ruling is a significant win for President Donald Trump's efforts to dissolve the US Agency for International Development and broadly withhold funding from programs that have fallen out of favor with his administration, regardless of how Congress exercised its authority over spending. Trump's critics have assailed what they've described as a far-reaching power grab by the executive branch. The nonprofits and business that sued could ask all of the active judges on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to reconsider the three-member panel's decision. If the panel's decision stands, it wasn't immediately clear how much it would affect other lawsuits contesting a range of Trump administration funding freezes and cuts besides foreign aid. Judge Karen LeCraft Henderson wrote in the majority opinion that the challengers lacked valid legal grounds to sue over the Trump administration's decision to withhold the funds, also known as impoundment. The US Comptroller General — who leads an accountability arm of Congress — could sue under a specific law related to impoundment decisions, Henderson wrote, but the challengers couldn't bring a 'freestanding' constitutional claim or claim violations of a different law related to agency actions. Henderson, appointed by former President George H.W. Bush, was joined by Judge Greg Katsas, a Trump appointee. The court didn't reach the core question of whether the administration's unilateral decision to refuse to spend money appropriated by Congress is constitutional. Judge Florence Pan, nominated by former President Joe Biden, dissented, writing that her colleagues had turned 'a blind eye to the 'serious implications' of this case for the rule of law and the very structure of our government.' White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement that the appeals court 'has affirmed what we already knew – President Trump has the executive authority to execute his own foreign policy, which includes ensuring that all foreign assistance aligns with the America First agenda.' A lead attorney for the grant recipients did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The two consolidated cases before the appeals court only deal with money that Congress approved for the 2024 fiscal year, which ends on Sept. 30. Grantees are poised to lose access to funds if they haven't yet been approved to be spent by federal officials — a precursor to actual payouts — or unless a court order is in place. The administration lost one of its few battles before the US Supreme Court earlier this year in the foreign aid fight. In March, a majority of justices refused to immediately stop US District Judge Amir Ali's injunction taking effect while the legal fight went forward. Since then, however, the challengers have filed complaints with Ali that the administration is failing to obligate or pay out the funds. They've rebuffed the government's position that the delay is part of a legitimate effort to 'evaluate the appropriate next steps' and accused officials of angling to use a novel tactic to go around Congress in order to cut appropriated money. The Trump administration has dramatically scaled back the US government's humanitarian work overseas, slashing spending and personnel and merging the USAID into the State Department. The challengers say the foreign aid freeze has created a global crisis, and that the money is critical for malaria prevention, to address child malnutrition and provide postnatal care for newborns. The groups argued that the president and agency leaders couldn't defy Congress' spending mandates and didn't have discretion to decide that only some, let alone none, of the money appropriated by lawmakers should be paid. The president can ask Congress to withdraw appropriations but can't do it on his own, the challengers argued. The Justice Department argued Ali's order was an 'improper judicial intrusion into matters left to the political branches' and that the judge wrongly interfered in the 'particularly sensitive area of foreign relations.' The government also said that the Impoundment Control Act, which restricts the president from overruling Congress' spending decisions, wasn't a law that the nonprofits and business could sue to enforce. The challengers countered that Ali's order blocking the funding freeze was rooted in their constitutional separation-of-powers claim, not the impoundment law. The cases are Global Health Council v. Trump, 25-5097, and AIDS Vaccine Advocacy Coalition v. US Department of State, 25-5098, US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit. (Updated with White House comment.) Bessent on Tariffs, Deficits and Embracing Trump's Economic Plan Why It's Actually a Good Time to Buy a House, According to a Zillow Economist Dubai's Housing Boom Is Stoking Fears of Another Crash The Social Media Trend Machine Is Spitting Out Weirder and Weirder Results Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gavin Newsom Just Announced California Is Drawing New Electoral Maps In The Most Hilarious Way
Gavin Newsom has announced that California will draw new electoral maps. On Monday, he sent a letter to Donald Trump, essentially warning that unless Texas backed down, he'd be forced to redraw California's maps: "If you will not stand down, I will be forced to lead an effort to redraw the maps in California to offset the rigging of maps in red states. But if the other states call off their redistricting efforts, we will happily do the same. And American democracy will be better for it." GovPressOffice/Twitter: @GovPressOffice Related: He also started tweeting EXACTLY like him. It started with a 24-hour warning. Related: "DONALD TRUMP HAS 24 HOURS LEFT TO RESPOND TO GOVERNOR NEWSOM'S LETTER. IF HE DOES NOT STAND DOWN, THERE WILL BE A VERY IMPORTANT PRESS CONFERENCE THIS WEEK WITH A MAJOR ANNOUNCEMENT! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." He followed that up the next day with another warning: "DONALD TRUMP, THE LOWEST POLLING PRESIDENT IN RECENT HISTORY, THIS IS YOUR SECOND-TO-LAST WARNING!!! (THE NEXT ONE IS THE LAST ONE!). STAND DOWN NOW OR CALIFORNIA WILL COUNTER-STRIKE (LEGALLY!) TO DESTROY YOUR ILLEGAL CROOKED MAPS IN RED STATES. PRESS CONFERENCE COMING — HOSTED BY AMERICA'S FAVORITE GOVERNOR, GAVIN NEWSOM. FINAL WARNING NEXT. YOU WON'T LIKE IT!!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." Related: That evening, he issued his final warning: "FINAL WARNING DONALD TRUMP — MAYBE THE MOST IMPORTANT WARNING IN HISTORY! STOP CHEATING OR CALIFORNIA WILL REDRAW THE MAPS. AND GUESS WHO WILL ANNOUNCE IT THIS WEEK? GAVIN NEWSOM (MANY SAY THE MOST LOVED & HANDSOME GOVERNOR) AND A VERY POWERFUL TEAM. DON'T MAKE US DO IT!!! THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER." And boom, just like that, after that 24-hour deadline, he tweeted: "DONALD 'TACO' TRUMP, AS MANY CALL HIM, 'MISSED' THE DEADLINE!!! CALIFORNIA WILL NOW DRAW NEW, MORE 'BEAUTIFUL MAPS,' THEY WILL BE HISTORIC AS THEY WILL END THE TRUMP PRESIDENCY (DEMS TAKE BACK THE HOUSE!). BIG PRESS CONFERENCE THIS WEEK WITH POWERFUL DEMS AND GAVIN NEWSOM — YOUR FAVORITE GOVERNOR — THAT WILL BE DEVASTATING FOR 'MAGA.' THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER! — GN" Related: From the "MORE BEAUTIFUL MAPS" line to the multiple exclamation points to the classic THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER!" I'm sorry, but he nailed it. As this person said, "If you can't beat em, join em (in their style of writing.)" Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds: Also in Internet Finds:
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Appeals court lets the White House suspend or end billions in foreign aid
WASHINGTON (AP) — A divided panel of appeals court judges ruled Wednesday that the Trump administration can suspend or terminate billions of dollars of congressionally appropriated funding for foreign aid. Two of three judges from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit concluded that grant recipients challenging the freeze did not meet the requirements for a preliminary injunction restoring the flow of money. In January, on the first day of his second term in the White House, Republican President Donald Trump issued an executive order directing the State Department and the U.S. Agency for International Development to freeze spending on foreign aid. After groups of grant recipients sued to challenge that order, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali ordered the administration to release the full amount of foreign assistance that Congress had appropriated for the 2024 budget year. The appeal court's majority partially vacated Ali's order. Judges Karen LeCraft Henderson and Gregory Katsas concluded that the plaintiffs did not have a valid legal basis for the court to hear their claims. The ruling was not on the merits of whether the government unconstitutionally infringed on Congress' spending powers. 'The parties also dispute the scope of the district court's remedy but we need not resolve it ... because the grantees have failed to satisfy the requirements for a preliminary injunction in any event,' Henderson wrote. Judge Florence Pan, who dissented, said the Supreme Court has held 'in no uncertain terms' that the president does not have the authority to disobey laws for policy reasons. 'Yet that is what the majority enables today,' Pan wrote. 'The majority opinion thus misconstrues the separation-of-powers claim brought by the grantees, misapplies precedent, and allows Executive Branch officials to evade judicial review of constitutionally impermissible actions.' The money at issue includes nearly $4 billion for USAID to spend on global health programs and more than $6 billion for HIV and AIDS programs. Trump has portrayed the foreign aid as wasteful spending that does not align with his foreign policy goals. Henderson was nominated to the court by Republican President George H.W. Bush. Katsas was nominated by Trump. Pan was nominated by Democratic President Joe Biden.
