In their words: How recent presidents have honored America's fallen on Memorial Day
WASHINGTON (AP) — From Arlington National Cemetery outside the nation's capital to the American burial ground in Normandy, France, presidents customarily commemorate Memorial Day on hallowed ground.
In somber wreath-laying ceremonies and poignant speeches, presidents remember the military members who died serving the country, even as many Americans associate the holiday with a three-day weekend and shopping sales.
Here's a look at what recent presidents have said on Memorial Days past. All spoke at Arlington in Virginia, except for President George W. Bush:
RONALD REAGAN
'The willingness of some to give their lives so that others might live never fails to evoke in us a sense of wonder and mystery. One gets that feeling here on this hallowed ground. And I have known that same poignant feeling as I looked out across the rows of white crosses and stars of David in Europe, in the Philippines and the military cemeteries here in our own land. Each one marks the resting place of an American hero.' — May 31, 1982.
'My fellow Americans, on this Memorial Day, let us commit ourselves to a future worthy of their sacrifice.' — May 25, 1998.
GEORGE W. BUSH
'The day will come when no one is left who knew them. When no visitor to this cemetery can stand before a grave remembering a face and a voice. The day will never come when America forgets them. Our nation and the world will always remember what they did here, what they gave here, for the future of humanity.' — May 27, 2002; Colleville-sur-Mer, France.
BARACK OBAMA
'Our nation owes a debt to its fallen heroes that we can never fully repay, but we can honor their sacrifice, and we must.' May 30, 2011.
DONALD TRUMP
'They were generals and privates, captains and corporals, of every race, color, and of every creed. But they were all brothers and sisters in arms. And they were all united then, as they are united now forever, by their undying love of our great country.' — May 28, 2018.
JOE BIDEN
'This is the mission of our time. Our memorial to them must not be just the day when we pause and pray. It must be a daily commitment to act, to come together, to be worthy of the price that was paid.' May 30, 2022.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
33 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Chris Hayes: Trump's 'secret police': Masked agents' sweeping immigration raids raise concern
This is an adapted excerpt from the June 5 episode of 'All In with Chris Hayes.' The term 'secret police' invokes a kind of haunting specter. When we see representations of it in movies or history, we immediately identify it with a certain kind of regime: One that tramples people's liberty with no accountability. We associate it with authoritarian governments and dictatorships like the former Soviet Union, where people, usually armed, could wield the authority of the state but were, themselves, totally unaccountable in the same way. Whatever issues there are with American policing — and there are many — at least our police officers have names on their uniforms and badge numbers. But now, in the era of immigration under Donald Trump, one cannot help but notice that in clip after clip, interaction after interaction, the people enforcing the president's policies have all the qualities that one would associate with the concept of 'secret police.' In videos, these individuals are usually masked and either wearing plain clothes or irregular uniforms. They won't give their names or say what agency they're with. Watching it feels wrong, weird, alien and menacing. It does not feel like these law enforcement officials are subject to the authority of a democratic government. It's so striking, in scene after scene, to see regular people asking masked agents, 'Who are you?' and 'What are you doing?' and not receiving an answer. That's what we saw play out in one of the first videos of this kind to be made public: The arrest of Columbia student and lawful resident Mahmoud Khalil. In that video, you can see plainclothes officers apprehending Khalil in the lobby of his building. The officers pointedly refused to identify themselves or what agency they were with. 'We don't give our name,' one man said, after handcuffing and detaining a legal resident of the United States. Not long after that, we got video of the arrest of Tufts University graduate student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was snatched off the street by masked agents and led away in handcuffs. In New Bedford, Massachusetts, there was the chilling scene from last month in which masked agents broke a car window and forcibly removed a man they say was in the country illegally. Just last weekend, in Great Barrington, Massachusetts, masked agents detained an apparently undocumented gardener at his place of work. In San Diego that same weekend, residents tried to hold back what appeared to be militarized agents who were reportedly executing an immigration raid on local businesses. We've also got allegations of all kinds of lies, manipulation and subterfuge. Eyewitnesses in Tucson, Arizona, allege agents posed as city utility workers as part of an arrest attempt. There have been reports of agents performing wellness checks on children, which critics say is a trap for immigration enforcement. All this feels like something distinct from the normal forms of policing and law enforcement that we're used to. As the writer M. Gessen, who was born in the then-Soviet Union, put it in a column for The New York Times: 'The United States has become a secret-police state. Trust me, I've seen it before.' 'The citizens of such a state live with a feeling of being constantly watched. They live with a sense of random danger,' Gessen wrote. 'Anyone — a passer-by, the man behind you in line at the deli, the woman who lives down the hall, your building's super, your own student, your child's teacher — can be a plainclothes agent or a self-appointed enforcer.' This administration is treating people as if they have no rights, as if they can be rounded up at whim without any due process. That is the legal theory of the Trump administration. It believes that immigrants in this country don't have rights, even though that's very clearly not true. The Constitution is clear on this, and precedent is clear on this: Immigrants have due process rights. But the Trump administration seems to believe the state can do whatever it wants to people. According to Trump's border czar, Tom Homan, the agents in these videos are wearing masks for their own safety. 'They wear a mask because they're trying to protect themselves and their families,' Homan said on Fox News. 'Agents are getting doxed every day, their pictures and phone numbers being put on telephone poles. These leftists are following and filming when they go home from work at night.' In a statement to NBC News about these recent immigration crackdowns, Assistant Homeland Security Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said, 'Under Secretary Noem, we are delivering on President Trump's and the American people's mandate to arrest and deport criminal illegal aliens and make America safe.' This article was originally published on
Los Angeles Times
33 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
DOGE employees can search Social Security records, Supreme Court says
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court cleared the way Friday for the DOGE team that had been led by Elon Musk to examine Social Security records that include personal information on most Americans. Acting by a 6-3 vote, the justices granted an appeal from President Trump's lawyers and lifted a court order that had barred a team of DOGE employees of freely examining Social Security records. 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances,' the Social Security Administration, or SSA, 'may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work,' the court said in an unsigned order. In a second order, the justices blocked the disclosure of DOGE operations as agency records that could be subject to the Freedom of Information Act. The court's three liberals — Justices Ketanji Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan — dissented in both cases 'Today, the court grants 'emergency' relief that allows the Social Security Administration (SSA) to hand DOGE staffers the highly sensitive data of millions of Americans,' Jackson wrote. 'The Government wants to give DOGE unfettered access to this personal, non-anonymized information right now—before the courts have time to assess whether DOGE's access is lawful.' The legal fight turned on the unusual status of the newly created Department of Governmental Efficiency. This was a not true department, but the name given to the team of aggressive outside advisors led by Musk. Were the DOGE team members presidential advisors or outsiders who should be not given access to personal data? While Social Security employees are entrusted with the records containing personal information, it was disputed whether the 11 DOGE team members could be trusted with same material. Musk had said the goal was to find evidence of fraud or misuse of government funds. He and DOGE were sued by labor unions who said the outside analysts were sifting through records with personal information which was protected by the privacy laws. Unless checked, the DOGE team could create highly personal computer profiles of every person, they said. A federal judge in Maryland agreed and issued an order restricting the work of DOGE. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, Obama appointee, barred DOGE staffers from have accessing to the sensitive personal information of millions of Americans. But her order did not restrict the Social Security staff or DOGE employees from using data that did not identify persons or sensitive personal information. In late April, the divided 4th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to set aside the judge's order by a 9-6 vote. Judge Robert King said the 'government has sought to accord the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) immediate and unfettered access to all records of the Social Security Administration ('SSA') — records that include the highly sensitive personal information of essentially everyone in our country.' But Trump Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court and said a judge should not 'second guess' how the administration manages the government. He said the district judge had 'enjoined particular agency employees — the 11 members of the Social Security Administration (SSA) DOGE team—from accessing data that other agency employees can unquestionably access, and that the SSA DOGE team will use for purposes that are unquestionably lawful. ... The Executive Branch, not district courts, sets government employees' job responsibilities.' Sauer said the DOGE team were seeking to 'modernize SSA systems and identify improper payments, for instance by reviewing swaths of records and flagging unusual payment patterns or other signs of fraud. The DOGE employees 'are subject to the same strict confidentiality standards as other SSA employees,' he said. Moreover, the plaintiffs 'make no allegation that the SSA DOGE team's access will increase the risk of public disclosure.' He said checking the personal data is crucial. 'For instance, a birth date of 1900 can be telltale evidence that an individual is probably deceased and should not still receive Social Security payments, while 15 names using the same Social Security number may also point to a problem,' he said.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
DOGE can access sensitive Social Security records, Supreme Court rules
The Department of Government Efficiency can have unimpeded access to sensitive Social Security records for millions of people, the Supreme Court ruled Friday. The justices granted the Trump administration's emergency request to lift a lower-court order that had blocked a DOGE team assigned to the Social Security Administration from viewing or obtaining personal information in the agency's systems. The court's majority provided no detailed explanation for its ruling, but in a three-paragraph unsigned order, the majority wrote: 'We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work.' The three liberal justices dissented. In a 10-page dissent, Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote that the decision creates 'grave privacy risks for millions of Americans.' Trump administration lawyers claimed the DOGE team members needed unfettered access to Social Security's data in order to detect and halt fraudulent payments, but a federal judge in Maryland ruled that the breadth of DOGE's access violated federal law and put the data at risk of intentional or unintentional disclosure. The legal fight over DOGE's access to Social Security data is one of several that broke out in the early weeks of Trump's second term as the budget-slashing team overseen by Tesla and SpaceX founder Elon Musk fanned out across the federal government. In response to lawsuits, federal judges also limited DOGE access to sensitive databases at the Treasury and Education departments, as well as the Office of Personnel Management. Some of the restrictions have been eased over time as the Trump administration convinced the judges that adequate safeguards were in place to avoid disclosure of personal information. U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, a Baltimore-based Obama appointee, blocked DOGE's access to Social Security's databases, which include tax and wage reports as well as retirement and disability payments. In her March ruling, she concluded that the access granted to the cost-cutting team violated the Privacy Act because agency officials did not show that it was necessary to include identifying information in order to carry out the search for fraudulent payments. Justice Department lawyers defending the move offered only 'cursory, circular statements' to justify the DOGE team's access, the judge said. However, Solicitor General John Sauer told the Supreme Court that the limits Hollander imposed interfered with President Donald Trump's ability to carry out his 'critically important' agenda to eliminate wasteful spending and update archaic systems at federal agencies. 'Employees charged with modernizing government information systems and routing [sic] out fraud, waste, and abuse in data systems plainly need access to those systems,' Sauer wrote. 'District courts should not be able to wield the Privacy Act to substitute their own view of the government's 'needs' for that of the President and agency heads.' In her dissent Friday, Jackson said the government had presented 'next to nothing' to explain what harm the DOGE operation or the Social Security Administration would suffer if the limits the lower-court ordered remained in place. The Biden-appointed justice also contended that her conservative colleagues were bending the court's usual standards to allow the Trump administration to pursue its favored course of action. 'It seems as if the Court has truly lost its moorings,' Jackson wrote, joined by Justice Sonia Sotomayor. 'The Court is … unfortunately, suggesting that what would be an extraordinary request for everyone else is nothing more than an ordinary day on the docket for this Administration.' Justice Elena Kagan also dissented from the court's order, but did not provide any explanation of her views. Among the projects DOGE staffers were working on at Social Security was one targeting improper payments to dead people. Trump has frequently falsely claimed that large numbers of deceased people receive Social Security checks, including earlier this year during a high-profile address in March to a joint session of Congress. 'One person is listed at 360 years of age … More than 100 years older than our country,' Trump said. 'But we're going to find out where that money is going, and it's not going to be pretty.' Musk also made staggering claims, suggesting in a social media post that 20 million people over 100 years of age were receiving Social Security. However, computer experts said most of the outlandishly implausible ages were the product of a default setting in the 60-year-old COBOL programming language, which interprets incomplete or missing age data as the system's oldest possible date in 1875. Musk's term as a special government employee ended last week with Trump hosting an Oval Office send-off for the tech entrepreneur. While the pair were upbeat and complimentary there, Musk's escalating attacks on Trump's budget bill currently before Congress led to a spectacular flame-out of the relationship in recent days, with Trump threatening to cut government contracts to Musk's businesses and Musk accusing Trump of delaying the release of FBI records that could be embarrassing to him.
