US President Donald Trump vigorously defended the $250 million White House ballroom expansion amid mounting criticism over the project’s transparency and funding. During a press briefing on Wednesday, Trump addressed concerns raised by journalists about whether the demolition of the East Wing and construction of the new ballroom had been sufficiently publicized. He singled out Reuters correspondent Jeff Mason, dismissing his question as uninformed. “I haven’t been transparent? Really?” Trump exclaimed, displaying mockup images of the planned golden ballroom. “I’ve shown this to everybody who would listen. Third-rate reporters didn’t see it because they didn’t look. You’re a third-rate reporter — always have been.”
As Mason attempted a follow-up, Trump reiterated that the plans had been widely publicized and covered in multiple news outlets. He emphasized that the project had received overwhelmingly positive attention. “Anybody who asked, these pictures have been in newspapers; they’ve been all over the place. We’re very proud of it. It’s gotten great reviews — really great reviews,” he said, highlighting what he framed as full transparency.
Trump also defended the necessity of the construction, noting that the current East Room was insufficient for large state functions. The new 90,000-square-foot ballroom will nearly double the capacity of the existing space, accommodating up to 999 guests. Trump argued that state dinners are a key part of presidential duties and that outdoor tents, sometimes used for such events, are undignified. He insisted that the project is being privately funded by “patriots, great American companies — and yours truly,” seeking to preempt criticism over taxpayer involvement.
Despite Trump’s claims, the National Capital Planning Commission has not yet formally approved the project. The White House maintains that demolition work on federal property does not require the Commission’s prior consent. Trump concluded the briefing by asserting that his administration had demonstrated more transparency than any prior government in undertaking the expansion. The exchange highlighted both the contentious nature of the project and Trump’s combative approach toward media scrutiny, underscoring tensions between presidential initiatives and public accountability.
The project has drawn attention not only for its cost but also for its scale and opulent design, with critics questioning whether a private funding claim is verifiable. While Trump portrays the ballroom as a functional necessity for state affairs, opponents argue that the lavish expansion reflects a prioritization of prestige over prudent use of resources. With demolition underway and construction just beginning, the debate over transparency and oversight is likely to continue, keeping the $250 million project under intense public scrutiny.
