Context matters. White House has history and the wing was defenitely demolished.

Whether you want to hide it and ignore the history and praise the ballroom, you alternatively omit the demolish part. Propaganda works for both ways.

https://www.whitehousehistory.org/collections/president-trum... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_House_Reconstruction

It is obvious that demolishing is the first step in new construction, and has been done before to the White House. You can't give all the context in a single sentence. You can avoid bias or wording that attempts to sway the audience (propaganda).

There is no praise or value judgement on the ballroom. The neutral PoV statement is "Microsoft donated to a new ball room for the White House east wing."

Glad that every statement of personal opinion is now "propaganda"...

This isn't a subject that needs opinions. "Microsoft donated to a new ball room for the east wing of the White House." is a neutral, factual statement.

As is "Donald Trump ordered the demolition of the existing east wing of the White House, in order to construct a new ballroom on that site. Microsoft has funded this construction work."

I get it, it's hard to wrap your head around two statements being true at the same time

Let's say he was demolishing the whole White House, and was replacing it with a high rise, with his name in gold letters on the outside. Would the headline be "Trump expands White House. It's now bigger and better!". Or would it be that Trump destroyed a historic building that he had no right to destroy?

Yup, demolishing is the first step in renovation. You are right, this isn't hard. This is the weirdest topic for globalists to use in their anti-Trump rhetoric. It just makes you look desperate.

Yawn. Nonetheless, glad we agreed on demolishment - it's hard to get any of that from you guys these days.

Is it really just a ballroom? I see few people mentioning the East Wing was actually covering the White House's underground bunker. Maybe Trump wants a more future-proof nuclear refugee.

Maybe I’m mistaken but I thought I had read somewhere that nukes are now so powerful that bunkers don’t really work, even Cheyanne Mountain not considered safe anymore. If so, not sure if that’s a possible upgrade.

They can gate to the alpha site if the danger is serious enough.

No, it is humorous. Everyone knows the story and there is literally a link to a publication owned by one of the other donors (with full disclosure).

I mean, it would have been possible to examine the birthday letters of Myhrvold and Trump and a couple of Trump quotations to put the financing into context.