Donald Trump Attends Les Misérables at Kennedy Center — Audience Reaction Divides the Room
US President Donald Trump was met with loud boos and jeers during the opening night of Les Misérables at the Kennedy Centre in Washington DC on 11 June 2025. It was his first high-profile appearance at the venue since appointing himself chairman. Some audience members applauded, chanting 'USA', while others turned their backs, turning the evening into a politically charged spectacle. Divided Audience Reflects Show's Themes
The mixed reaction echoed the musical's core themes of revolution and redemption. While some welcomed President Trump's presence, critics voiced concern over his conservative changes at the Centre. These included the cancellation of Pride-themed events and drag performances. Drag Artists Lead Pride Month Protest
Outside the venue, drag performers and LGBTQ+ activists staged a protest timed for World Pride Month. They waved placards and chanted against the president's record on LGBTQ+ rights and his role in cancelling inclusive programming. Organisers said his presence at such a symbolic event was a direct affront to the values of Pride. Performers Boycott in Silent Protest
Reports suggest at least ten members of the touring cast chose not to perform. Though not officially confirmed, sources close to the production say these absences were a silent protest. Many in the arts community remain critical of the president's track record on inclusion and expression. A Cultural Institution Under Fire
The Kennedy Centre, long regarded as a champion of diversity, is now seen by some as politically compromised. President Trump's leadership and appointments to cultural boards have led to concerns over censorship and the politicisation of the arts. Several artists and board members have stepped down in response.
Supporters claim the Centre is simply shifting direction. However, the decision to cut Pride events and reshape programming has fuelled fears of artistic regression. Night of Protest Raises Big Questions
The evening raised more than £7.8 million (US$10 million) for the Centre. Yet the backlash highlighted deep divisions in American culture. Protesters outside and dissent within the audience made clear that the president's appearance was not just symbolic — it was controversial. What It Means Public response : Cheers met boos in a rare clash of culture and politics on stage.
: Cheers met boos in a rare clash of culture and politics on stage. LGBTQ+ backlash : Pride Month protests spotlight ongoing concerns over rights and visibility.
: Pride Month protests spotlight ongoing concerns over rights and visibility. Art vs politics: The Kennedy Centre must choose whether to protect creative freedom or bow to political tides. Final Word
President Trump's appearance sparked more than applause or protest. It ignited a national debate on culture, politics and identity. As the arts and politics grow more entangled, institutions like the Kennedy Centre face mounting pressure to define what they stand for. The curtain may have fallen on Les Misérables , but the larger drama continues.
Originally published on IBTimes UK
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
26 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
Israel Attack On Iran Tests Trump Promise Not To Be Dragged Into War
For President Donald Trump, few goals on the world stage have been more explicit -- he will not drag the United States into another "forever war." Yet Israel's massive strikes on Iran will test that promise as never before, potentially setting up a showdown with his base as Trump decides how much support the United States will offer. Trump had publicly called for Israel not to strike as he sought a negotiated solution, and his roving envoy Steve Witkoff had been scheduled to meet Iranian officials for the sixth time Sunday. Trump, who hours earlier warned that a strike would cause "massive conflict," afterward praised Israeli strikes as "excellent" and boasted that Israel had "the best and most lethal military equipment anywhere in the world" thanks to the United States -- and was planning more strikes unless Iran agrees on a deal. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, however, has insisted that the United States was not involved in the strikes and warned Iran not to retaliate against the thousands of US troops stationed in nearby Arab countries. "The US has calculated that it can help Israel and that the Iranians will obviously be aware of this, but at the end of the day, at least at the public level, the US stays out," said Alex Vatanka, founding director of the Iran program at the Middle East Institute in Washington. The hope is that "the Iranians will do a quick cost/benefit analysis and decide it is not worth the fight," Vatanka said. He said Iranian leaders are for now focused on staying alive, but could decide either to swallow a tough deal -- or to internationalize the conflict further by causing chaos in the oil-rich Gulf, potentially sending oil prices soaring and pressuring Trump. Most key lawmakers of Trump's Republican Party quickly rallied behind Israel, whose prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is a hero for many on the US right. But Trump's populist "America First" base has been skeptical. Tucker Carlson, the prominent media commentator who counseled Trump against a US strike on Iran in the first term, has called fears of Tehran building a nuclear bomb overblown, saying neither Iran nor Ukraine warrants US military resources. Trump has brought outspoken non-interventionists into his administration. In an unusually political video this week, Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, warned after a visit to Hiroshima that "warmongers" were putting the world at risk of nuclear catastrophe. In a speech in Riyadh last month, Trump denounced decades of US interventionism in the Middle East and said, "My greatest hope is to be a peacemaker and to be a unifier. I don't like war." Daniel Shapiro, who served as US ambassador to Israel under former president Barack Obama, said he was certain the United States would support Israel in defense against Iranian retaliation. But Trump will face a harder decision on "whether to use the United States' unique capabilities to destroy Tehran's underground nuclear facilities and prevent an Iranian nuclear weapon," said Shapiro, now at the Atlantic Council. "The decision will split his advisers and political base, amid accusations, and perhaps his own misgivings, that Netanyahu is attempting to drag him into war." Lawmakers of the rival Democratic Party widely revile Netanyahu, including over Israel's bloody offensive in Gaza. "This attack by Netanyahu is pure sabotage," said Democratic Representative Joaquin Castro. "What does 'America First' even mean if Trump allows Netanyahu to drag the country into a war Americans don't want?" he wrote on social media. Netanyahu has long insisted that Iran's ruling clerics -- who support Hamas in Gaza -- pose an existential threat to Israel. The strikes came after Iran defiantly said it would ramp up output of highly enriched uranium, playing hardball ahead of US talks. Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the progressive Center for International Policy, said that China -- identified by Trump as the top threat -- could seize the moment, perhaps by moving on Taiwan, as it sees the United States as even more distracted. "Even without direct involvement, Washington now faces the prospect of indefinite resupply, intelligence and diplomatic backing for Israel, just as the war in Ukraine intensifies and global crises multiply," Toossi said. "Wars are easy to ignite, but once unleashed, they tend to spiral beyond control, and rarely end on the terms of those who start them." US President Donald Trump shakes hands with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as Netanyahu departs the White House in Washington, DC, in April 2025 AFP
Int'l Business Times
26 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
UN Summit Celebrates Ocean Protections, But Drops Fossil Fuels
A global oceans summit concludes Friday with nations taking major steps toward marine protection and vowing a showdown over deep-sea mining, but criticised for leaving fossil fuels off the agenda. Countries hoping for new financial pledges to assist with combating rising seas and overfishing were also left disappointed at the UN Ocean Conference in France. More than 60 heads of state and government joined thousands of business leaders, scientists and environmental campaigners over five days in the southern city of Nice. The United Nations says the world's oceans are facing an "emergency" and the Nice gathering was just the third -- and the largest yet -- dedicated entirely to the seas. Activists unanimously praised concrete progress toward ratifying a landmark pact to protect marine life in the 60 percent of oceans that lie beyond national waters. "This week's ratifications of the high seas treaty mark a major milestone for ocean action," said Rebecca Hubbard from the High Seas Alliance. Some 19 countries formally ratified the treaty at Nice, taking the overall tally to 50. Sixty nations are needed to enact the treaty. France's special envoy for the oceans, Olivier Poivre d'Arvor, said the numbers would be ready in time for a formal ratification ceremony in September in New York. The treaty should then take effect in January 2026, he added. The conference sought to rally global action on marine protection as countries prepare to tussle over global rules for deep-sea mining in July and a plastics treaty in August. More than 90 ministers issued a symbolic call in Nice for the hard-fought plastics treaty to contain limits on consumption and production of new plastics, something opposed by oil-producing nations. The summit rallied a defence of science and rules-based oversight of common resources -- most notably the unknown depths of the oceans -- in a direct rebuke of US President Donald Trump. Trump was not present in Nice and rarely mentioned by name but his spectre loomed large as leaders backed the global multilateralism he has spurned. In particular, leaders condemned Trump's push to fast-track seabed mining, vowing to resist his unilateral efforts to exploit the ocean floor. Leaders "made it unmistakably clear: deep-sea mining is one of the biggest threats facing our ocean, and the world is saying no," said Sofia Tsenikli from the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition. French President Emmanuel Macron called it "madness" while Brazil's Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva warned against a "predatory" race for critical minerals. But a global alliance opposed to deep-sea mining, and spearheaded by France, only attracted four new members during the summit, taking the total to 37 nations. Poivre d'Arvor said the alliance would flatly reject any call at a meeting of the International Seabed Authority next month to permit deep-sea exploration. The authority, backed by the UN, has 169 member states. Many nations took the opportunity to unveil plans to create vast new marine protected areas and restrict bottom trawling, which was recently captured in grisly detail in a new David Attenborough documentary. Activists had wanted countries to go further, advocating for a total ban on the destructive fishing method that sees heavy nets dragged across the ocean floor. Some 8.7 billion euros ($10 billion) was committed over the next five years by philanthropists and private investors for the sustainable development of ocean economies. But pledges were less forthcoming from wealthy governments, with France announcing two million euros for climate adaptation in Pacific Island nations. The summit will close later Friday with a joint political statement, negotiated over many months between nations, that critics slammed for omitting any reference to fossil fuels -- the key driver of ocean warming. Laurence Tubiana, CEO at the European Climate Foundation, said Nice showed global cooperation was still possible "but let's not confuse signatures with solutions". "No communique ever cooled a marine heatwave," she said. Former US special climate envoy John Kerry, who was present in Nice, said in a statement that it was impossible to "protect the ocean without confronting the biggest root cause bringing it to the breaking point: the pollution from unabated fossil fuels pumped into the atmosphere".
Int'l Business Times
26 minutes ago
- Int'l Business Times
El Salvador President and Trump Ally Bukele Accused of Cutting Deals With MS-13 Gang Members Using U.S. Aid
In the first months of the Trump administration, the U.S. president found a close ally in El Salvador leader Nayib Bukele, particularly by making a deal to quickly deport Venezuelan migrants believed to be Tren de Aragua gang members and house them in the country's mega-prison known as CECOT. But despite Bukele often making himself the face of the fight against gangs and violence, a new investigation reveals he may have cut a deal with the leaders of the MS-13 gang in the early years of his presidency. The bombshell investigation comes from ProPublica , which gathered information from a long-running U.S. investigation of MS-13 as an effort to dismantle the gang's leadership and later expanded to focus on whether the Bukele government cut a secret deal with the gang in the early years of his presidency. According to ProPublica, Bukele's allies blocked extraditions of gang leaders whom U.S. agents viewed as potential witnesses to the negotiations and persecuted Salvadoran law enforcement officials who helped the task force. The report from the U.S. government was led by Joint Task Force Vulcan, a multiagency law enforcement team created at Trump's request in 2019. Further, the investigation suggests that the Bukele government may have diverted U.S. aid funds to the gang as part of the alleged deal to provide it with money and power in exchange for votes and reduced homicide rates. In 2021, agents drew up a request to review U.S. bank accounts held by Salvadoran political figures to look for evidence of money laundering related to the suspected diversion of U.S. funds. The list of names revealed Bukele, as well as other senior officials and their relatives, were involved in that scheme. "Information obtained through investigation has revealed that the individuals contained within this submission are heavily engaged with MS-13 and are laundering funds from illicit businesses where MS-13 is involved," the agents wrote. The people on the list "are also believed to have been funding MS-13 to support political campaigns, and MS-13 has received political funds." The alleged pact between the Salvadoran government and gang members is nothing new. In fact, previous Salvadoran administrations had made agreements to improve prison conditions and shorten sentences of convicted gang leaders in exchange for tamping down crime, World Politics Review reports. And even before Bukele became president in 2019, an El Faro investigation revealed that Bukele himself also made deals with gangs while serving as mayor of San Salvador. However, the actual deals that Bukele's government made with gang members went much further, willing to renegotiate violence inflicted by the gang, USAID grants and electoral votes, World Politics Review reports. The new report comes as the U.S. and El Salvador remain in a close relationship due to the Central American country's willingness to help with the Trump administration's anti-immigration policies and rhetoric. Earlier this year, President Trump and President Bukele sat down in the Oval Office in the White House to celebrate their new, extraordinary deal in which El Salvador agreed to take Venezuelan migrants accused of being gang members into their maximum security prison. President Trump and El Salvador president Nayib Bukele Likewise, one of Secretary of State Marco Rubio's first foreign visits was to El Salvador to meet Bukele. In that visit, they discussed immigration and gang violence and laid the groundwork for what would become a highly contested and legally challenged deportation plan. "We can send them, and he will put them in his jails," Rubio said after his trip of migrants of all nationalities detained in the U.S. "And, he's also offered to do the same for dangerous criminals currently in custody and serving their sentences in the United States even though they're U.S. citizens or legal residents." Originally published on Latin Times
