Another beautiful day in paradise. It was very cool when we went out on the deck for coffee. I can’t believe a whole week has passed. Each day upon waking, it was too cool for the pool; but, a very short dip in the pool and then on to the hot tub was the drill. Lots of people everywhere.
In fact, upon arrival at the airport it was like cattle in a pen ready to be transported to slaughter – with tempers short because of the Mexican mix-up in luggage. The announcement that the luggage would be on carousel five and ending on seven is only the tip of the ice berg with nary a person around to confirm or organize the people in lines. The purposed lines to exit with your luggage snaked around the airport and were long on tempers and short on manners. The way to find your luggage quickly is to look at the luggage sitting on the floor outside of the carousel instead of on it.
As we related the airport experience to our shuttle driver, who has been our friend for many years, his reply was – yes that was true, but just think now you are here and in good hands.
This is our first time in many years to visit in January and we had forgotten why we always waited until April or May when the high season was over and the area was quieter – now we will go back to the old way of enjoying our time with our friends.
Trump administration shows signs of eyeing possible conspiracy case against Obama and Biden officials
Top Trump administration officials from multiple agencies are taking steps behind the scenes toward further exposing what they say was a far-reaching scheme to weaponize the government against President Donald Trump, as one of his top allies hints the evidence could soon come together before a grand jury in Florida.
Federal prosecutors in South Florida are quietly preparing a new grand jury that could set the stage for criminal charges against former Obama- and Biden-era officials accused of orchestrating an alleged yearslong conspiracy to undermine Trump during his first presidency and after his 2020 election defeat. A recently-posted order from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on Sept. 26 shows that Chief Judge Cecilia Altonaga authorized a grand jury to convene in Fort Pierce beginning Jan. 12, 2026. The order does not specify the subject of the proceedings.
But a top Trump ally has publicly said the grand jury will be used to look at evidence related to an alleged weaponization conspiracy. The new panel will convene as multiple arms of the administration appear to be coordinating fresh efforts to revisit the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation and alleged intelligence abuses during the Obama years.
The DOJ’s new “strike force” looms in the background
Attorney General Pam Bondi announced over the summer that the DOJ had assembled a “strike force” to look into claims that senior national security officials “manufactured and politicized” intelligence during the 2016 transition to tie Trump to Russian election interference. She also authorized the convening of a federal grand jury, triggered by a criminal referral from CIA Director John Ratcliffe, who has suggested the evidence released by him and Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard show that officials under former President Barack Obama made a coordinated attempt to invent allegations that Trump’s campaign had colluded with Russia during the 2016 election.
“We will leave no stone unturned to deliver justice,” Bondi said at the time.
Earlier this week, Gabbard revealed that since April, a so-called Interagency Weaponization Working Group, coordinating officials at ODNI, DOJ, FBI, and CIA, among others, had been meeting biweekly to “share information, coordinate, and execute,” though the group has no clear connection to the planned grand jury proceedings in Florida.
Obama spokesman Patrick Rodenbush dismissed the allegations as “outrageous” and “a weak attempt at distraction,” while former intelligence officials rejected Gabbard’s conspiratorial claims.
A favorable venue lies in Florida
The Washington Examiner previously reported in August that the DOJ could benefit from convening a grand jury in South Florida—a venue more politically favorable to Trump than Washington, D.C., where most predicate conduct from the 2016 Russia investigation occurred.
“There’s no doubt South Florida is a more logical venue for this kind of case,” former federal prosecutor James Burnham posted to X at the time, noting that U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones, confirmed by the Senate in July, would likely oversee such a proceeding.
Former federal prosecutor Neama Rahmani previously warned that choosing a venue so far from the locus of the original events “could invite scrutiny,” though he acknowledged it could also help prosecutors avoid the perception of anti-Trump bias among jurors in alternative venue options like Washington, D.C.
Proponents of using the Florida venue for a hypothetical conspiracy case argue the 2022 Mar-a-Lago raid provides a jurisdictional “hook,” connecting the alleged conspiracy’s origins in 2016 to later actions by federal agencies.
“The conspiracy didn’t end in 2016,” said former prosecutor David Gelman, a previous Trump 2024 campaign legal surrogate. “It’s a continuation—Obama-era officials embedded in the FBI and DOJ were still trying to block Trump’s reelection years later.”
Trump allies hint at movement behind the scenes
The push to hold Obama-era leaders accountable may explain recent remarks by one of Trump’s most prominent legal allies.
Mike Davis, president of the Article III Project and a former Senate Judiciary counsel, said on The Charlie Kirk Show last week that U.S. Attorney Jason Reding Quiñones, a Trump appointee, had received court approval to seat the Fort Pierce grand jury. “It should be fully up and running by January,” he said, calling the order “a public document.” Davis made similar remarks earlier this month on Fox News, telling Maria Bartiromo that the grand jury would be an ideal venue to “investigate what they did to President Trump,” adding that the August 2022 “Mar-a-Lago raid is the hook.”
Mike Davis @mrddmia nails it: “I think it goes all the way up to the top, to President Obama, to Vice President Biden, to Hillary Clinton, Comey, Brennan, Clapper, so many players within the Obama and Biden administration. And I think it also includes the Lawfare Democrats, these… pic.twitter.com/4M03E5CbpW
“I think it goes all the way up to the top,” Davis said. “President Obama, Vice President Biden, Hillary Clinton, Comey, Brennan, Clapper—so many players within the Obama and Biden administration. And I think it also includes the Lawfare Democrats who coordinated with the Biden White House to bring these indictments against President Trump.”
Gelman said Davis’s comments about the Fort Pierce grand jury should be taken seriously. “I know Mike personally … and he has his pulse on everything really well,” Gelman told the Washington Examiner on Wednesday. “If Mike thinks there’s going to be a grand jury impaneled, I would take that as word. And if it is in Fort Pierce, that’s a much better venue — obviously a lot less liberal, a lot less left-leaning — and it would have jurisdiction because Mar-a-Lago is right there. So I think it’s a very relevant and appropriate place for this kind of investigation.”
He added that the breadth of any potential case could surprise even close observers. “In a grand jury, you can be king or queen for a day, a lot of things can come out that weren’t known at the beginning,” Gelman said. “It’s not a fishing expedition … but there are a lot of moving parts. You could see new individuals implicated, maybe even some heavy hitters, depending on what the evidence shows.”
Evidence fueling the new inquiry
Ratcliffe and Gabbard’s revelations this summer came with a trove of declassified materials, including a 2020 House Intelligence Committee report that exposed falsehoods at the core of the Russia collusion narrative. The report concluded that “no credible evidence” supported the assertion that Russian President Vladimir Putin explicitly sought to help Trump win, and that former CIA Director John Brennan pushed to keep the allegation in the intelligence community’s public assessment despite internal objections.
A separate review by CIA Director John Ratcliffe supported that finding, alleging that Brennan and former FBI Director James Comey fought to include unverified opposition research from the Steele dossier, funded by the Clinton campaign, in official intelligence assessments.
Former U.S. Attorney Bud Cummins, a Trump ally, told the Washington Examiner in July that the disclosures expose a pattern of “abuse of prosecutorial powers to eliminate political opponents.”
“Richard Nixon’s sins pale in comparison to what is suspected in this saga,” Cummins said. “As Americans, we cannot tolerate this, and it must be investigated.”
Indictments and political fallout
The expansion of the DOJ’s investigation comes amid a string of high-profile indictments targeting figures who have become known as some of Trump’s biggest political enemies. Since July, prosecutors have charged former FBI Director James Comey, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and former national security adviser John Bolton in separate cases.
Meanwhile, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) referred Brennan to the Justice Department for criminal investigation this week, a move largely symbolic absent evidence of contempt or obstruction, underscoring rising GOP pressure for accountability. The committee has also demanded hearings and testimony from former special counsel Jack Smith, whose classified documents case against Trump was brought in the same venue, and is now at the heart of speculation about a sweeping conspiracy case against former Democratic administration officials.
Trump, while meeting with Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. in late July, accused Obama and his senior aides of “treason” and said his administration had uncovered “irrefutable proof that Obama was seditious.”
Legal limits and immunity hurdles
Legal experts caution that while the declassified evidence may be politically explosive, criminally charging a former president or his aides presents formidable obstacles, particularly in light of the Supreme Court’s decision last year that found former presidents enjoy some immunity for official acts taken while in office.
Gelman, however, said the immunity issue may not be as absolute as some assume. “The immunity decision only talks about things that happen while you are president,” he explained. “If Obama participated in certain things after leaving office, policy decisions, political meddling, anything illegal, he does not enjoy that protection. So yeah, Obama could potentially be a subject of an indictment if the evidence points that way. It’s early, but where there’s smoke, there’s fire.”
Additionally, a potential conspiracy case, rather than discrete charges, could allow prosecutors to argue that the alleged conduct forms part of a criminal scheme, effectively eliminating statute-of-limitations barriers that might otherwise protect Obama-era figures.
Whether the Fort Pierce grand jury ultimately results in criminal charges against former high-ranking officials remains to be seen. But with the court order now public and Trump allies openly discussing its implications, expectations are mounting that 2026 could bring the first-ever criminal case alleging a coordinated Democratic conspiracy against a sitting or former president.
Let’s give Hillary her two minutes of fame. We didn’t hear her reaction to DODGE findings on how corrupt the Democrats were. She failed to mention that when she and Bill left the White House – she accidently took the SILVER. Click if you want to listen to her two cents worth:
How many countries in the world have a ball room in their government complex which can be used for ball room dancing and large gatherings? In the past during election time, gatherings after the election had to be held in local hotels or either stuff them in the small room at the White House as noticed in the past.
What do ball rooms do for people? They bring all cultures together to enjoy themselves. As a child I can remember my family taking us with them to the local large halls with orchestras/bands playing and during the intermission we would play on the dance floor. Music was something that brought people together. My husband and I enjoyed dancing all of our lives. I still have a family violin from those days brought to this country by a relative. Our shelves are filled with every level of music. There are over three hundred favorite songs selected on my website KOMMONSENTSJANE. Music can set the tone for any event.
All of the money that DOGE proved the left stuffed in their bank accounts could have built more than this ball room. Where is Newsome on that count?
Gavin Newsom seems to have an affinity against large rooms to serve the people’s house. Wonder if his skills include the waltz, rhumba, polka or jitterbug?
What to know about the $250 million ballroom Trump is adding to the White House.
1 of 4 |
The demolition of part of the White House’s East Wing continues as President Donald Trump aims to build a new ballroom. Here’s a breakdown of the White House layout. (AP Video: Jacquelyn Martin and River Zhang)
Work continues on the demolition of a part of the East Wing of the White House, Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2025, in Washington, before construction of a new ballroom. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
A window dangles from the East Wing as work continues on the demolition of a part of the East Wing of the White House, Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2025, in Washington, before construction of a new ballroom. (AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
|
People watch as work continues on the demolition of a part of the East Wing of the White House, Tuesday, Oct. 21, 2025, in Washington, before construction of a new ballroom.
The 90,000-square-foot ballroom will dwarf the main White House itself, at nearly double the size, and Trump says it will accommodate 999 people.
Trump said on social media that the ballroom won’t cost taxpayers a dime because it is being privately funded by “many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly.”
Here are some things to know about the newest White House construction project:
Why is Trump building a ballroom?
Trump says the White House needs a large entertaining space and has complained that the East Room, the current largest space in the White House, is too small, holding about 200 people. He has frowned on the past practice of presidents hosting state dinners and other large events in tents on the South Lawn.
Trump says the project will be paid for with private donations and that no public money will be spent on the ballroom. The White House promised to release information on which individuals and corporations have pledged or donated money and invited some of the donors to an East Room dinner last week, but has not released a comprehensive list and breakdown of funds.
Some $22 million for the project came from YouTube, a Google subsidiary, as part of a recent settlement for a 2021 lawsuit Trump brought against the company.
The White House also has not said how much of his own money Trump is contributing.
Why tear down part of the East Wing to build the ballroom?
The East Wing is traditionally the social side of the White House and sits across East Executive Avenue from the Treasury Department. It’s where tourists and other guests enter for events.
The president said on July 31 that the White House itself would remain intact as the ballroom was going up.
“It won’t interfere with the current building,” he said. “It will be near it but not touching it. And pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of.”
The White House said some demolition was needed because the East Wing, the traditional home for the first lady and her staff, is being modernized as part of the ballroom project.
Trump named a top White House aide, Will Scharf, to head the commission. Scharf has made a distinction between demolition work and rebuilding, saying the commission only has jurisdiction over the latter..
What happens to the East Room?
By Trump’s telling, it will become a space where guests will mingle, sip cocktails and eat hors d’oeuvres until they are called into the ballroom for dinner. Trump said a set of windows in the room will be removed to create a passageway to and from the ballroom.
What will the new ballroom look like?
Renderings released by the White House suggest a strong resemblance to the gilded ballroom at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s private club and home in Palm Beach, Florida.
The project also has grown in size since it was announced, going from accommodating 650 seated guests to holding 999 people, big enough to fit an inauguration if needed, he said at a recent White House dinner for donors. Windows will be bulletproof, he said.
When will the ballroom be completed?
The White House has said the ballroom will be ready for use well before Trump’s term ends in January 2029, an ambitious timeline.
Trump also said he renovated the bathroom in the famous Lincoln Bedroom in the private living quarters and laid down marble floors in a passageway leading to the South Lawn.
How has construction changed the White House over the years?
Presidents have added to the White House since construction began in 1792 for a host of reasons, and Trump aides say his decision to build a ballroom follows that long tradition.
Many of the prior projects were criticized as being too costly or too lavish, but eventually came to be accepted, according to the White House Historical Association.
Thomas Jefferson added the east and west colonnades.
Andrew Jackson built the North Portico on the Pennsylvania Avenue side of the White House, aligning with the South Portico that James Monroe added after the original mansion was rebuilt after the British burned it during the War of 1812.
Theodore Roosevelt added the West Wing to provide dedicated space for the president and key staff, while Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East Wing, which over time became the home base for the first lady’s staff and social functions.
One of the most significant White House renovations happened under Harry Truman, when the mansion was found to be so structurally unsound that he ordered a complete gutting of the interior that lasted from 1948 to 1952. The project, including Truman’s addition of a balcony to the second floor of the South Portico, was highly controversial.
Other changes include the creation of the Rose Garden during John F. Kennedy’s administration and Richard Nixon’s decision to convert an indoor swimming pool that was built for FDR’s physical therapy into a workspace for the growing White House press corps.
—
This story replaces an Oct. 21 story withdrawn by The Associated Press that quoted White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt as saying over the summer that “nothing will be torn down” in reference to construction starting at the White House on a ballroom and crews tearing down the façade of the East Wing. The AP incorrectly attributed that quote to Leavitt in that story and two others, one on July 31 and Oct. 20. It was a journalist, not Leavitt, who said the quote while asking a question during a briefing Leavitt gave to reporters on July 31. The error was brought to the AP’s attention on Oct. 22.
****
Newsom needs to worry more about California and less about D.C. His problem – he is trying to make people forget about his destruction of CA and lack of attention in helping the good people who are left to suffer his destruction.
Now let’s see – what is a good topic to throw out to these STAY AT HOME lefties who won’t show up to do their job? How about VOTER FRAUD and VOTER PHOTO ID?
Is it called, “Behind Closed Doors?” Another said, “Just say, “Yes,” to any question. And, lastly, he was the boss for the first 50 years and, then; I was the boss for the last 50 years.
Oh! My! Another reporter turned Psychologist having her say. Question for that reporter. Before we read her opinion on the Vance’s, we need to have her tell us – “how does she make her marriage work?”
****
Scared is not the proper word. The proper word in my eyes is being “confident” in who you are and working within the role you are playing. You can please some of the people some of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.
(Too funny, Googlie changed my word to “sacred.” Yes, that word is used.
10/22/2025
When a woman describes another woman in this manner, it reflects back on her own insecurities. We all know that both men’s wives are very savvy women who are well established by being educated, held high positions, married men who are their equal, and have children and are raising them.
In fact, as women we say – they have it all together.
Has Psaki followed that same path? In the working world, we would never criticized any woman for “having it all together.” Many families have to have two paychecks in today’s world and now even three paychecks to make ends meet.
So, all of you people who have been criticizing both women, you should be glad that we have women and men who are educated and know how to run our country because for the last 12 years that hasn’t been the case. And, the husbands are very lucky to have such beautiful/smart women who are raising their children, and representing our country – which is not an easy job.
This is a good example of what they have to put up with which is called stress and isn’t necessary. Psaki could have conducted the opposite scenario which was to hold an interview and ask them – how do these two women/men take all of this manufactured pressure in stride.
“I think the little Manchurian candidate, JD Vance, wants to be president more than anything else,” Psaki said. “I always wonder what’s going on in the mind of his wife. Like, are you okay? Please blink four times. We’ll come over here. We’ll save you.”
She continued, “And that he’s willing to do anything to get there. And your whole iteration you just outlined, I mean, he’s scarier in certain ways in some ways. And he’s young and ambitious and agile in the sense that he’s a chameleon who makes himself whatever he thinks the audience wants to hear from him.”
The podcast episode’s description also referenced this joke, reading, “Usha Vance, please blink twice if you need help.”
Several X users called out Psaki’s comments as “disgusting” and “vile” for mocking Vance’s marriage and suggesting someone was worse than the “worse than Hitler” Trump.
“Not a good person. At all,” Fox News contributor Joe Concha remarked.
The Libs of TikTok X account wrote, “Unhinged Jen Psaki is now smearing JD Vance, suggesting that his wife, Usha, wants to leave her husband and offers to ‘save’ her. She also thinks JD Vance is ‘scarier’ than Donald Trump. @MSNBC should be ashamed to pay her salary.”
Townhall.com writer Amy Curtis commented, “Also, this is an absolutely vile thing to say. Usha Vance is happily married. She made a vow to JD and those words mean something. It’s also an insult to women who are in actual bad marriages.”
“Jen Psuki [sic] must be transferring her own personal issues onto others. @jrpsaki is a dumba– who has no comprehension of the truth and has to overcompensate for her lack of talent by saying untrue things. Circle back on that, moron,” White House director of communications Steven Cheung wrote.
“I must admit, the pivot to ‘JD Vance is worse than Hitler’ started earlier than I anticipated,” Federalist senior legal correspondent Margot Cleveland joked.
“A NEW ‘Worse than “worse than Hitler”‘ is on the way!” conservative commentator Doug Powers wrote.
“Usha is accompanying JD right now in Israel securing the Gaza Peace Deal. Absolutely disgusting comments,” Turning Point USA contributor Jack Posebic wrote.
A White House official called Jen Psaki a “dumbass” and a “moron” after she made mocking remarks about Second Lady Usha Vance and her marriage to Vice President JD Vance.
Psaki, a former White House press secretary under President Joe Biden, who now hosts her own shon MSNBC, had been speaking on an episode of the “I’ve Had It” podcast that was released Tuesday.
“I always wonder what’s going on in the mind of his wife,” Psaki said, referring to Usha Vance. “Like, are you OK? Please blink four times. Come over here, we’ll save you.”
The podcast episode’s description on YouTube, Spotify and Apple Podcasts referenced the comment, stating: “Usha Vance, please blink twice if you need help.”
Steven Cheung, the current White House director of communications, hit back in a post on X. Psaki “must be transferring her own personal issues onto others,” Cheung wrote, sharing the clip of her comments.
Newsweek has contacted the Vice President’s office and Psaki through MSNBC for comment via emails sent outside regular business hours.
US Vice President JD Vance (R) and US Second Lady Usha Vance chat following an amphibious capabilities demonstration on Red Beach at Camp Pendleton, California, on October 18, 2025 as part of the Marine Corps’ 250th anniversary celebrations.
Why It Matters
The couple have been in the spotlight since President Donald Trump picked Vance to be his running mate in the 2024 presidential election. That scrutiny could increase as Trump has suggested Vance is likely the heir apparent to his MAGA movement. In an interview earlier this year, Usha Vance said she was “not plotting out” the next steps, adding that she would be happy to be “along for the ride” if her husband became president.
The couple met at Yale Law School, got married in 2014 and have three children. She worked as a trial lawyer for the Munger, Tolles and Olson law firm, but left shortly after her husband was chosen as Trump’s running mate.
What to Know
Cheung called Psaki “a dumbass who has no comprehension of the truth and has to overcompensate for her lack of talent by saying untrue things.”
“Circle back on that, moron,” he added, referring to a common phrase Psaki used when talking to reporters while she was press secretary.
In the podcast, Psaki had also said she thought Vance is “scarier in certain ways” than Trump.
She said the “little Manchurian candidate JD Vance wants to be president more than anything else” and that “he’s willing to do anything to get there,” calling him “a chameleon who makes himself into whatever he thinks the audience wants to hear from hi
But Psaki added that she thinks Vance will struggle to take the MAGA movement with him because he has “no rizz”—meaning charisma—and is “a little odd.”
Conservatives slammed Psaki’s comments on social media, with conservative activist Jack Posobiec calling them “absolutely disgusting.”
What People Are Saying
The Libs of TikTok account wrote on X: ”Unhinged Jen Psaki is now smearing JD Vance, suggesting that his wife, Usha, wants to leave her husband and offers to ‘save’ her. She also thinks JD Vance is ‘scarier’ than Donald Trump. @MSNBC should be ashamed to pay her salary.”
Conservative activist Jack Posobiec called Psaki’s comments “absolutely disgusting” in a post on X, adding that Usha Vance “is accompanying JD right now in Israel securing the Gaza Peace Deal.”
What’s Next
Vance headed to Israel for talks on Tuesday, accompanied by his wife. They are set to return later this week.
IUpdate 10/22/25, 3:40 a.m. ET: This article has been updated with additional information.*
FOX News
kommonsentsjane 