Senator Whitehouse Put Up or Shut Up
Segment #674
With all that is happening now on the world stage the Kennedy Center and the Dems fight to embarrass Trump is pretty insignificant. What is significant is brazen ill conceived attacks mounted by such poorly prepared Dem advocates such as the likes of Senator Whitehouse. You will never see Grennell’s counter arguments describing what is really happening at the Kennedy center in the legacy press. However, it is my hope that you will see Grennell sue the New York Times and Washing Post if they don’t retract.
President Donald Trump criticized the Kennedy Center during a board board dinner at the White House on Monday. Earlier this year he ousted the existing board of the Washington, D.C. arts center and his newly-appointed board voted Trump to be the Kennedy Center's chair. Trump criticized the center for what he described as outdated interiors and misallocated funding.
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse's Criticism of the Kennedy Center
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (which oversees federal funding for public buildings like the Kennedy Center), has recently escalated his scrutiny of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. This stems from a leadership overhaul earlier in 2025, where President Donald Trump was elected chairman of the board, and Richard Grenell (a Trump ally and former acting Director of National Intelligence) was appointed interim president. Whitehouse's actions—primarily a formal letter sent on November 20, 2025—accuse the new leadership of financial mismanagement, cronyism, and turning the center into a "playground" for Trump allies. While not strictly an op-ed, the letter (publicly released and covered extensively in media) functions as a pointed public critique, detailing alleged abuses of the center's $268 million budget.Key Allegations in
Whitehouse's Letter
Whitehouse's letter, obtained by outlets like The New York Times and CBS News, cites internal documents (contracts, invoices, and facility agreements) gathered by his committee staff. He claims these reveal:
Millions in lost revenue: Waived or steeply discounted rental fees for non-arts events, including a $5 million fee waiver for FIFA's three-week takeover of the center (November-December 2025) for the 2026 World Cup draw announcement. Another example: A $21,993 discount (from ~$42,000) for the American Conservative Union Foundation's "ending Christian persecution" summit in October 2025, with waived fees for recording, lighting, and broadcasting.
Preferential treatment for Trump allies: Deep discounts for events like a NewsNation town hall (framed as benefiting "well-funded political allies") and contracts to Grenell's associates, such as a $15,000/month deal for "policy research and speechwriting" to a former colleague (with no clear link to arts programming) and $10,833/month to Jeff Halperin (husband of Trump advisor Kari Lake) for social media services.
Luxury spending and waste: Tens of thousands in reimbursements for meals, champagne, and Watergate Hotel rooms, amid reports of plummeting ticket sales (down 43% since September 2025, per The Washington Post) and canceled programming. Whitehouse argues this shows a "profound disregard for fiduciary responsibility," betraying the center's bipartisan mission as a national cultural hub.
Whitehouse requested detailed records on finances, ethics, contractors, and audits by December 4, 2025. As Democrats lack subpoena power in the Republican-controlled Senate, this is an investigative request rather than a full probe. He has discussed these issues publicly, including on MSNBC's All In with Chris Hayes on November 20, 2025, framing it as part of broader Trump-era corruption.
Grenell's Response and CounterclaimsGrenell swiftly rebutted Whitehouse in a detailed letter posted on X (formerly Twitter) on November 20, 2025, calling the allegations "careless," "inaccurate," and based on "anonymous sources, inaccurate gossip, and partisan reporters" without fact-checking. Key defenses:
Financial improvements: The center now has a "balanced budget for the first time in decades," with $117 million raised in fundraising (up dramatically) and staff cuts (development department from 94 to 16). Grenell claims prior leadership (under Biden appointees) left the center in debt, using reserves for salaries and neglecting maintenance.
Event specifics: FIFA is providing $7.4 million (including sponsorships), not using the space for free. The NewsNation event was bipartisan (featuring Democrats Chris Cuomo and Sen. John Fetterman), not a Trump favor. Discounts are standard for high-profile events that boost visibility.
No show cancellations: Grenell implemented a "break-even policy" for programming—events must be donor- or ticket-funded, not subsidized by taxpayers.
Threat of legal action: Grenell warned of suing The New York Times (which first reported Whitehouse's letter) if it doesn't correct the record, accusing it of amplifying falsehoods.
The Kennedy Center echoed this in statements, calling Whitehouse's claims "baseless partisan attacks" amid record fundraising.
Whitehouse's Attendance Record as a Board Member
Whitehouse serves as an ex officio member of the Kennedy Center Board of Trustees, a statutory role for the ranking member of the relevant Senate committee (established by Congress). However, his engagement has been minimal:
No prior service or invitations: Whitehouse's office states he "did not serve on the Kennedy Center board prior to this year, nor has he ever been invited to attend a board meeting." This contradicts Grenell's claim that Whitehouse is a longtime member who has skipped meetings.
Zero attendance under current leadership: As an ex officio member, he has not attended any board meetings, events, or programs since the 2025 transition, per Kennedy Center spokesperson Roma Daravi. Critics, including Grenell supporters on X, argue this undermines his sudden "new-found interest" in oversight.
Context: Ex officio roles are often ceremonial or oversight-focused rather than hands-on; Whitehouse's involvement appears limited to his committee's jurisdictional authority over federal funding (~$50 million annually for the center).
This lack of direct participation has fueled accusations that Whitehouse's critique is politically motivated rather than born of insider knowledge.Credibility as an Unbiased CriticWhitehouse's credibility here is sharply contested, reflecting broader partisan divides. Supporters view him as a principled watchdog; detractors see hypocrisy and bias.
Undermining Whitehouse's Credibility
Whitehouse has a track record of anti-Trump probes (e.g., on climate denial and Supreme Court ethics). This fits his pattern of holding power accountable, as praised by outlets like NPR and Playbill.
Accusations of selective outrage: Grenell highlights Whitehouse's membership in the all-white Bailey's Beach Club in Rhode Island (a segregated private club he has defended). X users and conservative media (e.g., Fox News, RedState) label his probe a "witch hunt" timed for post-election Democratic retaliation.
Factual Disputes
Reports of declining attendance (36% drop in subscriptions) and potential opera exodus (Washington National Opera considering leaving due to cost pressures) lend weight to revenue-loss claims.
Grenell's point-by-point rebuttal (e.g., FIFA's actual $7.4M payment) suggests factual errors in Whitehouse's letter, eroding trust. He reportedly tipped off The New York Times before Grenell responded, per insiders.
Public Perception
Progressive X posts and media (e.g., CBS, WaPo) amplify his allegations as evidence of "grift." MSNBC appearances reinforce his role as a corruption fighter.
Conservative backlash (e.g., Daily Caller, Newsmax) portrays him as a "petty" partisan, with X memes mocking his club ties and non-attendance. Broader critiques note Whitehouse's history of inflammatory rhetoric (e.g., calling opponents "fanatics" on Obamacare).
Overall Assessment: Whitehouse's critique is superficially substantive backed by documents, making it a credible exercise of congressional oversight—especially given the center's public funding and reports of financial strain under new leadership. However, his non-attendance as a board member and the partisan framing (targeting Trump allies amid low Democratic power) invite valid questions about bias. Grenell's rebuttals highlight potential inaccuracies, suggesting Whitehouse's team rushed without full verification. This feud exemplifies post-2024 election tensions, with no resolution yet—Grenell has until December 4 to respond fully, but subpoenas are off the table.