By John Q. Hosedrinker 
According to a new book by Republican strategist Scott Jennings, White House staff had to intervene to prevent President Trump from installing a chandelier in the Oval Office because the ceiling could not support its weight. Jennings recounts that Trump was intent on redecorating the Oval Office and making it his own, as he did with the rest of the government. The book frames this incident as part of a larger trend of Trump’s aesthetic changes, which included heavy gilding, personal iconography, and the construction of a ballroom. These interior design choices mirror his approach to governing, adding new elements at a rapid pace.
Read the original article here
White House staff were forced to step in to stop President Donald Trump from hanging a potentially damaging chandelier in the Oval Office, according to a new book by CNN’s resident MAGA pundit Scott Jennings. This wasn’t just a matter of aesthetics; it was a matter of physics. The Oval Office ceiling, as discovered by White House staff, simply couldn’t hold the weight of a chandelier. It’s almost comical when you consider it.
The whole situation paints a vivid picture of the former president’s approach to things. He envisions a grand change, a bold statement, without seemingly considering the practical implications. It’s that classic Trumpian approach: big, bold, and, in this case, potentially disastrous. This wasn’t the only design idea that didn’t make it to fruition. The idea of redesigning the Oval Office to be square was also floated around, reminiscent of the offices at Mar-a-Lago, where apparently, things are much “nicer.”
One can’t help but notice the sycophancy displayed by those around him. The exchange quoted in the news story is the perfect example. When Trump suggests the chandelier, Jennings’ response is nothing more than pure, unadulterated flattery. He states that the chandelier “will come in handy at night, Mr. President” despite the fact that the room is already awash in sunlight. It’s a sad display of the extent people will go to in order to keep their positions in the former President’s orbit.
This whole episode seems to reflect a deeper pattern. Trump’s redecorating of the White House, including his ideas for portraits and his plans for a “Presidential Hall of Fame,” seems to be a way of leaving his mark, regardless of how impractical or even absurd the ideas may be. It is as though the role of the President is an opportunity to decorate the house. It’s a mix of vanity, ego, and the need to control every aspect of his environment.
The fact that the staff had to step in to prevent a potentially dangerous situation speaks volumes about the situation. Trump seems to have little regard for physical limitations or the advice of experts. His reaction to being told “no” seems to be that of a child; apparently, the world should simply bend to his will. The chandelier incident could be a metaphor for Trump’s overall approach to governance, where practicality and reason are often secondary to his personal desires.
It’s tempting to see the whole situation as something of a farce. The idea of a solid-gold chair or an autopen portrait speaks to a certain level of obliviousness. But there’s also a more serious side to it. The willingness of those around him to go along with these ideas, to offer praise and support, is a reflection of the corrupt culture around the former President. It’s a culture that prioritized loyalty and flattery over competence and integrity.
The chandelier incident is just one small example of a larger issue. It shows how the former President surrounded himself with people who enabled his worst instincts, people who were willing to overlook basic facts in order to maintain their position.