Senator John Fetterman was “front and center” in the Washington Hilton’s ballroom during the shooting that occurred at the White House Correspondents’ Dinner, according to a statement released by the senior senator from Pennsylvania.

You would imagine that in his first public statement he would discuss the welfare of the president, who was the target of the gunman, or the dangers of political violence. Fetterman instead chose to promote one of President Donald Trump's pet projects, despite its lack of relevance.

“That venue wasn’t built to accommodate an event with the line of succession for the U.S. government. After witnessing last night, drop the TDS and build the White House ballroom for events exactly like these,” he wrote on social media.

This might initially seem like a reasonable reaction. The gunman got too close. Still, the man never entered the ballroom. Fetterman’s “front and center” was more like “on a different floor and down a hall.”

The assailant was stopped by Secret Service agents well before he got close to the doors, with only a handful of shots fired and only one federal agent (wearing a bulletproof vest) hit.

While he was able to circumvent some of the protocols established to protect the president (and the members of the line of succession who were there, like the vice president), our Commander-in-Chief was safe and safely removed. Some time later, the president was comfortable enough to recommend the event “go on.”

Some folks are born

Any shooting that has an outcome of minor injuries, despite someone charging in with multiple weapons, is worth praising. And maybe interrogating access and hotel-guest screening. The perpetrator could easily have killed someone well away from the ballroom, either law enforcement or bystanders. Our senator should be demanding explanations.

So why is Fetterman talking about a ballroom?

The ballroom in question is the new White House Ballroom, which currently requires Congressional support to continue construction, after a judge declared Trump’s demolition against the law (construction on underground bunkers for protection was approved). The venue would purportedly seat 900 people with all the benefits of on-site security at the White House.

The problem, of course, is that the White House Correspondent’s Dinner is not hosted by the White House. It’s hosted by the White House Correspondent’s Association, a nonprofit that represents journalists who cover the White House. And there is no way a private nonprofit would be able to entertain over 2,000 guests at a sub-1,000-seats government facility.

So, either Sen. Fetterman believes that every event the president attends in our nation’s capital should be hosted by the White House itself, or he’s taking advantage of the attempted assassination to push the president’s agenda — which is a weird move for a Democrat from Pennsylvania. But not an unusual move from this senator.

Silver spoon in hand

Jeffrey Evan Gold, CNN legal analyst, has a theory for Fetterman’s take: “Do you directly get the talking points from the GOP or just read about them?,” he wrote on social media. “No venue should hold the entire line of succession. Period.”

Gold is not wrong. No one forced Vice President JD Vance and other Cabinet members to attend the black-tie event. Normally, as with the State of the Union, the “line of succession” would not all be in the same space, even if it were held on White House grounds. But that didn’t stop Fetterman from supporting the ballroom instead of better safety protocols.

Another point for Jeffrey Evan Gold? Fetterman’s thoughts were echoed by his Republican colleagues, suggesting coordinated messaging from someone in the GOP that Fetterman listens to.

Take Sen. Tim Sheehy of Montana, who announced that he’d introduce a ballroom construction bill if no one else would: “It is an embarrassment to the strongest nation on earth that we cannot host gatherings in our nation’s capital, including ones attended by our President, without the threat of violence and attempted assassinations,” he wrote.

“A President of any party should be able to host events in a secure area without attendees worrying about their safety. This is common sense. Let’s get it done.”

I’m not sure that it’s an embarrassment to our country that some people make violent threats against the president and a tiny number try to carry them out. That’s a risk presidents take and nothing will protect them completely except keeping them in the White House 24/7.

In fact, after Charles Manson devotee Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme pulled a jammed trigger on President Gerald Ford in 1972, Secret Service tightened protocols and increased the number of agents who accompanied the president. Importantly, they did not cancel all future open-air visits, travel to California or handshaking for Ford or any future presidents.

Which is to say: Despite what happened to President Lincoln, our heads of state still go to the theater.

Don’t they help themselves

Some things, like going outside the bubble of White House grounds, are part of the job of being president. Even if the White House had a completed ballroom, the president would have accepted an invitation to the Washington Hilton.

If Sen. Fetterman wants to support Trump’s ballroom for other reasons, fine. He can do so. But in pretending that what happened at the White House Correspondent’s Dinner could have been prevented with a different venue, he revealed how deeply divorced he is from the realities on the ground.

No matter how “front and center” he might claim to be.

_____

©2026 PG Publishing Co. Visit at post-gazette.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.