Brooks and Atkins Stohr on the demolition of the East Wing

Jeff Bennett:

Last week saw the entire East Wing of the White House demolished and the redistricting battle intensify in several key states.

On this and more, we now turn to Brooks and Atkins Stohr. These are New York Times columnist David Brooks and Kimberly Atkins Stohr of the Boston Globe. Jonathan Capehart is absent this evening.

It’s great to see you both.

David Brooks:

It’s good to see you.

Jeff Bennett:

So the amazing scenes at the White House this week when President Trump gave the go-ahead for the complete demolition of the East Wing — you can see it there — to make room for the ballroom, and the price tag for that has now risen to about $300 million.

On the screen there, this is the list that the News Hour obtained of the private sponsors and companies that contributed to this project.

So, David, last time we talked about this, you said the idea wasn’t necessarily a bad idea. Do you still feel that way now that the East Wing has been reduced to rubble and dust?

(He laughed)

David Brooks:

Well, I must say that the pictures are shocking, because there is something sacred about this building. It looks like someone is taking a claw into the wedding cake. It feels wrong.

But I’ve long thought the White House was too small. It was built for John Adams and Abigail Adams. People have added wings since then, of course. But they’re just rooms, and the west wing is so sacred, you can’t touch that.

But the Obama family used to hold their state dinners in tents. And JFK, they had a state dinner, and they had to put everyone into different rooms. So the idea of ​​having a room where we could have a formal dinner or a big event still strikes me as the right thing to do. I hope future presidents remove the gold and make it bland.

Jeff Bennett:

And you could say, Kimberly, that this ballroom project is in many ways a kind of perfect distillation of how President Trump sees the presidency, something that needs to be remade in his image. Do you see it this way?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr, Boston Globe:

Well, I don’t.

And listen, we can have a debate, a debate about the size of the White House and the age of it. I was in that press room. I know that renewal is needed. But it is the people’s house. And the idea that it was corporatization – corporatization is responsible for this rebuilding in a way that is not transactional in any way.

I mentioned a lot of people today saying, this saves taxpayer money. No, but what do taxpayers pay? The reason things that happen in the White House should be paid for by taxpayers is because the White House is accountable to them. Now who is accountable to the president? Google, corporate interests, meta, unknown individual donors?

This is precisely what the Emoluments Clause and other constitutional measures are supposed to protect against. Who will the president get the credit now, the American people or all the people who contributed to paying for this hall?

Jeff Bennett:

And, David, when the White House faced criticism this week, they updated this list on the White House website of major events, they say, to include things like Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky, the cocaine found on the premises during the Biden administration, and real trolling of the highest order.

David Brooks:

Yes.

No, I completely agree with the finance part. The big, beautiful bill increased the deficit, how much was it, like $4 trillion, and they can’t build a ballroom? So cost seems to me just a silly and corrupt argument. It’s not – I don’t think it’s as big as the 747 from Qatar or cryptocurrencies, but it’s just a leg – you’re asking for corruption.

Jeff Bennett:

Meanwhile, President Kimberly is asking the Department of Justice for $230 million. He says he suffered real harm from the Russia investigation and the Mar-a-Lago search.

What is your comment on this request?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

From the allegations I’ve been able to see, I haven’t seen a lot of “there” there, but what’s really concerning is the people making this decision from the first shame under the law are his former personal attorneys, people like Todd Blanche or other people who have been on his side from the beginning like Pam Bondi.

They shouldn’t be the ones deciding how much money he might make. Yes, he says he’ll donate it to charity. I’ll believe it when I actually see the receipts for the charity arriving there. But, besides that, again, this is using taxpayer money to compensate for itself.

And to do this and demolish at a time when federal workers are now running out of money, going to soup kitchens, and Americans will see their health care costs rise at the beginning of the month, I can’t imagine a worse outlook. I think even Marie Antoinette would blush at this point.

(He laughed)

Jeff Bennett:

David, how about that? What about the optics of it or the base material?

David Brooks:

I’m here to defend Marie Antoinette. It’s got a bad reputation. She – No, she is. I mean he’s a luxury man. And people like him or Putin, think that big men should live in big ways. He is true to that belief.

Jeff Bennett:

Yes, I mentioned the redistricting battle in the introduction. This has led to both parties stepping up, Republicans in North Carolina and Democrats in Virginia.

Is there any way out in this battle now?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Well, so far, that’s the only way I can see – outside of the way I can see is if Republicans finally stop pushing.

What I’ve seen from Democratic leaders in states is that they’re reacting to what Republicans are doing. I’m encouraged by California’s move to include in its sunset law that essentially says, look, when Texas stops, so will we. But we can’t have a redistricting war race to the bottom.

This is terrible for democracy for everyone. It distorts representation and makes our government work better for no one. There is Congress. You might think they could get together and fix this, but they won’t. I fear that the Supreme Court, with its decision on the Voting Rights Act coming later this term, which Courage will likely make a bigger hole in, will only make matters worse.

I don’t really know how we get to the end of this, but I certainly don’t think a race to the bottom of the war is the right way to go. But I also think that if someone is advancing bad policy, the other side doesn’t have every right to try to defend themselves.

Jeff Bennett:

And there’s this dynamic where you have legislators choosing their constituents, versus voters choosing their legislators.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yes.

David Brooks:

Yeah, I mean people died in Valley Forge or at least got cold there. People died on the beaches of D-Day to preserve American democracy.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Yes.

David Brooks:

And what astounds me, frankly, is why voters in Texas and California and I think Virginia and North Carolina and all these other states don’t say, you’re being disenfranchised.

Why bother voting in a House race in 2026 when the outcome is already predetermined? They are basically trying to eliminate competitive racing. It is clear that they will succeed. And so I think it’s atrocity that people don’t put democracy and their country above their party. They think that as long as my party is doing the rigging, it’s okay. I’m fine with that.

I think it’s a mistake for Democrats to join the race to the bottom, both for moral reasons, which is what I just tried to express, but also for political reasons. I think the country will be in the mood for integrity, upholding standards, and defending the Constitution, just as after Watergate, the country chose Jimmy Carter because they thought they got integrity.

I think that’s the play here. And in the long run, Democrats would be better off, not just morally but politically, if they said we’re not playing this game.

Jeff Bennett:

And in the remaining time, I want us to shift our focus outward, because several American officials, as we reported on the program tonight, have visited Israel. They met with Netanyahu and other senior Israeli officials. You see the cum there.

The list also includes the Minister of Foreign Affairs. What is your assessment of where things stand, David, two weeks after this ceasefire?

David Brooks:

I don’t say this often. I think the Trump administration is doing an excellent job. I think the 20-point plan that they did and the way they implemented that and executed it, it was excellent.

But it is clearly fragile. We saw the Knesset vote on trying to annex parts of the West Bank. Trump could not have been clearer. You won’t get the West Bank. You are not annexing the West Bank. So this is not our policy. Do that, we’ll get out of here. And Vance and Rubio and all the people who go there, Jared Kushner, I think this is a deal that needs some babysitting.

The Trump administration is doing an excellent job of babysitting.

Jeff Bennett:

Kimberly?

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

I agree with David on this too. I mean, Donald Trump wants a Nobel Prize for his work on the ceasefire. He believes that she is being threatened by Netanyahu again.

So I agree. It makes sense for everyone in the administration, from J.D. Vance to Rubio to Trump himself, to make clear that this would not only threaten the ceasefire, but also cause a rift between Israel’s largest ally.

Jeff Bennett:

Well, this week, “PBS News Hour” celebrates 50 years on the air.

David, you’ve spent almost half that time with the program, just a quarter of a century with the program.

David Brooks:

Thanks for reminding me of that.

(He laughed)

Jeff Bennett:

So I just want to invite you to think about that time period.

David Brooks:

It’s just a parade of faces. I think of Robin. Thinking of Gwen. I’m thinking of Ray Suarez, and obviously Jodi. I mean, it’s a parade. You are like the worthy heirs of a great procession of people.

But I will tell one story that I told in one of my books. When I first started doing this, whenever I said something stupid or rude, which happened a lot, I would see Jim’s eyes when he was hosting. I could see his mouth turning downward in dismay because I said something stupid. When I say something he likes, his eyes crinkle with pleasure.

So, for 10 years, I just tried to avoid mouth recession and chased eye creases.

Jeff Bennett:

Yes.

David Brooks:

And Jim never told me how to do this, or how to do the work we do. But with those little gestures, he said, that’s the “News Hour” standard. This is how we do things here.

Jim has been dead for several years, but that ethical environment, because he taught the same lesson to everyone on the team, that ethical environment is still there. Jim Lehrer’s ethical environment, this is the way we do things around here, is still there. It is a great legacy for anyone to leave behind in an ethical environment.

Jeff Bennett:

Ethical environment, what a phrase.

David Brooks, Kimberly Atkins Stohr, thank you both.

Kimberly Atkins Stohr:

Thank you.

David Brooks:

Thank you.