Trump criticizes Smithsonian portrayal of slavery amid call for review
Trump wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform that he would direct his attorneys to "review" the Smithsonian in the same way his administration has sought to reshape colleges and universities. The post comes a week after the White House announced it was subjecting the influential museum consortium to an unprecedented examination of its materials, signaling it had become a focal point in Trump's efforts to transform cultural institutions.
In his post, Trump wrote that museums all over the country are the "last remaining segment of 'woke.'"
"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 -- Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future," Trump wrote.
Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., reacted with a post on X, writing that if "Trump thinks slavery wasn't bad, he clearly needs to spend more time in a museum."
Roughly 17 million people visited one of the Smithsonian's 21 museums and galleries last year.
Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lonnie Bunch III, who is the first African American to lead the institution and has held the position since 2019, has previously commented on the importance of acknowledging slavery's impact on American history.
"I believe strongly that you cannot understand America without understanding slavery, that our notions of freedom, our notions of liberty are juxtaposed with our notions of enslavement," he said in an interview on Face the Nation in 2021. "And so I think that it's not about pointing blame, it's not about remembering difficult moments just to hurt."
Last week, three White House aides wrote to Bunch in a letter notifying him the museum would be subject to a review 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 reshaping of the Smithsonian and its galleries and museums has been part the Trump administration's goal to remove left-leaning ideology from the federal government and cultural institutions.
In March, Trump signed an executive order directing the Smithsonian to eliminate "divisive" and "anti-American ideology" from its museums, pointing to exhibits that "promoted narratives that portray American and Western values as inherently harmful and oppressive."
He also named himself chairman of the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts, seemingly in opposition to its having hosted performances he disagreed with for promoting so-called woke ideology. The move prompted many performances and performers to cancel shows.
Copyright 2025 UPI News Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
People Are Calling Trump's Latest Truth Social Rant "Outrageous" After He Slammed American Museums For Discussing "How Bad Slavery Was"
It's been 159 years since slavery was legally abolished in the U.S, and yet, in 2025, discussing the history of slavery has seemingly become too "woke" for the MAGA crowd. During a recent CNN panel discussion, MAGA-supporting celebrity Jillian Michaels shocked her colleagues after she argued that slavery shouldn't be blamed on "just one race," — meaning white Americans. CNN / Twitter: @Acyn Related: Well, President Donald Trump recently took to Truth Social to argue a similar point, criticizing American museums that discuss "how bad slavery was," calling them "woke" and "out of control." He wrote that he's instructed his attorneys to "go through the museums" and make changes to reflect "success" and "brightness." Here's the full post. Related: The now-viral post has been seen by over 10.2 million people and received thousands of comments criticizing Trump for his rhetoric. One person called Trump "out of his damn mind," and advocated for the history of slavery to be taught "again and again." Related: Another person described Trump's post as "pro slavery rhetoric." While this person called the president "fragile" for feeling attacked by teaching slavery. Representative Jim McGovern advised Trump to "spend more time in a museum." Related: And Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of trying to "erase" slavery... And finally, this person asked: "Why do the same people who want to erase the history of slavery insist on preserving the Confederate flag and generals?" What are your thoughts? Let us know in the comments below. Also in In the News: Also in In the News: Also in In the News:
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American
When President Donald Trump first declared a crime emergency in the nation's capital and sent hundreds of federal law enforcement agents to patrol its streets, this district resident had a hard time taking it too seriously. The initial images of bored Drug Enforcement Administration agents strolling past perplexed joggers on the National Mall were more clownish than carceral. Local street resistance to the occupation was limited to a drunk guy throwing a sandwich at a federal agent. But inevitably, as this operation has dragged on, things have taken a darker turn. The sandwich-thrower was overcharged and rearrested in a needless, publicized show of force. Masked federal agents have set up an unconstitutional checkpoint, violently arrested at least one delivery driver, and filmed themselves tearing down a banner protesting their presence in the city. Each day, more and more National Guard members pour into the capital. The conversation about Trump's declared crime emergency has understandably, albeit unhelpfully, provoked a lot of discourse about how safe D.C. is, whether a federalized local police department will make it safer, whether federal agents are being deployed in the right places and going after the right crimes, and on and on. This incessant crime conversation has distracted from just how un-American Trump's show of force in the nation's capital is. Uniformed troops and masked federal agents doing routine law enforcement at the command of the president is just not how we do things in the United States. The entire point of the U.S. Constitution is to prevent the federal government from becoming a despotism, and one of the primary ways it does this is by limiting how many men with guns it has at its disposal. This is why the Constitution places strict constraints on maintaining a standing army. It's why there are only three crimes mentioned in the Constitution, none of which would plausibly require federal agents to patrol U Street. It's why questions of what to criminalize and who to prosecute were largely left up to the states. The Third Amendment is mostly treated as an anachronistic joke today. In fact, it is a load-bearing part of the Constitution that makes clear that the military and the police are different things and that Americans should not have to tolerate the presence of armed agents of the states as a routine part of daily life. Obviously we've deviated considerably from this ideal since the founding generation. The federal criminal code is now extensive. The feds' wars on drugs, terror, and immigration have grown the number of militarized federal agents doing law enforcement activities. Federal money has subsidized a similar trend of militarization of state and local police forces. Reason has been decrying this trend for decades. In his book Rise of the Warrior Cop, Radley Balko writes about how the trend of increased police militarization has eroded the "Symbolic Third Amendment" and the free society it protects. It's darkly ironic then that, after decades of politicians of both parties in D.C. gifting the federal government vast powers to police the rest of the country, a militarized federal police force is now being deployed on the streets of America's capital against its residents. This is why arguments about whether federal agents could be more effectively deployed in less visible, higher crime areas of the city are completely beside the point. The federal government acting as a beat cop is inimical to our constitutional design, regardless of how effective its efforts are. That D.C. is a federal district might seem to complicate this point. In fact, it reinforces it. Despite being a constitutionally peculiar special district, a lot of effort has been put into giving D.C. a local police force that does not practically function as an arm of the federal government. Even in the seat of federal power, it's understood that a force of federal agents policing everyday life is not something ordinary citizens should have to put up with. That Trump has the power to federalize the D.C. police or deploy the D.C. National Guard doesn't stop his actions from being authoritarian and offensive to the spirit of the Constitution, even if it doesn't violate the letter of it. It's also cold comfort that Trump's declared crime emergency is clearly mostly a performative act to rile up the libs and not a serious effort at combating crime. While the president is staging the performance, it's disconcerting that he's opted to cast himself as the villain in the play. Moreover, the longer federal agents are deployed on D.C. streets, the greater the odds that more serious abuses do happen. It's true that D.C. today is not as locked down as it has been in recent years. The police-enforced curfews during the George Floyd protests or the security cordons that sprang up after the January 6 riots were a lot more visible and heavy-handed. Excessive as those police actions were (particularly the latter), they were at least being done as an emergency response to widespread breakdowns in public order. Trump is rolling out the feds in D.C. to do routine law enforcement. That's un-American. The post Trump's D.C. Goon Squads Are Un-American appeared first on Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Obama applauds Newsom's California redistricting plan as 'responsible' as Texas GOP pushes new maps
Former President Barack Obama has waded into states' efforts at rare mid-decade redistricting efforts, saying he agrees with California Gov. Gavin Newsom's response to alter his state's congressional maps, in the way of Texas redistricting efforts promoted by President Donald Trump aimed at shoring up Republicans' position in next year's elections. 'I believe that Gov. Newsom's approach is a responsible approach. He said this is going to be responsible. We're not going to try to completely maximize it,' Obama said at a Tuesday fundraiser on Martha's Vineyard in Massachusetts, according to excerpts obtained by The Associated Press. 'We're only going to do it if and when Texas and/or other Republican states begin to pull these maneuvers. Otherwise, this doesn't go into effect.' While noting that 'political gerrymandering' is not his 'preference,' Obama said that, if Democrats 'don't respond effectively, then this White House and Republican-controlled state governments all across the country, they will not stop, because they do not appear to believe in this idea of an inclusive, expansive democracy.' According to organizers, the event raised $2 million for the National Democratic Redistricting Committee and its affiliates, one of which has filed and supported litigation in several states over GOP-drawn districts. Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Eric Holder, who served as Obama's attorney general and heads up the group, also appeared. The former president's comments come as Texas lawmakers return to Austin this week, renewing a heated debate over a new congressional map creating five new potential GOP seats. The plan is the result of prodding by President Donald Trump, eager to stave off a midterm defeat that would deprive his party of control of the House of Representatives. Texas Democratic lawmakers delayed a vote for 15 days by leaving the state in protest, depriving the House of enough members to do business. Spurred on by the Texas situation, Democratic governors including Newsom have pondered ways to possibly strengthen their party's position by way of redrawing U.S. House district lines, five years out from the Census count that typically leads into such procedures. In California — where voters in 2010 gave the power to draw congressional maps to an independent commission, with the goal of making the process less partisan — Democrats have unveiled a proposal that could give that state's dominant political party an additional five U.S. House seats in a bid to win the fight to control of Congress next year. If approved by voters in November, the blueprint could nearly erase Republican House members in the nation's most populous state, with Democrats intending to win the party 48 of its 52 U.S. House seats, up from 43. A hearing over that measure devolved into a shouting match Tuesday as a Republican lawmaker clashed with Democrats, and a committee voted along party lines to advance the new congressional map. California Democrats do not need any Republican votes to move ahead, and legislators are expected to approve a proposed congressional map and declare a Nov. 4 special election by Thursday to get required voter approval. Newsom and Democratic leaders say they'll ask voters to approve their new maps only for the next few elections, returning map-drawing power to the commission following the 2030 census — and only if a Republican state moves forward with new maps. Obama applauded that temporary timeline. 'And we're going to do it in a temporary basis because we're keeping our eye on where we want to be long term,' Obama said, referencing Newsom's take on the California plan. 'I think that approach is a smart, measured approach, designed to address a very particular problem in a very particular moment in time.' ___ Kinnard can be reached at
