Category Archives: The Everyman Chronicles

Chelsea Clinton: Fall of The People’s House


Târgu-Mureş

What was dismantled today isn’t just marble or plaster; it is a reflection of how easily history can be erased when power forgets purpose.

Although I spent many of my formative years living in the White House, I always knew it wasn’t my house. It was my home, absolutely, but not my house. The White House belongs to the American people, and that’s why we call it the People’s House. I never forgot that.

So yes, while I played hide-and-seek in the White House residence and danced outside the closed doors of many a state dinner, I never once thought, “this is my house” in the way my friends thought of theirs.

I was 12 years old the first time I walked through the doors of the White House as a soon-to-be resident, not a visitor. First lady Barbara Bush gave my mom and me a tour, sharing where her grandchildren would stay when they came to visit and what their families’ favorite foods were.

Eight years later, my family would welcome the Bush family back, and I remember telling Jenna and Barbara Bush about my favorite places, the friends I had made who worked at the White House and, yes, my favorite foods.

I always had the sense that the Bush family, like mine, understood that we are all merely passing through, even while our parents were shaping American history. It was the same sensibility I had when meeting Presidents Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon as well as first ladies Jacqueline Kennedy and Lady Bird Johnson, and others who had, for a time, called the White House home.Need a news break? Check out the all new PLAY hub with puzzles, games and more!

All presidents make changes to the White House – including my family

While it is only a temporary home, every president and their families have made changes. President Theodore Roosevelt built the modern-day West Wing, and a few years later, President William Howard Taft built the Oval Office. President Franklin Roosevelt developed the East Wing and installed a swimming pool, which President Nixon later turned into the White House briefing room.

Mrs. Kennedy famously redecorated the state rooms. My mom was the first first lady to bring contemporary art into the White House, a Georgia O’Keeffe. First lady Michelle Obama added a vegetable garden (my mom had only planters full of tomatoes on the roof). And Mrs. Melania Trump, in her husband’s first term, renovated the Rose Garden, adding limestone paths and preserving the surrounding flowers.

The White House Historical Association believes that a garden has been on that site since the mid-1800s, when President Ulysses Grant was in office, or for more than half of the country’s life. Presidents and first ladies have added elements for efficiency, for comfort, for aesthetics, all of which are then cared for by the extraordinary staff of electricians, plumbers, painters, arborists, gardeners, butlers, housekeepers, chefs, ushers and historians.

Many of those professionals spend substantially more years working in the White House than any presidential family does living in it.Their legacy extends across elections: Meet the people who run the White House | Opinion

President Trump’s East Wing demolition is what happens when power forgets purpose

President Donald Trump has the right – and clearly has raised the private funds – to pave over the Rose Garden (and denude it of roses) as well as turn the East Wing into a ballroom.

Still, with less than a year until we celebrate our country’s 250th anniversary, it is unsettling that such substantial alterations to the 225-year-old People’s House are being undertaken without a historic-preservation review and seemingly without the involvement of any historians, and I would love to be proven wrong here.

When Mrs. Kennedy restored and renovated the White House and Rose Garden, she did so with historians, landscape architects and preservation experts ‒ leading to the creation of the White House Historical Association ‒ to ensure that while it would reflect her influence, it would remain coherent with the original design.White House Historical Association: Did you know you can call the White House? Thank technology for that. | Opinion

For decades afterward, that garden became a stage for history itself, where presidents announced peace accords, welcomed visiting heads of state and signed historic landmark legislation, including the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Given the widespread public rebuke to the cementification of the Rose Garden and its apparent recapitulation as “The Rose Garden Club at the White House” and the outrage at the complete demolition of the East Wing, I am clearly not alone in feeling unsettled.

Renovations aren’t inherently objectionable because of who orders them or who pays for them. Every generation has a duty to care for and update the White House as needs evolve for the number of staff in an administration, for technology, for a more complete representation of America, for security or other understandable reasons. But how we do it ‒ and whom we include in the process and whom we leave out ‒ says a great deal about our respect for history and for the People’s House.

Yes, the president has authority over the White House grounds, though the National Trust for Historic Preservation and others have indicated both precedence for and required review steps. But authority is not the same as stewardship. Stewardship requires transparency, consultation and an accounting for history.

A disregard for history is a defining trait of President Trump’s second administration. Reports indicate he has directed the Smithsonian Institution and the National Park Service to censor exhibits and erase mentions of slavery and the treatment of Native Americans. Federal websites have deleted references to women’s rights and LGBTQ+ history. In one especially embarrassing episode, Trump’s Department of War, formally known as the Department of Defense, even scrubbed its site of all mentions of the Enola Gay ‒ the plane that dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima ‒ because an automated effort to remove the word “gay” caught it in the process.

This is what happens when we take a wrecking ball to our heritage. Disregarding our democratic institutions and the rule of law or impounding funds that Congress has already approved grow from the same source of disregard for our founding ideals, and the norms and laws that have helped us move, over time, closer to a more perfect union, the cardinal call of our U.S. Constitution.

Our greatness doesn’t come because we ignore our history – it comes because we acknowledge it, we learn from it and build a better future on it, including in the buildings and gardens of the People’s House.

The White House will always be a home I was lucky enough to live in for a while. Even more important, it is a mirror of our democracy, resilient when we honor its foundations but fragile when we take them for granted. What was dismantled today isn’t just marble or plaster; it is a reflection of how easily history can be erased when power forgets purpose.

Chelsea Clinton is an author, investor, advocate and vice chair of the ⁠Clinton Foundation.

The NBA’s Crooked Bet


The game has a dealer problem.

Terry Rozier and Chauncey Billups just proved what happens when a league starts chasing the same money that bets on it. The player and the coach are caught in a gambling sting that feels less like a scandal and more like the cost of doing business.

Rozier, the Miami guard, reportedly tipped friends he’d that leave a game early so they hit the unders and cashed out. Billups, the Portland coach, is accused of joining poker games run by crooks who used him to bait rich marks. Both worked for a league that sells gambling as entertainment.

You can’t dress vice in a sponsor’s suit and call it fan engagement. ESPN runs odds beside highlights. Teams tweet point spreads before lineups. Leagues sign deals with casinos.

The result is a sport that looks more like a stock ticker than a scoreboard. And every network ad whines the same line: play along.

The fans hear. They bet on points and rebounds instead of wins. They don’t cheer anymore. They invest.

The temptation is simple math. Every rebound, every shot, every ankle turn is a possible market shift.

This is the new economy of sport. The house sets the odds. The networks sell the dream. The leagues cash the checks. Everyone else playing along is fandom, not gamblers.

The resulting is volatility. It’s the rush of maybe.

The old rule was clear: You don’t gamble on the game. It was the one sin that killed careers.

Now the rulebook is for sale. The same voices that once said gambling would destroy the sport now cut promos with betting apps. The same networks that warned of addiction now push parlays like soda commercials.

Rozier and Billups didn’t break the game. They followed its logic. When everything around you says the action never stops, eventually someone will take that literally. And when the league profits off every bet placed on every screen, the moral high ground becomes a marketing slogan.

Fans think they’re closer to the game because of the bets. They feel connected. They aren’t. They’re being mined.

Every wager, every click, every “boosted odds” special feeds a system that feeds on them. It doesn’t care who wins. It cares who stays hooked.

The fallout will come in waves. More names. More teams. Maybe even refs or front offices. The scandal won’t end because the structure rewards it.

As long as gambling is the language of sports, this will keep happening. The question isn’t who gambled. It’s who didn’t.

The NBA can issue statements about integrity. It can suspend players and fire coaches.

But it can’t claim surprise. It built the pipeline. It opened the window and called it fresh air.

The house didn’t take the game. The league gave it away.

The Myth of Social Media


For the first time ever, more Americans now get their news from social media and video apps than from television.

A report from Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism says 54% of Americans say they get news via social media/video platforms (at least sometimes) compared to 50% via TV. 

Pew Research says the same: more than half of U.S. adults at least sometimes get news from social platforms. It’s the final proof that social media is no longer the alternative to mainstream media. It is the mainstream.

Everywhere you look, self-appointed truth-tellers are railing against “the media” while quoting it word for word. They rage on YouTube about bias and corruption, then cite CNN, The New York Times, or The Washington Post as the source for their stories.

They curse the beast while feeding off it. If you quote the media, you are the media. The sooner these self-styled outsiders admit it, the sooner we can retire this nonsense about being “independent.”

The myth of an “anti-media” social class depends on pretending that clicks, likes, and shares are not circulation numbers. They are.

Most newspapers in this country would give their firstborn for the reach of a mid-level YouTuber. Some of these podcasters and TikTok pundits draw audiences in the millions. That is not rebellion. That is scale. You can wrap it in denim and attitude, but it is still mass media.

The claim that social media keeps traditional outlets honest is another sleight of hand. These so-called watchdogs amplify the very messages they say they are policing. They repost the same headlines, clip the same news footage, and build the same outrage loops.

When an influencer “fact-checks” a network, he keeps the network alive by spreading its stories. The more they fight, the more alike they become.

At its core, media is the business of attention. Traditional journalists used to compete for inches of space on a page; influencers now fight for seconds of screen time. Different weapons, same war.

Both rely on headlines that spark emotion and speed that outruns reflection. Both profit when audiences react faster than they think. One uses a press badge, the other an iPhone, but they are in the same trade.

The biggest difference between mainstream and social media is the lack of rules.

Newsrooms have editors, standards, and corrections pages. Influencers have sponsors, likes, and delete buttons. When a post goes viral, it stays viral whether it’s right or wrong. The apology, if it ever comes, is a whisper.

The algorithm rewards volume, not accuracy, and the crowd decides who gets to be credible. The public used to demand the truth; now it demands attention.

And yet, the public still wants to believe there’s a moral difference between the two. There isn’t. The same outlets that once sold papers on corners now sell clips on phones.

The same audiences that once tuned in at six now scroll through feeds at midnight. The platform changed, not the instinct.

We like to be told stories that make us feel smarter, safer, or superior. That’s as old as the printing press.

What we call “social media” is just media stripped of furniture. It has no editor’s desk, no ombudsman, no fact-checking department, no copy desk.

But it has influence, reach, and profit, all of which make it part of the same system it mocks. The person ranting about “fake news” while monetizing their views is not fighting the media; they are franchising it.

So let’s stop pretending there are two sides, one pure and one corrupt, one traditional and one free. There is only one media machine, endlessly spinning, endlessly reshaping, endlessly selling.

The only real question is whether it’s serving truth or performance. And right now, performance is winning.

Social media didn’t kill the media. It became it.