Trump takes an unexpected walk on the White House roof to survey new projects
Late Tuesday morning, Trump emerged from a door connected to the State Dining Room and stepped onto the roof above the press briefing room and west colonnade that walls the Rose Garden. He spent nearly 20 minutes surveying the rooftop and the grounds below, including a newly paved makeover of the Rose Garden.
'Taking a little walk,' Trump shouted back. 'It's good for your health.'
Trump walked with a small group that included James McCrery, architect of the newly announced $200 million ballroom project. They moved slowly, with Trump frequently gesturing and pointing at the roof and grounds. Several times, he wandered toward the corner nearest the press corps, waving and cupping his hands to shout responses to shouted questions.
At one point, he said he was looking at 'another way to spend my money for this country.' Later, near the end of his appearance on the roof, Trump was asked what he was going to build. He quipped, 'Nuclear missiles.'
The unexpected walk on the rooftop comes as Trump looks to leave a lasting footprint on what's often referred to as 'The People's House.'
He has substantially redecorated the Oval Office through the addition of golden flourishes and cherubs, presidential portraits and other items and installed massive flagpoles on the north and south lawns to fly the American flag. And last week, his administration announced that construction on a massive ballroom will begin in September and be ready before Trump 's term ends in early 2029.
While Trump appeared on the West Wing, the White House has said the ballroom will be where the 'small, heavily changed, and reconstructed East Wing currently sits.'
While rare, there have been times through the years where presidents ventured out onto — and even slept on — the White House roof.
To promote renewable energy, President Jimmy Carter installed 32 solar panels on the West Wing roof in the 1970s. The panels were removed during the Reagan administration.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Advisers Push for a Temporary Fed Governor to Fill Open Seat
(Bloomberg) -- Donald Trump's advisers are encouraging him to nominate a temporary Federal Reserve governor to fill the soon-to-be vacant seat on the central bank's board, according to people familiar with the discussions. Mayor Asked to Explain $1.4 Billion of Wasted Johannesburg Funds All Hail the Humble Speed Hump PATH Train Service Resumes After Fire at Jersey City Station Major Istanbul Projects Are Stalling as City Leaders Sit in Jail What England's New National Cycling Network Needs to Get Rolling Naming a governor to serve out the term for the seat opening soon — set to expire in January 2026 — would give Trump additional time to interview candidates to serve as chair when Jerome Powell's tenure leading the central bank ends in May of next year, the people said. Fed Governor Adriana Kugler announced last week that she plans to vacate her role on Aug. 8. A short-term governor is likely to be someone who is already in the government and who has previously been confirmed by the Senate for a federal job, two people said. The nominee will need to clear Senate confirmation, a vetting process that has traditionally taken months, but could be expedited if Trump pressures lawmakers to quickly fill the seat. Trump is slated to meet with advisers on Wednesday about the Fed pick, one person said. Trump on Tuesday said he would make his decision for a replacement for Kugler this week as he looks to make his imprint on the central bank. No decision should be deemed final until announced by Trump, a White House official said. Trump on Tuesday said that he's weighing whether to fill the seat with a short-term pick or someone he would likely elevate to Fed chair next year. 'We'll either decide on one for permanence or the four-month period — the term. You know, there's a term of about a number of months,' Trump told reporters at a White House event on Tuesday. Kugler's early departure hands Trump a sooner-than-anticipated opportunity to fill the Fed board with a governor who more closely aligns with his preference for lower interest rates. Fed Credibility Trump has been highly critical of the Fed, repeatedly blaming the central bank and Powell for being too slow to lower interest rates. Trump has argued the central bank — which has so far left rates unchanged in 2025 — is keeping the federal government's debt-servicing costs too high and restraining economic growth. 'It's a lot of trouble to do it for four months but it's a critical four months as well and Trump really wants the Fed to follow through for some of the rate cuts that have been on the table,' said Derek Tang, an economist at LH Meyer/Monetary Policy Analytics, Inc. He said it could hurt the Fed's credibility to have a governor in place, even for several months, who is clearly pushing the president's agenda. 'If you don't play it well, then you might actually un-anchor the long end of the Treasury yield curve,' Tang said. 'Inflation expectations might go up because even though you're saying this a four-month position, you're setting a precedent that you're willing to use this vacancy in this manner.' But the addition of a dovish governor to the Federal Open Market Committee, which sets policy, is unlikely to yield an immediate shift. The FOMC is composed of the seven members of the Board of Governors, based in Washington, and five of the Fed's regional reserve bank presidents. A majority vote is required to adjust rates. Among the broader group of 19 policymakers who participate in FOMC meetings, a majority signaled in June that they expect two rate cuts this year, a projection that makes a move in September a strong possibility. Two Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, both Trump appointees, voted against the July decision to hold rates steady, the first time two members of the board had dissented since 1993. Trump on Tuesday said he was considering four candidates for the post of Fed chair, including Federal Reserve Governor Kevin Warsh and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett. He also said that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent had said he did not want to be in consideration for the post. 'We're looking at the Fed chair, and that's down to four people right now,' Trump said Tuesday. 'Well, I can tell you because I've already said, there's two Kevins and two other people.' --With assistance from Jonnelle Marte. (Updates with Tang comments starting in the 10th paragraph.) Russia's Secret War and the Plot to Kill a German CEO AI Flight Pricing Can Push Travelers to the Limit of Their Ability to Pay Government Steps Up Campaign Against Business School Diversity The Pizza Oven Startup With a Plan to Own Every Piece of the Pie The GOP Is Choosing Pesticides Over the MAHA Moms ©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
USA Today
23 minutes ago
- USA Today
UCLA in talks with Trump administration to end $584M freeze
The university is the first public institution to contend with a targeted government funding freeze. The University of California, Los Angeles, is negotiating with the federal government to end a research funding pause of more than half a billion dollars, according to the school. Approximately $584 million has been suspended, UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said in an Aug. 6 message to the campus community. James Milliken, the president of the University of California system, said the school has committed to "engage in dialogue with the federal administration" in hopes of ending the freeze, "as soon as possible." On July 29, the Justice Department notified UCLA that it had violated federal civil rights laws and allowed discrimination to occur against Jewish and Israeli students when it failed to adequately respond to protests in the spring of 2024 stemming from the Israel-Hamas war. Read more: Ivy League colleges face a reckoning after Columbia's Trump deal Since then, grants from the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health and other federal agencies have been cut off, jeopardizing the university's research apparatus. "This far-reaching penalty of defunding life-saving research does nothing to address any alleged discrimination," Frenk said in a July 31 statement. Read more: The details of Columbia's extraordinary $220 million deal with Trump The funding freeze mirrors similar actions the federal government has taken against other prestigious colleges in recent weeks and months, prompting a series of unprecedented agreements with schools like Columbia and Brown. UCLA is the first major public institution, however, whose research support has come into the Trump administration's crosshairs. Zachary Schermele is an education reporter for USA TODAY. You can reach him by email at zschermele@ Follow him on X at @ZachSchermele and Bluesky at @
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
New plan to limit Russian energy, protect US trade
President Trump has become increasingly angry with Russian President Vladimir Putin. For about two months he has been threatening the Kremlin with 'secondary' sanctions, which would impose high duties on imports from the nations which continue to purchase Russian energy resources. The Russians seem unfazed by Trump's warnings (as well as by Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R-S.C.) recent remarks), citing their resilience to sanctions. Several authoritative sources argue that the U.S. simply cannot afford to impose even 100 percent duties on China, India or Turkey. If all of Russia's energy trading partners were subjected to new tariffs, the U.S. would hijack a significant part of its foreign trade and ruin its trade relationships with at least 26 countries. I agree with those who believe the new tariffs cannot be put in place by Trump's updated deadline for Russia. We have seen that 125 percent duties on China lasted less than a month, and in recent days, President Trump has announced 50 percent tariffs against Brazil, 25 percent tariffs against India and 15 percent tariffs on the European Union. One hundred percent duties don't seem plausible. I would urge changing the overall approach to make the tariffs more affordable. The goal appears to be to cut Russia's energy supply to the world. Trump's plan should make Russian oil more expensive to the buyers (by the way, the European 'oil price cap' approach has failed. It resulted in discounts for the Russian oil, thus encouraging its smuggling and creation of Russia's 'shadow tanker fleet'). In this sense, Trump's position looks more effective — but the major problem lies in the numbers. The predecessor of Trump's strategy — the bill proposed by Sens. Graham and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) — calls for the duty to be applied to all imports coming to the U.S. from Russia's energy trading partners. I believe it is too radical and, frankly speaking, not very justified because of the lack of differentiation. A much better option would be to relate the tariffs to the actual amount of money countries pay to Moscow. For example, India sent $115 billion in its goods and services to the U.S. in 2024 and paid $49 billion for Russian oil that year. China exported $513 billion in goods to the U.S. in 2024 while it bought Russian oil, gas, and coal for up to $76 billion. The EU's figures stood at $939 billion and $34 billion, correspondingly. If the U.S. applies 100 percent tariffs linked to the Russian energy resources imported, it would fix additional duties for India this year at 42.6 percent of its exports to U.S., China's at 14.8 percent and Europe's at a mere 3.6 percent. These figures are not so astonishing. On the one hand, they seem manageable, and on the other hand, they still double the price of Russian oil for importing nations. If this strategy is taken as the principal one, the overall additional duties would equal the entire volume of Russia's energy exports, $261.9 billion for 2024. As the U.S. combined imports of goods and services amount to $4.11 trillion, the figure makes less than 6.5 percent in additional tariffs. It looks like a fair price for knocking Russia out as self-proclaimed 'energy superpower.' The measure would make Russia's 'shadow fleet' useless, since it doubles the price for Russia's energy for any country except those with zero exports to the U.S.. But these, if they exist, aren't significant oil importers that might be helpful to Moscow in substituting the vanishing demand for its oil and gas. I suggest amending Graham and Blumental's bill to impose the duty for goods or services imported into the U.S. to an amount that corresponds to each country's imports of Russian energy resources for the previous year. It would be a right recipe to destroy the Russian energy exports in two to three years and put Putin's economy on the brink of collapse without ruining America's trade ties to its major commercial partners. Should Trump adopt such a plan on Aug. 11, the chances of stopping Russia's aggression against Ukraine could rise significantly. Vladislav Inozemtsev is special adviser to the Middle East Media Research Institute's Russian Media Studies Project and is co-founder and senior fellow at the Center for Analysis and Strategies in Europe.
