White House Labels Rep. Jasmine Crockett a “Moron” Over Misleading Ballroom Critique
In what may be a first in White House history, Texas Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett was publicly called a “moron” after misrepresenting information about a White House construction project.
The incident unfolded Thursday when Crockett took to social media platform X, attempting to criticize President Donald Trump by suggesting that his top priority was building a new ballroom at the White House. In her post, she wrote:
“Today, the White House Press Secretary told the country that this ridiculous damn ballroom is ‘the president’s main priority’ …not reopening the government, not lowering the cost of groceries, not lowering the cost of housing, not lowering the cost of healthcare….building a ballroom.”
The White House quickly pushed back, clarifying that Crockett had mischaracterized Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt’s remarks, which were taken entirely out of context. The gaffe drew widespread attention and prompted sharp reactions from political commentators, with many questioning Crockett’s judgment and accuracy in representing official statements.
The exchange highlights the growing scrutiny over how lawmakers engage on social media, especially when amplifying claims about executive priorities. In this instance, the White House did not hesitate to label the representative’s misstep in blunt terms, signaling a new level of direct pushback against public figures it perceives as spreading misinformation.
Today, the White House Press Secretary told the country that this ridiculous damn ballroom is “the president’s main priority”…not reopening the government, not lowering the cost of groceries, not lowering the cost of housing, not lowering the cost of healthcare….building a…
— Congresswoman Jasmine Crockett (@RepJasmine) October 23, 2025
This is accurate: Leavitt did describe the ballroom as Trump’s priority, but her remarks were explicitly in the context of ongoing White House renovations, not a summary of the president’s full agenda. The selective framing by Texas Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett was widely criticized as a misleading omission.
The White House’s official rapid response account, Rapid Response 47, responded bluntly, calling Crockett a “moron”—a rare, if not unprecedented, direct rebuke from an official White House social media platform. The post read:
“Not what she said and you know it, moron. Stop lying. She was answering a question specifically about construction projects on the White House grounds.”
The original exchange centered on a reporter’s question:
QUESTION: “In addition to the ballroom and the Rose Garden patio, is the President looking at any other renovations or significant kind of projects here at the White House?”
@PressSec:
Leavitt’s comments were narrowly focused, making Crockett’s broader characterization demonstrably misleading.
Not what she said and you know it, moron. Stop lying. She was answering a question specifically about construction projects on the White House grounds.
QUESTION: “In addition to the ballroom and the Rose Garden patio, is the President looking at any other renovations or…
— Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) October 23, 2025
Turning Point USA spokesman Andrew Kolvet directly countered the Democratic Party’s official X account, which had amplified Crockett’s misleading claim, by posting footage showing that Leavitt was explicitly asked about White House renovations. The video clearly aligns with the quote Rapid Response 47 shared in response to Crockett’s post.
The misfire highlights that Crockett’s attack was poorly conceived. It raises the question: was she acting with malicious intent, or simply lacking the judgment to assess the context? Her claim was easily debunked, and it strains credibility to suggest she hadn’t reviewed the footage before posting. Once again, her party’s approach in this instance underscores a pattern of remarkably inept political maneuvering.
Jerry Nadler DESTROYED: Kash Patel Dismantles the Democrats’ Legal Hit Job! Democrats’ Plot Unraveled
Jerry Nadler DESTROYED: Kash Patel Dismantles the Democrats’ Legal Hit Job! Democrats’ Plot Unraveled
Jerry Nadler’s Reckoning: FBI Referral Shatters the Illusion of Oversight
Washington, D.C. — The House Judiciary Committee chamber was silent, not with peace, but with the pressure of long-avoided accountability. Congressman Jerry Nadler, once the architect of partisan oversight, faced the music not as the inquisitor, but as the investigated.
The Evidence Mounts
FBI Director Cash Patel presented a thick folder stamped “Oversight, Suppression, and Political Weaponization: Subject—Rep. Gerald Nadler.” Patel’s calm delivery belied the gravity of the evidence:
43 subpoenas issued under Nadler’s leadership, 42 aimed at Republicans, zero at Democrats.
Ignored complaints and referrals involving Hunter Biden, Hillary Clinton, and Fonnie Willis.
Suppressed internal memos and audits, contracts routed to Democrat-aligned firms, and public funds repurposed for political strategy.
Patel exposed Nadler’s selective use of oversight, revealing a system weaponized to protect allies and punish opposition. “You didn’t just break trust. You rewrote the rules so you’d never be held to them,” Patel said.
Federal Consequences
The hearing ended with Patel submitting a formal criminal referral to the Department of Justice, citing:
Obstruction of congressional oversight
Misuse of public funds
Suppression of whistleblower testimony
Ethical misconduct
Within hours, headlines blared Nadler’s fall from grace. The DOJ confirmed a federal investigation. Nadler’s own party withdrew support, donors backed away, and his district turned hostile.
The Collapse of a Narrative
The House swiftly voted to strip Nadler of his committee leadership, followed by an overwhelming censure. Editorial boards, once defenders, now called for his resignation. Polls showed voters wanted a special election; primary challengers surged.
Pam Bondi, who initiated the inquiry, summed it up: “This isn’t a political victory. It’s a constitutional correction.”
A Legacy Unraveled
Nadler’s final statements were defensive and hollow. The man who once wielded the gavel with confidence now faced the consequences of years spent weaponizing oversight for partisan ends. The system he used to protect himself finally turned against him—not with outrage, but with process.
Jerry Nadler’s downfall wasn’t dramatic—it was inevitable. He wasn’t undone by rivals, but by the paper trail he left behind. The gatekeeper is gone. The illusion of partisan immunity has collapsed. And in its place stands a stark reminder: justice is not optional, and accountability is not partisan.
