President Trump complains 'woke' Smithsonian is too focused on 'how bad slavery was'
WASHINGTON − President Donald Trump said the Smithsonian museums in Washington are too fixated on "how bad slavery was" and other negative aspects of United States history as he promised to take aim at the "WOKE" elements inside them.
Trump's remarks, made in an Aug. 19 social media post on Truth Social, came after he last week launched a review of the Smithsonian Institution and its 21 museums to remove "divisive or partisan" elements and determine whether its materials conformed to the Trump administration's views on teaching history.
"The Museums throughout Washington, but all over the Country are, essentially, the last remaining segment of 'WOKE,' " Trump said in his post. "The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been."
More: Trump administration launches Smithsonian review to remove 'divisive' materials
Trump added that the Smithsonian museums contain "Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future."
"We are not going to allow this to happen," he said, comparing his review of the Smithsonian Institution to his administration's work to root out diversity, equity and inclusions initiatives from colleges and universities. "This Country cannot be WOKE, because WOKE IS BROKE. We have the 'HOTTEST' Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it, including in our Museums."
Federal funds make up about 62% of the annual budget of the Smithsonian, which is a public-private partnership established by Congress.
The National Museum of African American History and Culture, which the Smithsonian opened in 2016, has comprehensive exhibits on the history of slavery in the United States beginning with the transatlantic slave trade.
Trump's review is set to intially focus on eight Smithsonian museums. The list includes the National Museum of African American History and Culture, as well as the National Museum of American History; National Museum of Natural History; National Museum of the American Indian; National Air and Space Museum; Smithsonian American Art Museum; the National Portrait Gallery; and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden.
More: Civil rights leaders rally around National Museum of African American History
White House officials announced the review in an Aug. 12 letter to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch III, writing that the initiative aims to "ensure alignment with the President's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism, remove divisive or partisan narratives, and restore confidence in our shared cultural institutions."
The letter stated that within 120 days, the Smithsonian is expected to begin making "content corrections where necessary, replacing divisive or ideologically driven language with unifying, historically accurate, and constructive descriptions."
More: Trump's Smithsonian review will start with 8 out of 21 museums. Which ones?
The review will focus on Smithsonian exhibits, along with the process for creating them. It is expected to be completed early next year, which is the 250th anniversary of the nation's founding.
In a statement last week on the White House review, the Smithsonian said it would "continue to collaborate constructively with the White House."
"The Smithsonian's work is grounded in a deep commitment to scholarly excellence, rigorous research, and the accurate, factual presentation of history. We are reviewing the letter with this commitment in mind," the statement reads.
Contributing: Zac Anderson
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
6 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fed Found Over 22,000 Mortgages Like Those Pulte Is Flagging
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump and his allies are demanding Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook resign over alleged owner-occupancy fraud — a practice the central bank itself has found to be 'broad-based' across the US. Philadelphia Fed researchers in a 2023 report assessed the number of 'fraudulent investors' in the mortgage market, which they defined as those who had more than one owner-occupied home purchase loan within four quarters after the first one was originated. Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte has said that Cook took a mortgage on a property in Ann Arbor, Michigan, stipulating that it would be her primary residence, and then two weeks later declared the same for another mortgage on a Georgia property. Why New York City Has a Fleet of New EVs From a Dead Carmaker Trump Takes Second Swing at Cutting Housing Assistance for Immigrants Chicago Schools Seeks $1 Billion of Short-Term Debt as Cash Gone A London Apartment Tower With Echoes of Victorian Rail and Ancient Rome The paper's data set consists of 584,499 loans made from 2005 to 2017. Of those, 22,431 were considered fraudulent. The share of those claiming occupancy for better mortgage terms peaked ahead of the 2008 financial crisis, though remained steady for much of the ensuing decade at about 2% to 3%. The findings are based on a subsample of data, meaning the number of mortgages fitting the central bank's criteria could be higher. The researchers also caution that there are likely cases of accidental occupancy fraud, such as when borrowers were unable to sell their original home because of a worse-than-expected real estate market. Scrutinizing the mortgages of Cook, who was nominated to the Fed by former President Joe Biden, appears to be the latest way in which Trump and his allies are using novel methods to pressure the central bank to lower interest rates. The president said Wednesday that Cook 'must resign now,' while Pulte claimed his accusations give him 'cause to fire' her. If she were forced out, it would create another opening for Trump to appoint someone who would likely push for more aggressive rate cuts. Pulte said 'anybody can go look at these public documents' from Cook in a CNBC interview Wednesday. He cited four criminal statutes for Attorney General Pam Bondi to probe for potential charges. No charges have been filed and it's not clear whether she will investigate. Ronel Elul, a senior economic adviser and economist at the Philadelphia Fed who co-authored the 2023 report, didn't elaborate beyond what was in the paper when reached for comment. The Fed declined to comment. Cook, in a statement Wednesday, said she has 'no intention of being bullied to step down from my position because of some questions raised in a tweet.' She added that she is 'gathering the accurate information to answer any legitimate questions and provide the facts.' David Joffe, a federal criminal defense attorney in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, said in his experience, occupancy cases are rare. Still, 'like anything else, if you look at it under a microscope you're bound to find something that's wrong,' he said in an interview. Mortgage fraud cases tend to relate to overstating assets and income rather than misstating a primary residence, said Stephen Cazares, a former federal prosecutor who's now a defense lawyer at Foundation Law Group. Those based solely on a home being falsely identified as a primary residence are 'unusual' but 'not unheard of,' he said. They're rare because the theoretical loss to a financial institution is lower in cases based on primary residence, where the lender 'basically got cheated out of a higher interest rate' rather than the value of the home, Cazares said. The Philadelphia Fed report found that about a third of all property investors misrepresent their status as owner-occupants. It found that doing so allowed them to obtain lower interest rates and higher loan-to-value ratios. 'This type of fraud is difficult to detect until long after the mortgage has been originated,' the researchers said in their paper. Cook's mortgages in question were from 2021. Trump's administration has also made mortgage fraud allegations against California Senator Adam Schiff and New York Attorney General Letitia James. Both are Democrats and political foes of Trump. --With assistance from Erik Larson. (Updates with Cook statement starting in ninth paragraph.) Foreigners Are Buying US Homes Again While Americans Get Sidelined What Declining Cardboard Box Sales Tell Us About the US Economy Women's Earnings Never Really Recover After They Have Children Survived Bankruptcy. Next Up: Cultural Relevance? Americans Are Getting Priced Out of Homeownership at Record Rates ©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump isn't trying to ‘erase history' at Smithsonian — he's reversing a destructive woke takeover
Liberals were up in arms this week after President Trump said he wanted a review of the Smithsonian Institute — saying their displays were too negative, and too focused on slavery. But Trump isn't trying to 'erase history,' he's looking to reverse a woke movement that has indeed rewritten the American story to highlight suffering rather than providing a balanced picture of our past. Trump's criticism that the Smithsonian is overly focused on slavery is not unreasonable: In nearly every exhibit, critical race theory in general, or slavery specifically, makes an appearance. For instance, its new Benjamin Franklin exhibit on his innovations includes a whole section on slavery — with assumptions, but no proof, that slaves assisted Franklin in his electrical innovations. Even if they hadn't, the curators argue that without their work around the house, Franklin couldn't have spent the time on his experiments! 'Franklin held people enslaved during the time he pursued his electrical experiments. Their labor in his household helped make time that he could use to study electricity. Family, friends, and visitors directly participated in electrical experiments. The records are few and unclear, but enslaved people may also have directly assisted his research.' Another example of the obsession with slavery comes from the National Portrait Gallery; nearly every early Founding Father's description includes a statement on slavery. For example, the description for Thomas Jefferson includes the statement: 'Although Jefferson once called slavery 'an abominable crime,' he consistently enslaved African Americans, including his late wife Martha's half-sister, Sally Hemings, with whom he had several children.' The overemphasis on the history of slavery is a fairly recent development, an offshoot of the Black Lives Matter movement. In 2019, Lonnie G. Bunch III took over as the Secretary of the Smithsonian. Prior to that, Bunch was the founding director of the Smithsonian's National Museum of African American History and Culture, which is nearly exclusively focused on the legacy of slavery, with exhibits such as In Slavery's Wake, Slavery and Freedom, and Make Good the Promise, which deal with the history of slavery. Also in 2019, the Smithsonian collaborated with the New York Times on its 1619 Project, which falsely claims that the United States started, not with the Declaration of Independence or Revolutionary War, but when the first slave ship arrived. As curator Mary Elliot remarked at the time: 'This is a shared history, everyone inherited the legacies of slavery.' But America's history is more than just about slavery, and not everyone inherited this legacy — after all, America is also a nation of immigrants who came after the Civil War. In the Smithsonian 2020 annual report, more obsession with slavery comes into view. The Smithsonian is on a mission to have a completely searchable digital museum called 'The Searchable Museum Initiative.' One may think it would begin with digitization of some our greatest moments in history, such as the landing on the moon, the passing of the US Constitution, or even its great Natural History collections. You would be wrong; the digitization began 'with the museum's Slavery and Freedom exhibition.' The annual report claims that 'The Searchable Museum will provide rich, interactive, digital experiences that match the immersive experience of a visit to the physical museum' — unfortunately, likely as biased as a visit to the museum themselves. The problem with modern museums is not just about the obsession with slavery; it's also about dishonestly painting all of American history as evil and full of horrors — with little or no redeeming qualities. For instance, in the Smithsonian's American Indian Museum in NYC, George Washington hardly gets a mention, but his silhouette is used in a description of him as a 'town destroyer' — supposedly a nickname that Native Americans still use to describe our first President. And yet there's no mention in either of the American Indian Museums — in NYC or DC — about slavery practiced by Native Americans, both before Europeans' arrival and afterward. For example, the Cherokee owned slaves. In 1835, 15,000 Cherokee owned 1,592 African slaves; by the Civil War onset, 17,000 Cherokee owned 4,000 African slaves. While museums should provide an honest account of history, they should not be afraid to showcase and celebrate American achievement, which includes ending slavery. At present, however, museums seem more interested in pushing a woke, revisionist history of the United States. With two new Smithsonian museums in development, the National Museum of the American Latino and the Smithsonian American Women's History Museum, we can expect more of the same — unless we take action against woke propaganda now. Elizabeth Weiss is a professor emeritus of anthropology at San José State University and author of 'On the Warpath: My Battles with Indians, Pretendians, and Woke Warriors.'
New York Post
7 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump's DC takeover is just Step 1 — dysfunctional capital needs a bigger fix
Last week President Donald Trump declared war on crime in Washington, DC, when he sent in the National Guard and federalized the district's police force for the 30-day period allowable under the DC Home Rule Act. Trump's motives were good: He's right that it's shameful our national capital has become one of our most dangerous cities. He's also right that DC's crime epidemic hurts America's competitiveness and prestige. But the president's month-long law enforcement takeover won't fix that problem — because the problem is not, at its core, bad law enforcement. It's the fact that DC's government has for decades now shown itself incapable of even the most basic level of public administration. Blame it, too, on Congress, which transferred control over the district to the city's own elected government in the Home Rule Act of 1973 — but has refused to admit its mistake and reverse course. Both the Senate and the House of Representatives remain aloof from the problems they created, even as federal staffers, visitors and on occasion their own members are routinely harassed and attacked by criminals on the streets and in their homes. But the US Constitution stipulates that DC is a national public resource, not a self-governing city like any other. Under the Constitution, it is Congress's responsibility to competently administrate it — and Congress has abdicated that responsibility. When the 30-day takeover period is up (assuming Congress does not renew his privileges), Trump will turn the keys back over to a capital city government that can't staff a police force, can't keep young violent offenders off the streets and can't run a functioning crime lab. District officials can't claim to have reduced crime without cooking the books, and can't protect visiting diplomats from being shot And they're not just failing at law enforcement: DC can't keep its public schools out of the basement of national performance rankings, and can't prevent huge homeless encampments from forming while thousands of district-owned public housing units go unoccupied. The only possible solution to such a crisis of mismanagement is to overturn the law that gave home rule to DC and start over from scratch. And if President Trump is serious about tackling the district's dysfunction, he should do just that. First, the president should build up some goodwill by ending his police federalization and troop occupation, preferably earlier than planned. No need to make excuses; he can simply explain that he's come to realize DC's dysfunction runs far deeper than anything a few extra officers on the streets can solve. Then he and Republican leadership should begin meeting with members of Congress on both sides of the aisle to generate support for Home Rule repeal. While Trump seems to think the entire district is dead set against him, this is incorrect: Many residents, while no fans of the president, are fed up with not being able to safely walk their dogs at night. Longtime Democratic members of Congress have personally experienced the city's dangers for many years, and they all know the ordeal of their colleague Angie Craig (D-Minn.), who was assaulted in her apartment building's elevator just two years ago. If Trump were to approach this issue firmly but collaboratively, he would find the water warmer than he thinks. Legally, the argument is not a hard sell. Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution says that Congress shall have 'exclusive legislation in all Cases whatsoever' over the federal district. Congress has given a 50-year trial to the notion of delegating its power to the people of DC, and that trial has unequivocally failed to produce a district that serves the interests of the federal government, the American people, or the residents themselves. Therefore, we should return to rule by Congress, as the Constitution mandates. Doing so would require a simple act of Congress, passed by both parties, that overturns the 1973 law and dismisses DC's elected representatives. A third section of the new law should establish a congressional committee to appoint exemplary city managers from cities around United States to reconstitute a competent DC government. In many American cities, like Madison, Wis., Phoenix, Ariz., and Wichita, Kan., elected officials appoint professional administrators to oversee day-to-day municipal operations. Washington, DC, should do the same — with Congress taking ultimate responsibility. Some on the left will bemoan the reversal of Home Rule as yet another federal assault on our democracy. But the District of Columbia was never intended by the Founders to be a self-governing state. It was intended to serve the interests of the country as a whole, by providing a safe and orderly place for public administration. Returning DC's governing prerogative to the people of America, not the district itself, will take us one step closer to being the republic the Founders envisioned. John Masko is a journalist specializing in business and international politics.
