Trump Aide Overseeing Smithsonian Pushes Lost Cause Myth

**Trump Targets Smithsonian to Censor Historical Narratives on Slavery**

The Trump administration’s recent initiative to review the Smithsonian Institution has sparked significant controversy due to accusations that it aims to censor critical discussions surrounding slavery in America. Lindsey Halligan, a special assistant to Trump, claimed that the Smithsonian exhibits place an “overemphasis on slavery” and suggested that they should instead highlight America’s progress since that era. This rhetoric aligns with Trump’s broader narrative to eliminate what he terms “woke” ideology from cultural institutions.

In a bizarre effort to reshape the nation’s historical narrative, Trump criticized the Smithsonian’s portrayal of slavery, asserting that it paints a negative picture of American history. He described the museum’s focus on slavery as indicative of a culture that refuses to acknowledge success and achievement in U.S. history. This manifests a disturbing trend where an administration seeks to rewrite history, erasing and minimizing the contributions and suffering of enslaved individuals.

Critics, including established historians, have pushed back against this revisionist approach. Historian Douglas Brinkley stated that it is nonsensical to diminish slavery’s significance when discussing American history, especially since it was a pivotal factor leading to the Civil War. The Smithsonian, in presenting the realities of slavery, provides essential context, as it deals robustly with human rights and civil rights issues alongside the history of slavery.

Furthermore, reports indicate that Trump’s administration has actively sought to promote a version of American exceptionalism that ignores the complex and painful aspects of the country’s past. The White House’s fact-sheet outlining its concerns with the Smithsonian’s exhibits has been criticized for straying from factual historical accuracy and displaying a clear bias against comprehensive learning about America’s past. Efforts like this only serve to exacerbate historical ignorance rather than educate the populace.

This push aligns with other actions taken by Trump, including reinstating names of military bases associated with Confederate leaders, thereby glorifying individuals who fought to maintain slavery. The attempt to sanitize U.S. history under the guise of restoring patriotism reflects a broader authoritarian approach to governance, revealing a clear intention to rewrite American history in favor of a racially biased narrative. The implications of such a campaign threaten the very foundation of education and historical integrity in the United States.

Trump’s Anti-Immigrant Rhetoric Fuels Fear and Division in Europe

During a recent visit to Scotland, President Donald Trump made alarming comments regarding immigration, asserting that a “migrant invasion” is causing severe consequences in Europe. This rhetoric plays into his pattern of inflammatory claims aimed at furthering a xenophobic agenda. Trump’s remarks included harsh advice for European leaders to “get your act together” and defend their nations against what he described as an existential threat from immigration.

Upon his arrival at Glasgow Prestwick Airport, Trump was received by thousands, including Scottish Secretary Ian Murray. He met with UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, whom he praised, while simultaneously promoting his own business interests, including his luxury golf resorts. This underscores the troubling mixture of personal gain and national dialogue that has characterized much of Trump’s public engagement.

Trump’s ongoing fixation on immigration is not just rhetoric but aligns with the authoritarian trends seen in Republican policies, creating an atmosphere of fear and division. By framing migrants as an invasion, he signals support for extreme and inhumane immigration measures that threaten the rights and dignity of individuals seeking refuge or a better life.

Additionally, Trump made disparaging comments about windmills, falsely claiming they are damaging the environment. Such statements illustrate a disregard for factual information and demonstrate his enduring commitment to denying climate change—a stance that has dire implications for environmental policy and public health.

This visit serves as a stark reminder of Trump’s persistent divisive tactics and the dangerous political discourse he champions, benefiting from fearmongering in an attempt to solidify his political influence while undermining democratic values across the globe.

Trump’s Condescending Remarks on Liberian President Spotlight Cultural Ignorance

Donald Trump recently lauded Liberian President Joseph Boakai for his impressive command of English during a White House meeting with several African leaders. Trump’s comment, however, sparked outrage as it was seen as ignorant and condescending. Liberia, where President Boakai was educated, has English as its official language, leading many to question Trump’s perception of African nations and cultures.

Archie Tamel Harris, a Liberian youth advocate, expressed feeling insulted by Trump’s remarks, emphasizing that his suggestion that Boakai’s English skills were exceptional implies a stereotype of Africans as uneducated. A Liberian diplomat described Trump’s question as inappropriate, further highlighting the condescension perceived in his remarks.

The White House attempted to defend Trump’s comments as a compliment, suggesting that the administration has a strong commitment to Africa. However, critics, including a South African politician, questioned the appropriateness of Trump’s remarks and called for African leaders to stand up against such patronizing behavior.

In response to the backlash, Liberia’s Foreign Minister clarified that Boakai did not perceive any offense and suggested that Trump recognized the American influence in Liberia’s English. Despite this, Trump’s history of derogatory comments regarding African nations casts a shadow over his diplomatic interactions.

This incident underscores the ongoing need for awareness and sensitivity concerning historical contexts and cultural perceptions in international relations, particularly from leaders who have previously exhibited xenophobic attitudes towards Africa.

(h/t: https://www.cnn.com/2025/07/09/africa/trump-praises-liberian-president-latam-intl)

Trump’s Inappropriate Comments Undermine Serious Peace Efforts Amid Congo-Rwanda Accord

During a recent Oval Office event, President Donald Trump made inappropriate comments directed at a female reporter, Hariana Veras, while acknowledging a peace agreement between the Democratic Republic of Congo and Rwanda. Trump lightheartedly called Veras “beautiful” and expressed a wish for more reporters like her, undermining the seriousness of the diplomatic occasion.

The exchange occurred amidst a signing ceremony aimed at addressing decades of violent conflict in eastern Congo, where millions have died due to ongoing strife fueled by over 100 armed groups. Trump’s comments shifted the focus away from the historical significance of the agreement, trivializing the efforts toward peace in a region beset by a long humanitarian crisis.

Trump’s remarks, “I’m not allowed to say that…it could be the end of my political career,” reflect a troubling attitude towards women in professional settings, particularly in a role as significant as that of the President. Flirting with a reporter during an official event not only displays a lack of professionalism but also reinforces harmful gender dynamics in political discourse.

As he touted the peace deal, dubbed the “Washington Accord,” Trump diverted attention to himself, even suggesting it could be renamed the “Trump Accord.” This self-serving behavior is emblematic of a leader more focused on personal accolades than on the serious implications of foreign policy and its impact on affected populations.

Overall, Trump’s antics during this diplomatic event exemplify his ongoing pattern of behavior that undermines the integrity of the presidency, showcasing a troubling blend of misogyny, narcissism, and a lack of decorum that has steadily contributed to the erosion of America’s democratic values.

(h/t: https://www.thedailybeast.com/trump-flirts-with-female-reporter-wish-more-were-like-you/)

Trump’s Racist Claims of ‘White Genocide’ Target South African President

In a contentious meeting at the White House, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa faced a barrage of false claims from President Donald Trump regarding racial violence in South Africa. Trump, leaning on discredited assertions of a “white genocide,” quickly turned the discussion hostile by screening videos that he purports support his allegations against the South African government’s treatment of white farmers, specifically the Afrikaners.

Despite efforts to redirect the narrative, Ramaphosa was largely overshadowed as Trump repeated his misleading statements, ignoring realities on the ground. Ramaphosa attempted to clarify the context behind a controversial song by opposition politician Julius Malema, asserting that it did not represent government policy, but Trump remained fixated on this inflammatory issue.

The meeting highlighted a troubling trend of Trump’s administration attacking South Africa based on unfounded claims. Just months earlier, Trump cut aid to the country and engaged in diplomatic snubs, indicating a severe deterioration in U.S.-South Africa relations. Meanwhile, South Africa has faced accusations from the U.S. administration that are vehemently disputed by its leaders.

Ramaphosa’s strategy was to maintain composure and potentially negotiate a crucial trade deal, despite Trump’s aggression. The meeting was never intended to devolve into a dispute, emphasizing the disconnect between Trump’s rhetoric and the actual diplomatic discourse necessary for fostering international relationships.

Ultimately, the meeting demonstrated not only Trump’s troubling disregard for factual information but also a willingness to perpetuate divisive ideologies. Such rhetoric aligns with Republican tactics that seek to exploit racial divisions and undermine the foundational tenets of democracy, showcasing a disturbing trend in contemporary politics.

(h/t: https://www.npr.org/2025/05/21/nx-s1-5404667/south-africa-white-house-visit-ramaphosa-trump-tensions)

Trump’s Rhetoric on South African Refugees Echoes White Supremacy and Racial Discrimination

Kevin O’Leary, a prominent Canadian businessman and supporter of Donald Trump, asserted that the recent decision to grant refugee status to white South Africans by the current president is unrelated to race. Trump’s alarming rhetoric portrays the alleged persecution of white farmers in South Africa as a form of “genocide,” suggesting their situation is unique among global refugee populations. This claim has no basis in reality, as ongoing research and reports indicate that farm-related violence is not racially motivated and affects individuals of various backgrounds.

During an interview, O’Leary downplayed the significance of focusing on white South Africans, stating that immigration policies differ across administrations and expressing confusion over the uproar surrounding this particular refugee group. Trump has gone as far as to threaten the cessation of funding to South Africa due to alleged discriminatory practices aimed at South African whites, rather than addressing the broader context of land reform issues in a country still grappling with the legacy of apartheid.

The narrative pushed by Trump and his supporters, including O’Leary, feeds into a dangerous ideology that insinuates a “white genocide” is occurring, echoing sentiments found in white supremacist circles. This rhetoric ignores substantial evidence, such as a South African court ruling, which confirmed that claims of “white genocide” are unfounded. Historical and statistical context shows that while violence does occur, it is widespread and not targeted specifically at one racial group.

O’Leary’s comments, likening the situation of white South Africans to that of past Irish migrants, trivialize the complex realities of modern immigration debates. By framing the conversation as merely a standard immigration policy decision, O’Leary disregards the racial implications and the societal impact of Trump’s narrative. The historical context of land ownership in South Africa demonstrates the deep-rooted inequities that persist today, with white landowners still holding a disproportionate share of farmland despite making up only a small fraction of the population.

Ultimately, the rhetoric and policies advocated by Trump and his supporters not only divert attention from the real issues at hand but also perpetuate a narrative that seeks to justify discriminatory practices under the guise of immigration policy. This approach normalizes harmful ideologies and threatens to derail progress toward a more equitable society, as evidenced by the racially charged legal and social debates underway in South Africa and beyond.

Trump’s Misleading White Genocide Claims Spotlight Far-Right Ideologies in Republican Politics

President Donald Trump has made a controversial claim asserting that White South Africans are fleeing their homeland due to “genocide.” This assertion marks a significant pivot in the narrative regarding immigration policies under his administration, as it prioritizes the influx of White South African farmers while other immigration avenues remain restricted. The claim follows a report by The New York Times about a U.S.-funded charter flight transporting South African families alleging discrimination and violence based on their race.

During a recent White House press conference, Trump defended this expedited process for granting refugee status to these South Africans, stating that they are being murdered and asserting that it is an issue largely overlooked by the media. He emphasized that the South African government has passed laws allowing for the confiscation of land without compensation, which he used to frame his narrative of victimization for White farmers. However, in reality, no land has yet been seized, and these claims have been challenged and deemed misleading.

Trump’s comments echo a longstanding conspiracy theory regarding the supposed plight of White South Africans, a narrative that originated from far-right circles and has since permeated mainstream Republican discourse. This rhetoric effectively feeds into the larger culture of fear and division that the Trump administration has cultivated, further militarizing opposition to racial equity in land ownership.

Critics have condemned Trump’s portrayal of White South Africans as victims, viewing it as part of a broader pattern of racially motivated and divisive politics aimed at garnering support among his base. This strategy inflicts harm on genuine discussions around racial issues and undermines the real struggles of historically marginalized groups in South Africa.

The administration’s decisions reinforce a troubling precedent in U.S. immigration policy, favoring whiteness in a manner that not only disregards the complexities of the South African context but also reveals the deep-seated biases that inform Trump’s political narrative. The elevation of such claims serves to distract and distort facts, aligning with the dangerous ideologies that threaten both American democracy and principles of justice.

(h/t: https://www.mediaite.com/politics/trump-defends-importing-white-south-africans-to-us-with-absurd-claim-they-are-victims-of-genocide/)

University of Michigan Closes DEI Office Amid Trump Pressure

The University of Michigan, known for its commitment to progressive values, is shutting down its Office of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (ODEI) following pressure from the Trump administration. This decision reflects the broader trend of Republican policies undermining diversity initiatives across educational institutions. University President Santa Ono announced that this closure comes in response to recent executive orders targeting DEI programs nationwide, particularly those promoted under the Trump regime.

In a statement, the university indicated that services previously provided by the ODEI will be redistributed to other offices dedicated to student access and opportunity. The DEI 2.0 Strategic Plan and associated programming will also be discontinued. This retreat from the university’s previous support for diversity is alarming to faculty and advocates, who see it as a compliance with federal pressures aimed at enforcing a culture of white supremacy.

Rebekah Modrak, chair of the Faculty Senate, criticized the decision in an email, asserting that the federal government is working to erode the foundations of higher education by fostering a more homogeneous and inequitable environment. Her comments highlight the potential dangers of this shift, noting that similar initiatives in other states like Texas and Ohio have led to censorship and diminished academic freedom.

Despite the announced changes, there are efforts to maintain some degree of diversity programming, including mental health support and programs for historically underrepresented students. However, the overall trend of scaling back DEI initiatives raises concerns about the university’s commitment to fostering a truly inclusive campus. Critics warn that the administration’s decisions will ultimately diminish the educational experience and alter how equitable opportunities are administered.

U.S. Representative Rashida Tlaib sharply condemned the decision, stating that University of Michigan students deserve an administration that defends their rights against Trump’s regressive attacks on academic integrity and freedoms. The move to dissolve DEI efforts represents a significant setback not only for the University of Michigan but also for higher education institutions navigating Trump’s divisive policies.

(h/t: https://www.freep.com/story/news/education/2025/03/27/university-michigan-dei-office-closing/82690676007/)

Trump’s Policies Threaten NASA’s Diversity Initiatives and Scientific Progress

A wave of anxiety and uncertainty has swept through the space science community as the Trump administration sets its sights on slashing NASA funding and dismantling vital diversity initiatives. Under President Trump’s leadership and with the influence of Elon Musk’s U.S. DOGE Service, researchers are grappling with an environment threatening to reverse decades of progress in scientific leadership and inclusivity.

The Trump administration’s assault on science began early in his presidency. This included basketball-sized executive orders that diverted funding from critical research and initiated a series of layoffs, particularly targeting diversity programs in civil service roles. While a court briefly halted the funding freeze, the chaos persists, leaving grant evaluations in a state of disarray and creating uncertainty among researchers reliant on federal support.

NASA has already begun to suffer from these policies, noticeably pulling essential data from its public websites and halting operations of advisory groups crucial for scientific progress. The impending threat of budget cuts, rumored to reach as high as 50%, has sent shockwaves through the community. One researcher expressed intense concern for colleagues, emphasizing the stress and fear permeating the workforce.

Among the programs at risk is the Here to Observe initiative, which connected underrepresented students with NASA mission teams, fostering diversity and innovation in science education. The cutting of this program illustrates Trump’s broader agenda of undermining diversity for the sake of a regressive vision that aligns with white supremacy ideals.

As scientists rally to voice their concerns, they express not only fear for their careers but also for the future of American science. The budget slashes threaten longstanding missions and the development of new talent, imperiling not only NASA’s ongoing projects but also America’s standing in the global scientific community. Unless addressed, these cuts promise an extinction-level event for space science.

(h/t: https://www.astronomy.com/space-exploration/space-scientists-fearful-as-trump-administration-targets-science-and-mulls-nasa-cuts/)

PBS Closes DEI Office Under Trump Pressure Threatening Media Diversity

PBS has shut down its Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) office in direct response to a recent executive order from Donald Trump. This closure affects staff members who worked in the DEI unit, previously led by Cecilia Loving. In a statement, PBS vowed to continue reflecting America’s diversity in its workforce despite this setback.

This decision follows a series of Trump’s executive orders designed to dismantle DEI programs across both federal entities and private organizations. PBS is currently under scrutiny from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which is investigating potential violations regarding sponsorship disclosures. This inquiry has been instigated by Trump-appointed FCC Chair Brendan Carr, who has repeatedly targeted public broadcasters like PBS and NPR.

Before this closure, PBS had been actively expanding its DEI initiatives, having established a dedicated DEI office in 2022. Their recent reports indicated a record high of 44 percent BIPOC representation in their workforce. However, with the Trump administration’s aggressive stance against DEI efforts, PBS now faces significant challenges in continuing these programs.

The closure of the DEI office represents a worrying trend of undermining efforts to foster diversity and equality in public institutions, echoing broader Republican agendas aimed at eroding inclusive practices. As public broadcasting faces external pressures, the rollback of such initiatives serves to reinforce the exclusionary tactics of Trump and his allies, who are determined to reshape America’s media landscape.

This move not only affects the staff involved but also threatens the integrity of public broadcasting as a space for diversity in representation and perspective. Trump’s regime continues to implement authoritarian tactics aimed at stifling dissent and manipulating media narratives, reminiscent of the strategies employed by populist leaders around the world.

1 2 3 15