New Trump Portrait Donated by White House Hangs in Colorado Capitol After Earlier One Drew His Ire
The new portrait by Tempe, Arizona, artist Vanessa Horabuena is a sterner, crisper image than Sarah Boardman's painting of Trump that had hung since 2019. Last spring, Trump posted on social media that Boardman must have lost her talent as she got older and purposely distorted him – criticisms the Colorado Springs artist denied. The next day, lawmakers announced they would remove the portrait from a wall of past presidents. By the day after that, Boardman's painting was gone, put into museum storage.
The Horabuena portrait, donated by the White House a month or so ago, went up this week after a Thursday decision by Lois Court, a former state lawmaker who chairs the Capitol Building Advisory Committee that helps select artwork for the Capitol in downtown Denver. 'There was a blank on the wall. It seemed inappropriate. We knew that the White House had sent us this replacement, and it simply made sense to put it up,' Court said. 'The White House donated the Horabuena portrait a month or so ago,' Court said.
Horabuena is a Christian worship artist who has done several other depictions of Trump as well as Abraham Lincoln, Mount Rushmore, and Jesus Christ, according to her website. On Tuesday, the Colorado statehouse was sleepy with lawmakers out of session and no schoolchildren visiting the historic building. A smattering of tourists took photos of the new portrait. Horabuena did not return a phone message Tuesday seeking comment.
'Thank you to the Highly Talented Artist Vanessa Horabuena and the incredible people of Colorado!' Trump posted Tuesday on his social media platform Truth Social.
The portrait and others of past presidents might not remain up for long. The advisory committee is considering whether to replace them with portraits of past governors to mark the 150th anniversary of Colorado statehood next year.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Arabiya
an hour ago
- Al Arabiya
No peace, just pause: Iran and Israel's fragile standoff
Following President Donald Trump's announcement of a ceasefire agreement between Iran and Israel, many questions remain about the durability of such an arrangement after years of proxy conflict – culminating recently in a direct 12-day aerial exchange of fire. The nature of the agreement itself remains shrouded in ambiguity. Trump has yet to disclose the terms accepted by the Iranian and Israeli sides, and it is still unclear whether Washington and Tehran will return to the nuclear negotiation table, talks that had previously collapsed. At this stage, all involved parties share an interest in halting hostilities, suggesting that the agreement may hold – at least temporarily – until strategic calculations shift. The United States, exhausted by protracted Middle East conflicts, has little appetite for a new drawn-out war. Iran, for its part, appears more open to temporary deals due to its declining capabilities and escalating internal crises. Trump himself faced a divided political base: Between isolationists wary of foreign entanglements and pro-Israel hawks who see American and Israeli interests as inherently aligned. From Israel's perspective, continuing the war may have yielded diminishing returns, especially after achieving key strategic goals – such as depleting Iran's missile stockpiles and weakening the IRGC through targeted strikes – without triggering a full-scale confrontation. Preserving unity with Washington and avoiding embarrassment for the Trump administration were also decisive factors in accepting a truce. Tehran, meanwhile, has little desire to provoke the US and seeks to end Israeli strikes on its facilities. Continued escalation raises the risk of direct confrontation with Washington – not just Tel Aviv – at a time when Iran is facing severe domestic pressures. With each passing day of war, the risk of regime collapse – or at least conditions that could lead to it – increases. A ceasefire may reassure regional actors concerned about Iran's nuclear ambitions, though they are even more alarmed by the prospect of a devastating war to prevent them. Still, Tehran remains cautious about offering nuclear concessions without real guarantees that Israel will not resume its attacks – especially given past episodes where Trump greenlit Israeli strikes despite ongoing negotiations. Since the October 7, 2023, attack, Netanyahu's government has embraced a national security doctrine focused on regional dominance rather than peace, making any long-term deal with Iran appear unlikely. Despite suffering serious blows to its nuclear infrastructure and missile capabilities, the Iranian regime remains intact and is seeking opportunities to rebuild its military strength. While this task will be difficult and expensive, it is not impossible, given the Iranian regime's history of resilience. The region has just witnessed one of the most dangerous flashpoints in the long-standing tension between Tehran and Tel Aviv. Israel views its latest strikes as a 'relative success,' having neutralized much of Iran's air defenses and secured near-total aerial freedom over Iranian skies. Iran responded with a barrage of missiles and drones – some of which penetrated Israeli defenses – focusing on dense population centers like Tel Aviv and employing a staggered timing strategy to stretch Israeli response capabilities. However, Tehran's retaliation failed to deter further Israeli escalation. Tel Aviv describes its operations as 'preemptive strikes,' though their scope and context suggest objectives beyond halting Iran's nuclear program – possibly even undermining the regime or dismantling its high command structure. Since the Iran-Iraq war, Tehran has demonstrated political flexibility that often surprises its adversaries. Its leadership follows a strategy of 'tactical retreats' that serve broader long-term goals. The regime may concede when cornered but consistently aims to regain lost ground. While Tehran may express readiness for sanctions relief and deals with the West, it still views resistance to Western domination as the cornerstone of its ideology. Any major retreat would be interpreted as a defeat after decades of struggle. Though frequently floated as a response to Israeli or American aggression, the threat of closing the Strait of Hormuz remains largely impractical. Such a move would not serve Iran's interests – it could provoke a harsh international backlash and alienate China, Iran's largest oil customer. Alternative routes through the UAE and Oman also limit the effectiveness of such a threat. In fact, Iran itself would suffer most from the closure, as the bulk of its imports pass through the strait. Furthermore, much of the strait lies in Omani waters and spans up to 60 miles in width, making complete Iranian control virtually impossible. Overall, Israel has used successive airstrikes to dismantle Iranian defenses and maintain aerial superiority, effectively forcing Iran to divert its missile arsenal from offensive operations to defense – thus constraining Tehran's ability to take initiative. In response, Iran has embraced a policy of escalation-for-escalation, calculating that showing weakness would cost it dearly in future negotiations. Tehran also appears to be betting that such escalation will generate internal pressure on Netanyahu's government and destabilize Israel's economy through precise, intermittent strikes on populated and strategic areas. Ultimately, this ceasefire does not signal a strategic shift toward peace. Rather, it reflects a moment of 'mutual deterrence' within a fragile balance – one that could shift quickly with any change in power dynamics or political will.
Arab News
4 hours ago
- Arab News
Paramount to pay $16 million in settlement with Trump over ‘60 Minutes' interview
In a case seen as a challenge to free speech, Paramount has agreed to pay $16 million to settle a lawsuit filed by President Donald Trump over the editing of CBS' ' 60 Minutes' interview with then-Vice President Kamala Harris in told media outlets the money will go to Trump's future presidential library, not to the president himself. It said the settlement did not involve an lawyer said the president had suffered 'mental anguish' over the editing of the interview by CBS News, while Paramount and CBS rejected his contention that it was edited to enhance how Harris sounded. They had sought to get Trump's lawsuit was no immediate word from the White House about the settlement of the case, which Trump filed in Amarillo, case has been closely watched by advocates for press freedom and by journalists within CBS, whose lawyers called Trump's lawsuit 'completely without merit' and promised to vigorously fight it after it was early February, '60 Minutes' released a full, unedited transcript of the the settlement reached with help of a mediator, Paramount agreed that '60 Minutes' will release transcripts of future interviews of presidential candidates, 'subject to redactions as required for legal and national security concerns,' CBS News cited the statement as who did not agree to be interviewed by '60 Minutes' during the campaign, protested editing where Harris is seen giving two different answers to a question by the show's Bill Whitaker in separate clips aired on '60 Minutes' and 'Face the Nation' earlier in the day. CBS said each reply came within Harris' long-winded answer to Whitaker, but was edited to be more president's lawyer, Edward Andrew Paltzik, said that caused confusion and 'mental anguish,' misleading voters and causing them to pay less attention to Trump and his Truth Social and controlling shareholder Shari Redstone were seeking the settlement with Trump, whose administration must approve the company's proposed merger with Skydance Media. CBS News President and CEO Wendy McMahon and '60 Minutes' executive producer Bill Owens, who both opposed a settlement, have resigned in recent Freedom of the Press Foundation, a media advocacy group that says it is a Paramount shareholder, has said that it would file a lawsuit in protest if a settlement was December, ABC News settled a defamation lawsuit by Trump over statements made by anchor George Stephanopoulos, agreeing to pay $15 million toward Trump's presidential library rather than engage in a public fight. Meta reportedly paid $25 million to settle Trump's lawsuit against the company over its decision to suspend his social media accounts following the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the US Capitol.
Al Arabiya
5 hours ago
- Al Arabiya
Press review: President Trump's ‘big beautiful bill'
In this episode of The Dailies, Rawia Alami takes a look at important news stories, reports, analysis, and articles published in newspapers and media outlets across the world. American newspapers focused on the Republicans Senators' vote on several proposed amendments to US President Donald Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' in an attempt to gain the support undecided Republicans. The performance of the US dollar, the war in Gaza, and the aftermath of the Israel-Iran conflict continued to draw the attention of global news outlets.
