The Washington Post's boastful front-page slogan is "Democracy Dies in Darkness." But on today's Morning Joe, Post columnist David Ignatius kept viewers in the darkness regarding his own paper.
The show devoted yet another long segment to denouncing President Trump's ballroom project, and in particular, his decision to demolish the East Wing that was deemed necessary.
Jonathan Lemire highlighted an overly dramatic Peggy Noonan column in which she suggested that the project is evidence of a "tired and diminished" republic. Naturally, Lemire described her as a "conservative." MSNBC posted the title: "A Republic, But Can We Keep It?" Noonan also employed a favorite trope of Trump critics: that the destruction of the East Wing is a "metaphor." Lemire parroted the "metaphor" line himself, claiming that the demolition "really did seem to upset a lot of people."
Scarborough stepped in to echo the m-for-metaphor line, and, like Lemire, to bemoan that before proceeding, Trump hadn't consulted with "historical organizations."
Then it was Ignatius' turn. He offered a metaphorical analogy of his own: "This is the presidency as wrecking ball." He went so far as to claim that "the destruction of the East Wing has really upset people in a way that even Trump's most outrageous other actions haven't." Riiight.
Continued Ignatius:
"If the Washington Post hadn't run a photograph, taken from across the street in the Treasury building, we might not have known for 24 hours that it was even happening. It was stealthy, in the middle of the night."
An unsuspecting viewer might well have assumed that the Washington Post was relentlessly on the side of those who have risen in righteous indignation over the demolition.
But that's where Ignatius kept viewers in the darkness regarding his paper.
What Ignatius didn't disclose was that over the weekend, the paper's Editorial Board had published an editorial entitled, "In defense of the White House ballroom--Donald Trump vs. the NIMBYs." The editorial included these lines [emphasis added]:
Preservationists express horror that Trump did not submit his plans to their scrutiny, but the truth is that this project would not have gotten done, certainly not during his term, if the president had gone through the traditional review process. The blueprints would have faced death by a thousand papercuts.
Ignatius's failure to mention the editorial was a journalistic sin of omission.
Note: In the highlighted portion above, the Post editorial board made a point virtually identical to the one we had made at NewsBusters the day before:
"If Trump had submitted to the [historical] groups' tender mercies, and their endless demands for redesigns, site reviews, hearings, solicitation of public commentary, etc., what are the odds the ballroom would have been completed before the end of Trump's term -- if ever?"
We're not saying the Washington Post editorial board has started taking its talking points from NewsBusters. We're saying these points should be obvious to those highly educated but easily offended pundits on MSNBC.
Here's the transcript.
MSNBC
Morning Joe
10/27/25
6:32 am EDTJONATHAN LEMIRE: Backlash over the project has really grown after the entire East Wing was demolished to make way for the new structure . . . Conservative columnist Peggy Noonan's latest piece for the Wall Street Journal is titled, "A Republic, But Can We Keep It?" In it, Peggy writes about America's long history and President Trump's heavy-handed changes to the government, including the demolition of the White House East Wing.
. . .
You know, there are so many issues facing this country right now. It is of note, though, how the destruction of the East Wing and the way it was done. It'd be one thing if this was weeks long, months long, approval process where reviews and commissions and architects and Congress gets involved. That'd be one thing. But the way this was done so swiftly with no notice and the way plans just changed from a minor renovation, to the demolition of the entire East Wing really did seem to upset a lot of people.
And to Peggy's point, an on-the-nose metaphor for how President Trump is leading in his second term.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Well, the president, David Ignatius, said just a couple weeks ago, we aren't going to touch the East Wing. And then two weeks later, the entire East Wing is destroyed.
There are no plans. There is no consulting with historical organizations on trying to make sure the history of America is preserved.
. . .
DAVID IGNATIUS: So, Joe, this is the presidency as wrecking ball. I think that's one reason that destruction of the East Wing has really upset people in a way that even Trump's most outrageous other actions haven't.
Peggy Noonan is a very balanced, sensible person, but she was anguished by what she was seeing. And I think it comes down to the sense that we all have, we've been to the White House or certainly seen photographs of it. And we think of it as the people's house. It was built deliberately to be understated. It's not a palace like Victorian rulers have had.
It's the people's house. And Donald Trump has turned it into his own personal property, or at least he behaves that way. In the middle of the night, the bulldozers come in and begin tearing down this historic building.
If the Washington Post hadn't run a photograph, taken from across the street in the Treasury building, we might not have known for 24 hours that it was even happening. It was stealthy, in the middle of the night.
