Trump wants to honor traitors and racist myths in our national parks and shrines
I have a report to make about two inappropriate, if not anti-American, displays planned for our public spaces — by the Trump administration itself.
The first concerns the National Park Service's plan to install the statue of a traitorous American who fought for an enemy country in a war against the U.S. that cost the lives of hundreds of thousands of U.S. soldiers. His name is Albert Pike, a Confederate army general whose outdoor statue in Washington D.C. was toppled during the George Floyd protests in 2020.
By levying war against the U.S. government and aiding and abetting its enemies, Pike's behavior fits the constitutional definition of treason. And, according to historian Allen W. Trelease in 'White Terror,' Pike 'may well have been affiliated' with the Reconstruction Ku Klux Klan, the most savage domestic terrorist organization in American history.
The second is even worse: Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is planning to restore a monument that celebrates slavery to Arlington National Cemetery — which, while not a national park, is considered the nation's ' most hallowed ' ground.
'The Reconciliation Monument,' as it is formally known, was unveiled in 1914. It includes grotesque imagery: an enslaved Black man following his owner and an enslaved woman cradling the baby of a Confederate officer (described on the cemetery's website as a 'mammy').
In 2023, the bipartisan Naming Commission established by Congress ordered the removal of the monument. Retired Army Brigadier General Ty Seidule, the commission's vice chair, called it 'the cruelest I've ever seen because it's a pro-slavery, pro-segregation, anti-United States monument meant to say that the white South was right and the United States of America was wrong.'
Hegseth defended returning the monument by saying 'we're proud of our history.' That includes American slavery, apparently. Hegseth recently reposted on social media a seven-minute news clip about the self-described Christian nationalist co-founder of his church denomination. Among many other controversial things the pastor says in the clip, he doubles down on an assertion he made decades earlier, that slave owners and slaves had 'a mutually affectionate relationship.'
Shouldn't a secretary of Defense know something about American history, especially the Civil War and the barbarity of slavery, which is nothing to be proud of?
The monument bears an inscription that describes the Civil War as the 'Lost Cause,' the revisionist myth — call it 'Confederate woke' — that the South's enslaved were happy and content and that the war was fought not over slavery, but over states' rights. In fact, Alexander Stephens, the vice president of the Confederate States of America, declared at the war's outset that the Confederacy was founded upon 'the great truth that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery — subordination to the superior race — is his natural and normal condition.'
By restoring a pro-slavery monument to Arlington, Hegseth is not honoring our history but dishonoring the Union soldiers buried in the cemetery. It became necessary to create Arlington in 1864 because by then Northern cemeteries were running out of room for dead Union soldiers. But their sacrifice ended slavery in the U.S.
The Civil War, in which as many as three-quarters of a million men died, was not fought over an abstract theory of federalism. The Confederacy cannot be separated from the cause for which it fought. 'If slavery is not wrong, nothing is wrong,' as Lincoln said.
When you visit our parks and shrines, please report anti-American messaging such as this.
Gregory J. Wallance was a federal prosecutor in the Carter and Reagan administrations and a member of the ABSCAM prosecution team, which convicted a U.S. senator and six representatives of bribery. He is the author of 'Into Siberia: George Kennan's Epic Journey Through the Brutal, Frozen Heart of Russia. '
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
27 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump tax law could cause Medicare cuts if Congress doesn't act, CBO says
WASHINGTON — The federal budget deficits caused by President Trump's tax and spending law could trigger automatic cuts to Medicare if Congress does not act, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported Friday. The CBO estimates that Medicare, the federal health insurance program for Americans over age 65, could potentially see as much as $491 billion in cuts from 2027 to 2034 if Congress does not act to mitigate a 2010 law that forces across-the-board cuts to many federal programs once legislation increases the federal deficit. The latest report from CBO showed how Trump's signature tax and spending law could put new pressure on federal programs that are bedrocks of the American social safety net. Trump and Republicans pledged not to cut Medicare as part of the legislation, but the estimated $3.4 trillion that the law adds to the federal deficit over the next decade means that many Medicare programs could see cuts. In the past, Congress has always acted to mitigate cuts to Medicare and other programs, but it would take some bipartisan cooperation to do so. Democrats, who requested the analysis from CBO, jumped on the potential cuts. 'Republicans knew their tax breaks for billionaires would force over half a trillion dollars in Medicare cuts — and they did it anyway,' Rep. Brendan Boyle of Pennsylvania, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said in a statement. 'American families simply cannot afford Donald Trump's attacks on Medicare, Medicaid and Obamacare.' Hospitals in rural parts of the country are already grappling with cuts to Medicaid, which is available to people with low incomes, and cuts to Medicare could exacerbate their shortfalls. As Republicans muscled the bill through Congress and are now selling it to voters back home, they have been critical of how the CBO has analyzed the bill. They have also argued that the tax cuts will spur economic growth and pointed to $50 billion in funding for rural hospitals that was included in the package. Groves writes for the Associated Press.
The Hill
27 minutes ago
- The Hill
CEO of paid protest company says it works with both sides of the aisle
(NewsNation) — President Trump alleged Friday that Democrats are paying protesters to fight his Washington, D.C., crime policies. But how do paid protests actually work? NewsNation spoke with Adam Swart, the CEO of Crowds on Demand, about his company that provides services 'for impactful advocacy campaigns, demonstrations, PR stunts, crowds for hire and corporate events,' according to its website. 'All of our protesters are sincere advocates for the cause at hand. We've been in business 13 years, so we have a large roster of people we know and have networks of others we can call upon to be compensated for expressing their sincere points of view,' Swart said. Swart said compensation for protests is typically in the low hundreds of dollars, depending on the assignment. He said organizing a protest 'is like buying an ad.' He said his company receives requests for both conservative and liberal causes. 'We have been clear that we work with both liberals and conservatives on causes that align with common-sense values. Democrats are hiring our company, and so are Republicans,' he said. He did not disclose what protests his company has been asked to be a part of. Swart previously told NewsNation that he turned down $20 million to provide protesters for ' Good Trouble Lives On ' protests in July. 'I'm rejecting it not because I don't want to take the business, but because frankly, this is going to be ineffective; it's going to make us all look bad,' Swart said of the anti-Trump protests at the time.
San Francisco Chronicle
27 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Judge denies Trump administration request to end a policy protecting immigrant children in custody
McALLEN, Texas (AP) — A federal judge ruled Friday to deny the Trump administration's request to end a policy in place for nearly three decades that is meant to protect immigrant children in federal custody. U.S. District Judge Dolly Gee in Los Angeles issued her ruling a week after holding a hearing with the federal government and legal advocates representing immigrant children in custody. Gee called last week's hearing 'déjà vu' after reminding the court of the federal government's attempt to terminate the Flores Settlement Agreement in 2019 under the first Trump administration. She repeated the sentiment in Friday's order. 'There is nothing new under the sun regarding the facts or the law. The Court therefore could deny Defendants' motion on that basis alone," Gee wrote, referring to the government's appeal to a law they believed kept the court from enforcing the agreement. In the most recent attempt, the government argued they made substantial changes since the agreement was formalized in 1997, creating standards and policies governing the custody of immigrant children that conform to legislation and the agreement. Gee acknowledged that the government made some improved conditions of confinement, but wrote, 'These improvements are direct evidence that the FSA is serving its intended purpose, but to suggest that the agreement should be abandoned because some progress has been made is nonsensical.' Attorneys representing the federal government told the court the agreement gets in the way of their efforts to expand detention space for families, even though Trump's tax and spending bill provided billions to build new immigration facilities. Tiberius Davis, one of the government attorneys, said the bill gives the government authority to hold families in detention indefinitely. 'But currently under the Flores Settlement Agreement, that's essentially void,' he said last week. The Flores agreement, named for a teenage plaintiff, was the result of over a decade of litigation between attorneys representing the rights of migrant children and the U.S. government over widespread allegations of mistreatment in the 1980s. The agreement set standards for how licensed shelters must provide food, water, adult supervision, emergency medical services, toilets, sinks, temperature control and ventilation. It also limited how long U.S. Customs and Border Protection could detain child immigrants to 72 hours. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services then takes custody of the children. The Biden administration successfully pushed to partially end the agreement last year. Gee ruled that special court supervision may end when HHS takes custody, but she carved out exceptions for certain types of facilities for children with more acute needs. In arguing against the Trump administration's effort to completely end the agreement, advocates said the government was holding children beyond the time limits. In May, CBP held 46 children for over a week, including six children held for over two weeks and four children held 19 days, according to data revealed in a court filing. In March and April, CPB reported that it had 213 children in custody for more than 72 hours. That included 14 children, including toddlers, who were held for over 20 days in April. The federal government is looking to expand its immigration detention space, including by building more centers like one in Florida dubbed ' Alligator Alcatraz,' where a lawsuit alleges detainees' constitutional rights are being violated. Gee still has not ruled on the request by legal advocates for the immigrant children to expand independent monitoring of the treatment of children held in U.S. Customs and Border Protection facilities. Currently, the agreement allows for third-party inspections at facilities in the El Paso and Rio Grande Valley regions, but plaintiffs submitted evidence showing long detention times at border facilities that violate the agreement's terms.
