Matthew Chapman
June 8, 2026
RAW STORY
Construction is underway on a temporary arena that will host the UFC Freedom 250 fight card in June, while ongoing construction on the planned White House ballroom in the area of the former East Wing continues at the White House in Washington D.C., U.S., May 28, 2026. REUTERS/Kylie Cooper
President Donald Trump has been hit by a new lawsuit over his UFC arena being built on the White House South Lawn — and the details left a former federal prosecutor incredulous.
Joyce Vance detailed the most shocking parts in her Civil Discourse Substack.
The idea for the fight raised red flags from the start, noted Vance.
"UFC President Dana White has reliably supported Trump through his three campaigns. This is quite a reward for his dedication," she wrote.
And, although White denies this event is "transactional," he's pledging $60 million for construction and $700,000 for repairs to the White House lawn after the event — assuming those repairs even happen, since Trump has dropped hints he wants the arena to be permanent.
The new lawsuit, Vance said, offers astounding insight into just what a scheme of "corruption and kleptocracy" is on display.
"The amount of corruption alleged in this lawsuit is jaw dropping, even for Trump," she wrote on BlueSky.
For one thing, she noted, the plaintiffs point out that Trump “giving White and his company what none have enjoyed before: unfettered access to the White House and Lincoln Memorial to stage a private, for-profit sports event, with all the promotional and branding opportunities that accompany such access” — all while he purchased up to $50,000 in stock in the UFC's parent company, and the UFC itself promotes a cryptocurrency firm sponsoring the event and advertising itself with White House iconography.
And as all this is going on, the plaintiffs — a Vietnam vet and a senior citizen activist — said, this whole project defaces the nation's capital. “The Claw, which is constructed primarily out of steel, is 92 feet tall, 154 feet wide, and weighs 600 tons ... The Claw thus dwarfs the adjacent White House. It is visible from the National Mall to the south," the lawsuit reads.
To do this, the suit continued, the White House and UFC are violating National Park Service regulations, ignoring congressional approval, and environmental permitting.
The complainants are asking a judge to stop the event from taking place.
"A ruling and perhaps an appeal or two could materialize quickly given the timing here," Vance concluded — but the real fireworks could start to fly if "an injunction is in place and Trump is forced to cancel or at least postpone his plans."
This comes amid other reporting that Republicans were scrambling to get the limited tickets to the UFC event, and polling indicates the demographic groups Trump was hoping to win over with the spectacle have already soured on him.
Construction is underway on a temporary arena that will host the UFC Freedom 250 fight card in June, while ongoing construction on the planned White House ballroom in the area of the former East Wing continues at the White House in Washington D.C., U.S., May 28, 2026. REUTERS/Kylie Cooper
President Donald Trump has been hit by a new lawsuit over his UFC arena being built on the White House South Lawn — and the details left a former federal prosecutor incredulous.
Joyce Vance detailed the most shocking parts in her Civil Discourse Substack.
The idea for the fight raised red flags from the start, noted Vance.
"UFC President Dana White has reliably supported Trump through his three campaigns. This is quite a reward for his dedication," she wrote.
And, although White denies this event is "transactional," he's pledging $60 million for construction and $700,000 for repairs to the White House lawn after the event — assuming those repairs even happen, since Trump has dropped hints he wants the arena to be permanent.
The new lawsuit, Vance said, offers astounding insight into just what a scheme of "corruption and kleptocracy" is on display.
"The amount of corruption alleged in this lawsuit is jaw dropping, even for Trump," she wrote on BlueSky.
For one thing, she noted, the plaintiffs point out that Trump “giving White and his company what none have enjoyed before: unfettered access to the White House and Lincoln Memorial to stage a private, for-profit sports event, with all the promotional and branding opportunities that accompany such access” — all while he purchased up to $50,000 in stock in the UFC's parent company, and the UFC itself promotes a cryptocurrency firm sponsoring the event and advertising itself with White House iconography.
And as all this is going on, the plaintiffs — a Vietnam vet and a senior citizen activist — said, this whole project defaces the nation's capital. “The Claw, which is constructed primarily out of steel, is 92 feet tall, 154 feet wide, and weighs 600 tons ... The Claw thus dwarfs the adjacent White House. It is visible from the National Mall to the south," the lawsuit reads.
To do this, the suit continued, the White House and UFC are violating National Park Service regulations, ignoring congressional approval, and environmental permitting.
The complainants are asking a judge to stop the event from taking place.
"A ruling and perhaps an appeal or two could materialize quickly given the timing here," Vance concluded — but the real fireworks could start to fly if "an injunction is in place and Trump is forced to cancel or at least postpone his plans."
This comes amid other reporting that Republicans were scrambling to get the limited tickets to the UFC event, and polling indicates the demographic groups Trump was hoping to win over with the spectacle have already soured on him.
.jpg)
'Yikes!' Alex Witt stunned as lawyer flags Trump's staggering 'insider dealing' scandal
Robert Davis
June 7, 2026
Robert Davis
June 7, 2026
RAW STORY
U.S. President Donald Trump holds a gold Olympic medal belonging to U.S. speed skater and Wisconsin native Jordan Stolz during an event at Custer Farms in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, U.S., June 5, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
MS NOW's Alex Witt was stunned on Sunday after a former Florida state attorney flagged President Donald Trump's latest insider-dealing scheme.
Trump's Department of Justice has been working to establish what it's calling an "anti-weaponization" fund to pay claims from people who say they were wrongfully prosecuted by the federal government. Last week, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ was not moving forward with the fund, but Trump directly contradicted that statement on Sunday by telling NBC News's Kristen Welker that he believes people who were prosecuted for rioting on Jan. 6, 2021 should be paid.
Dave Aronberg, a former Florida state attorney, told Witt that the entire fund "reeks of insider dealing" because it was established as part of a settlement Trump agreed to in a lawsuit against the IRS, an executive agency he oversees.
"As a matter of law, you cannot sue yourself and then choose not to fight it, and then write yourself a multibillion-dollar check out of the taxpayers' kitty while giving your own businesses immunity from the tax laws," he said, referring to a provision in the settlement that gives the Trump family absolute immunity from future tax cases.
Aronberg also noted that the deal seems to violate multiple aspects of the U.S. Constitution.
"It violates Article One because it steals Congress's spending power away from it. It violates Article Three because federal courts aren't supposed to rubber-stamp collusive sham lawsuits and settlements. So, if the judiciary doesn't throw this whole thing out, then the rule of law in this country just becomes a dead letter," Aronberg said.
His comments seemed to leave Witt stunned.
"Yikes!" she said.
U.S. President Donald Trump holds a gold Olympic medal belonging to U.S. speed skater and Wisconsin native Jordan Stolz during an event at Custer Farms in Chippewa Falls, Wisconsin, U.S., June 5, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
MS NOW's Alex Witt was stunned on Sunday after a former Florida state attorney flagged President Donald Trump's latest insider-dealing scheme.
Trump's Department of Justice has been working to establish what it's calling an "anti-weaponization" fund to pay claims from people who say they were wrongfully prosecuted by the federal government. Last week, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the DOJ was not moving forward with the fund, but Trump directly contradicted that statement on Sunday by telling NBC News's Kristen Welker that he believes people who were prosecuted for rioting on Jan. 6, 2021 should be paid.
Dave Aronberg, a former Florida state attorney, told Witt that the entire fund "reeks of insider dealing" because it was established as part of a settlement Trump agreed to in a lawsuit against the IRS, an executive agency he oversees.
"As a matter of law, you cannot sue yourself and then choose not to fight it, and then write yourself a multibillion-dollar check out of the taxpayers' kitty while giving your own businesses immunity from the tax laws," he said, referring to a provision in the settlement that gives the Trump family absolute immunity from future tax cases.
Aronberg also noted that the deal seems to violate multiple aspects of the U.S. Constitution.
"It violates Article One because it steals Congress's spending power away from it. It violates Article Three because federal courts aren't supposed to rubber-stamp collusive sham lawsuits and settlements. So, if the judiciary doesn't throw this whole thing out, then the rule of law in this country just becomes a dead letter," Aronberg said.
His comments seemed to leave Witt stunned.
"Yikes!" she said.
THE GRIFT
President Donald Trump looks on as he exits Air Force One on his arrival at Palm Beach International Airport in West Palm Beach, Florida, January 31, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard
June 08, 2026
ALTERNET
A new watchdog report has exposed the eye-watering costs to U.S. taxpayers that have piled up as a result of President Donald Trump's federal takeover of Washington D.C.
Last summer, Trump announced via executive order that the federal government would be taking over control of the D.C. police department, while also deploying forces from the district's National Guard regiment and from the regiments in other states. This, he and his MAGA allies claimed, was being done to address rampant crime in Washington, despite the fact that major crimes had been on the decline in the city for years, as they have been in many major metro areas. It was also speculated that the move came as a response to one of Trump's former DOGE employees, Edward Coristine, getting assaulted by two teenagers.
On Monday, the watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington released a new report detailing the vast expenses that this takeover has racked up on the dime of taxpayers, totaling over $18 million in less than a year, based on materials that the group obtained from the U.S. Marshals via a lawsuit.
"From August 2025 to March 2026, the U.S. Marshals Service identified over $18 million in taxpayer funded costs related to its deployment for the Trump administration’s federal takeover of D.C., according to records obtained by CREW through a lawsuit brought under the Freedom of Information Act," the watchdog report explained. "The marshals play several important roles, including providing security for judges, tracking down fugitives across the country and running the witness security program. The agency apparently pulled resources from district courts across the country, including in Guam and the Virgin Islands, to participate in the 'D.C. Safe and Beautiful Task Force.'”
These additional costs from the Marshals are on top of the $332 million cost related to the deployment of National Guard forces to D.C. as of February.
The CREW report added later: "The most significant cost was nearly $6 million pulled from USMS’ tactical operations division, the unit responsible for responding to high-threat and emergency situations. The agency also pulled over $3 million from its investigative operations division and over $2 million from the D.C. Superior Court, reducing the number of marshals providing security in a high profile courthouse in D.C. during a surge of threats against judges."
Based on emails that the group obtained from the lawsuit, they also determined that the "marshals’ involvement in it was announced abruptly and had significant staffing implications," with one August email from a chief in the Tactical Operations Division claiming that agents would be deployed the following day.
No comments:
Post a Comment