When President Trump was unjustly maligned, attacked, and maliciously prosecuted in a political witch hunt, we engaged in the fight to uphold the Constitution we all love.
Now, with the release of a previously classified annex to Special Counsel John Durham’s report, our unwavering defense of the Constitution has been thoroughly vindicated. It is important to understand the implications of the new evidence that has been uncovered.
We (ACLJ Executive Director Jordan Sekulow and Senior Counsel for Litigation and Public Policy Ben Sisney), along with ACLJ Chief Counsel Jay Sekulow, served (in our personal capacity) as President Trump’s personal legal counsel in the Russia investigation. We knew from the beginning that the Russia hoax was a politically motivated witch hunt disguised as legitimate law enforcement during this dark period in American history.
During this chaotic time, we witnessed firsthand the unprecedented weaponization of federal law enforcement agencies against a sitting U.S. president. We saw the manufactured evidence, the procedural violations, the nonsensical and unprecedented twisting of statutes to try to create new crimes, and the clear political bias that created and drove this investigation from day one. While the mainstream media and political establishment consistently dismissed our concerns over these gross irregularities, we never wavered in our commitment to exposing the truth.
The world watched as President Trump was vindicated when Bob Mueller’s report was made public in April 2019. He was vindicated again by Bob Mueller’s disastrous congressional testimony. And now, the newly released Durham annex materials provide smoking-gun evidence: The Russia collusion narrative was a deliberate fabrication designed to use the power of federal law enforcement to undermine the Trump presidency and subvert the will of the American people.
The Truth Finally Emerges
The newly declassified annex confirms in more detail than ever that federal agencies possessed exculpatory evidence from the earliest stages of the investigation – evidence that would have immediately debunked the collusion narrative had it been properly disclosed. It’s more – and clearer – proof of a pattern of deliberate misconduct, suppressed evidence, and coordinated efforts to maintain a false narrative despite mounting proof of President Trump’s innocence. We knew this went much deeper than just a single rogue FBI employee fudging information to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court. And we knew the allegations against the president were ludicrous. Now we know for sure that Bob Mueller’s team knew too.
While representing President Trump, we consistently argued that the Russia investigation lacked legitimate predication (no evidence of any underlying crime) and was tainted by political bias, abusing the sensitive tool of prosecutorial discretion for a political end. Critics dismissed these arguments as conspiracy theories. But to the extent there was any real doubt, the Durham annex proves that those legal arguments were right all along.
A Constitutional Crisis Exposed
From the beginning, we warned that the Russia investigation represented an unprecedented assault on the constitutional principle of separation of powers. We argued that unelected bureaucrats were attempting to nullify the results of a democratic election through manufactured legal proceedings.
The Durham annex validates our gravest concerns. It reveals something far worse than mere prosecutorial misconduct – it exposes a coordinated effort by the Obama administration that represents a fundamental threat to our constitutional republic.
What This Means Moving Forward
The revelations in the Durham annex demand immediate action and accountability. At the ACLJ, we remain committed to seeking full accountability for this unprecedented abuse of power.
The Durham annex contains pages of previously classified material that fundamentally reshape our understanding of how the Russia investigation was conducted. How high up did the corruption go? What major players were involved? To what lengths did they go in their effort to nullify an election? Over the coming weeks, we will be releasing a comprehensive series examining these revelations in detail.
Recalling the warning of what happens when people forget history, we will walk through the specific evidence of FBI misconduct, the suppression of exculpatory intelligence, and the coordinated efforts to perpetuate a narrative that federal agencies knew to be false. Each installment will demonstrate how these revelations vindicate the legal arguments we made on behalf of President Trump throughout this ordeal.
This is not just about political vindication – this is about constitutional governance, the rule of law, and ensuring that no future president faces such an orchestrated campaign of government misconduct. What they did to him, they were essentially doing to you. And what they could do to him, they could do to anyone.
The ACLJ Stands for Truth
The Durham annex represents more than vindication for President Trump – it represents a victory for constitutional government and the rule of law. It proves that truth and justice will ultimately prevail, even when opposed by the most powerful institutions in our government.
The ACLJ has always stood with the Constitution, even during these dark chapters in American history. The American people deserve the full truth about what their government did during this period. Through the work of the ACLJ, we will help ensure they get it. Join with us and add your voice to this moment: Defeat the Deep State – Defend the Constitution.
Justice delayed is not justice denied – and today, a much clearer picture of justice for President Trump and the American people is finally beginning to emerge.
Knowing people who have young adults in their family who previously received invitations to work as interns at the White House, when 21-year-old intern Eric Tarpinian-Jachym was murdered on June 30, it was alarming. The crime happened just a mile from the White House. Investigators stated several individuals exited a vehicle and began firing shots at a group of people, striking and killing Eric and shooting a 16-year-old male and adult female, who both survived.
So far in 2025, 91 people have been killed in Washington, D.C. That is a murder every 2.5 days since January 1.
While the FBI are assisting the Metropolitan Police Department in the investigation of Eric’s death, and a $40,000 reward has been offered for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the killers, there are no suspects and no one has been arrested.
Eric’s mother harshly criticized Washington, D.C.’s electeds, saying residents “are not being protected,” and she feels the D.C. council treats violent crime like a “joke.” She stated, “this isn’t a joke anymore. People are getting killed. I don’t care what color you are. I don’t care if you have money or not.”
Drive-by shootings are always very difficult to resolve. And yet, there are a lot of individuals who know a great deal, …and some of these individuals, these witnesses, actually know who the shooters are. But because of the intimidation factor here in the District of Columbia, you will find that these individuals will remain silent.
In addition to murders, beatings frequently occur in D.C. One recent example is the merciless assault of Edward Coristine, the ex-DOGE teenager known as “Big Balls.” Elon Musk wrote on X stating,
A few days ago, a gang of about a dozen young men tried to assault a woman in her car at night in D.C. A @Doge team member saw what was happening, ran to defend her and was severely beaten to the point of concussion, but he saved her. It is time to federalize D.C.
Citing this incident, President Trump talked federalization of D.C., and on August 11, 2025 President Donald Trump took control of the D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department and deployed 800 National Guard troops in Washington, D.C. to combat crime in the capital. The District of Columbia’s Home Rule Act allows the president to place the Metropolitan Police Department under federal control for up to 30 days. On August 12, D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser met with federal officials to supposedly discuss coordination and strategy.
On the first dayof the crackdown, federal and local authorities made 23 arrests, including suspects wanted for murder, gun offenses, and other crimes. Amazing! Criminals actually going to jail! Imagine that!
FBI Director Kash Patel wrote on X, “When you let good cops be cops they can clean up our streets and do it fast. More to come. Your nation’s Capital WILL be safe again.”
When confronted with stupid questions from reporters, U.S. Attorney for D.C. Jeanine Pirro stated, “Oh, stop it.” Then she referred the reporters to the posters of murdered people in D.C. and said,
It’s never enough. You tell these families, ‘Crime has dropped.’ You tell the mother of the intern who was shot going out for McDonald’s near the Washington Convention Center, ‘Oh, crime is down.’ You tell the kid who was just beat the hell and back with a severe concussion and a broken nose, ‘Crime is down’. No, that falls on deaf ears and my ears are deaf to that and that’s why I fight the fight.
Of course, numbskull top democrats like Hillary Clinton criticized President Trump’s efforts to combat crime, calling him “unhinged,” and Hakeem Jeffries said, “Trump has no basis to take over the local police department.” Perhaps Hillary is used to having a dead body count around her, and not surprisingly, Hakeem has a void in his brain where the law is concerned, since he doesn’t seem to know the “District of Columbia’s Home Rule Act.” Considering that Democrats stand for killing babies, transgendering children, perverse queer relationships, and putting deranged boys in girls’ sport and locker rooms, is it any surprise that they have absolutely no care or concern about the lives of the people they supposedly represent? After all, they think they can cheat and win elections. Right?
Responding to Hillary’s nonsense, White House deputy secretary Abigail Jackson posted on X, “On top of being a big-time loser, you’re also a massive liar.” Then Jackson posted a headline of an article about a D.C. police commander being suspended for allegedly altering crime data. Surprise! Surprise!
Democrats like Jeffries would rather preserve dangerous cities than admit their policies fail. IN FACT, murder is the most violent and accurately measured crime, and the D.C. murder rate in 2024 was 83% higher than in 2012.
The murder rate in Washington today is higher than in Bogota, Colombia, Mexico City, some of the places that you hear about as being the worst places on Earth, much higher. This is much higher. The number of car thefts has doubled over the past five years, and the number of carjackings has more than tripled. Murders in 2023 reached the highest rate, probably ever. They say 25 years, but they don’t know what that means because it just goes back 25 years can’t be worse.
While BLM activists like Nee Nee Taylor attempt to lead resistance to Trump, continuing her call to abolish the police, it makes you wonder if their slogan should change from “Black Lives Matter” to “No Lives Matter.” With her rants of “May all jails and Prisons be abolish! [sic]” and “Take it to the streets,” it really makes you wonder who is listening to her. Most people have to work jobs instead of stand in the street listening to bad grammar, but Democrats will surely be renting their crowds from either “Crowds on Demand” or “Good Trouble Lives On,” like they have done so many times in the past—as Trump told us.
So, it’s time for a change in D.C. and in numerous other cities in the U.S. There’s a new sheriff in town, …or at least, in the White House.
President Donald Trump’s administration has taken a lot of heat for cutting university grants for scientific research. But less noticed has been the ways his administration is actually opening the doors to more unorthodox scholarship — and academic freedom.
Scholars whose views do not always align with the prevailing ideas on issues like climate change, gender, and COVID are now playing important roles in the government’s actions on these matters.
Major news outlets like the New York Times have treated Trump’s actions with skepticism, but the changes signal new hope for academic freedom and honesty.
One of the most recent examples is a report by the U.S. Department of Energy, published at the end of July, regarding climate change policy.
A New York Timesreport summed up the document this way: “Sea level rise is not accelerating. More carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will be good for plant growth. The computer models used to predict global warming tend to exaggerate future temperature increases.”
The Environmental Protection Agency cited the report recently “in its proposal to repeal a landmark 2009 finding that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide, pose a threat to public health,” according to the NYT.
The article’s headline suggested the document is an attack on “science” by “climate skeptics” — and real “scientists” found “errors” with it. The newspaper quoted two:
Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist at Berkeley Earth and the payments company Stripe, called the document a “scattershot collection of oft-debunked skeptic claims” that “are not representative of broader climate science research findings.” …
“It is a coordinated, full-scale attack on the science,” said Dave White, who directs the Global Institute of Sustainability and Innovation at Arizona State University. “This was present in the first Trump administration, but it’s being exacerbated in the second.”
Reading on, however, the report revealed that the authors (“skeptics”) are actually distinguished scholars at major universities. Interestingly, the report names the scholars but not their institutions (it does the scholars who criticized their research, though).
One author is Steven Koonin, a fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and former NYU professor. Another is a distinguished professor at the University of Alabama, and a third author is a professor emerita of Georgia Tech.
These are not obscure scholars and certainly not quacks. But research like theirs has been met with skepticism and censure for years.
At a University of Southern California conference in January, Koonin recounted the many professors who have been canceled for “simply displaying data” that disputed catastrophic climate change predictions, The College Fixreported at the time.
That appears to be changing under the new presidential administration.
Similar is the case of Dr. Jay Bhattacharya.
The Stanford physician and epidemiologist faced harassment and censorship after he spoke out against the government’s handling of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Now, Bhattacharya is leading the National Institutes of Health under Trump.
Meanwhile, academics who recognize that men and women are different and that humans can’t change their gender also have more freedom to speak – and hopefully opportunities to receive grant funding – since the new administration adopted these realities as fact.
There’s more hope, too, that these changes could help shed light on whether these scholars’ positions are actually unorthodox or simply that cancel culture has led to the silencing of a quiet majority.
Sure, Trump is cutting scientific research grants — although many arguably have a political, rather than scientific, aim. But the administration also is elevating scientific views that add to the debate about important issues like our environment and health care. And that’s something that should be celebrated.
The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Forty years ago, President Ronald Reagan campaigned on getting homosexuals out of the classroom. Today, homosexuals in the classroom are keeping secrets from parents and abusing their kids. School choice has expanded, but student success has plummeted. Public schools remain a rank failure. Test scores are down, violence is up, and the woke agenda is still infecting public education.
In 2020, there was hope that all of this would change. Government overreaction to COVID shut down schools and forced children into online learning. Parents witnessed government education’s day-to-day indoctrination first-hand.
In 2021, a parent revolution broke out across the country. Parents crowded school board meetings, demanding an end to DEI, LGBT, and CRT programs. Some protests scared the school board members into quitting their jobs. Parents then took over the school boards, hoping to right the wrongs in their local school districts.
But the long-term reforms to public education still haven’t materialized.
A new school board conservative majority can promise reform. Within three to six months, one or even two of those campaign conservatives begin deviating from those promises, falling into the status quo that ruins public education.
What happens if parents don’t elect a conservative majority on a school board? Oftentimes, the good members are only outvoted but get demoralized. Parents stop attending school board meetings, frustrated that they are not achieving the reforms they hoped for. Frustrated in turn by the lack of support from the community, those school board members, elected to make a difference, elect to resign early and retreat to their everyday lives.
Perhaps a conservative school board majority not only takes charge, but also implements many of the reforms promised during the election season. What do the parents do about all the left- wing activists who target the school board members and their families? Keep in mind that a school board can implement policies at a district level, but school staff, from the superintendent down to the classroom teacher, has to enact and enforce those policies. What if the teachers don’t comply with the new directives like “No more pride flags in the classroom”?
Conservative school board majorities in Southern California (Chino Valley and Temecula Valley School Districts) enacted a number of pro-children, pro-parent policies to protect the students and enhance the school curriculum. They even ensured that teachers would comply.
Then the state declared war. Governor Newsom fined one district $1 million for removing books from the approved sex-ed curriculum. When both districts enacted a parental notification policy, the state legislature overrode their local authority with a law banning such Policies!
Parents are finding out the hard way that they can elect the right people, but how long will those new school board trustees vote the right way? How long will they sustain their efforts to reform the schools before caving under pressure? How do they stand up to larger forces forcing their hand on key issues? And what guarantees do parents have that their children will learn, free of indoctrination or exploitation, when the corrupt staff—teachers, librarians, administrators—are still running amok in the school districts?
The point of outlining these ups and downs in the conflict of parents versus school boards is that the silver bullet for solving the problems in public education is not electing better people. Left-wing activists, government interests, and teachers’ unions remain the fifth column of communist moral corruption in our schools, impeding these efforts.
The interminable bureaucracy of administrators, civil servants, support staff, paraeducators, and other employees is committed to the status quo. Steeped in the morass of LGBT-DEI-CRT madness, they resist all opposition to this agenda. After years of higher education, they have embraced the lie that they know better than the parents, and they are fanatically committed to this progressive caucus, the well-being of children and rights of parents be damned. Most daunting of all, the larger apparatus of government, whether the state government or the national interest groups, blocks reforms in public education.
School board members are not just outnumbered, but they are outflanked with a lack of training and resources to take on the regressive leftist mire that is overwhelming public education. Parents have the numbers, but they don’t have the activist awareness or organization to fight back. Parents need to form a MassResistance army of their own, repeatedly pushing back on all the interests within and outside of their local school districts. Where most pro-family groups have tinkered around the edges for change, MassResistance trains and commits parents to think bigger, demand more, and achieve real, lasting change in the schools.
Decades ago, parents would have marched on school districts, with torches and pitchforks, if they discovered that a teacher or an administrator was transitioning a child into the opposite sex, or teaching their kids about anal and oral sex, or indoctrinating them with anti-American Hatred.
That kind of outrage must be resurrected. Instead of relying on elections, parents should organize and demand:
a. Termination of all employees committed to pushing sexual perversion on children
b. Access to all education materials, including the right to obtain and review them at home.
c. Restoration of full parental involvement as volunteers within the schools, to monitor their children’s learning.
Parents must insist on these demands at every opportunity and organize for the long haul. Parents should not settle for new policies, but require school boards to defy unjust state laws and codes that harm children and undermine education. School board members should then unite with other pro-family conservatives across their respective state and ignore heinous laws that require school districts to keep secrets from parents, allow males in female sports and spaces, or permit the prevalence of pornography and LGBT perversion in classrooms and Libraries.
And winning school board elections is not enough.
Parents must organize for education reforms, a complete removal of moral corruption and intellectual stagnation. When enough parents raise hell and consistently push for better results, school districts will know that they resist. Mass Resistance can help them achieve these outcomes.
Americans would be better served if the Trump administration’s review forced the institution to have a fair and truthful depiction of their country, science, culture, history, and art.
The Smithsonian Institution is one of America’s greatest assets.
When Americans visit the nation’s capital in Washington, D.C., they are able to witness their country’s vast array of art, culture, history, and research acumen all in one place, and for free, because of the museums and zoo the institution operates there.
Like the national parks, the Smithsonian is part of America’s cultural inheritance.
But because of its academic and historical nature, the institution, established by an act of Congress that was signed by President James K. Polk in 1846, has always been in a precarious situation where dishonest and destructive actors who have deep disdain for the United States might take over its stewardship.
That appears to be what has happened, particularly under the Biden administration, as museum halls are adorned with gay “pride” flags and exhibits are filled with pseudo-history or history that is framed dishonestly — seemingly in an attempt to degrade the American experience.
That is a far cry from the Smithsonian Institution’s mission: to be “an establishment for the increase and diffusion of knowledge among men,” as initial patron James Smithson (after whom the institution is named) said in 1826 when willing his estate ultimately to the United States. Smithson’s donation would over time become the world’s “largest museum, research, and education complex,” boasting 21 museums, a zoo and conservation biology institute, and nine research facilities.
To that end, Trump administration officials — including Lindsey Halligan, Special Assistant to the President and Senior Associate Staff Secretary, Domestic Policy Council Director Vince Haley, and Office of Management and Budget director Russell Vought — wrote a Tuesday letter to Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III initiating an internal review of the Smithsonian’s exhibitions and materials.
“It is an honor to work alongside the Smithsonian in reviewing its museums and exhibits, with the shared goal of ensuring this treasured institution reflects the very best America has to offer — accuracy, excellence, and the richness of our shared history. While certain ideological influences have permeated the Smithsonian over time, our goal is for the Smithsonian to be fact-based, scholarly, and historically sound,” Halligan told The Federalist. “The current Smithsonian exhibits are publicly available so everyone can see firsthand what we have observed. We invite the public to form their own judgments and better understand why we believe certain changes are necessary to preserve the integrity of our shared heritage.”
Admission is free to everyone, Smithsonian buildings line the National Mall from the Capitol Building to the Washington Monument, and since 1970 they have been visited by between 20 and 30 million people per year, save for some off years.
While two of the notable off years included 2020 and 2021 — when there were protocols related to the coronavirus and the museums only saw three million to five million visitors — visitation has not returned to pre-coronavirus levels, with last year seeing fewer than 17 million visitors.
The phenomenon raises concerns about the broader left-wing project to force Americans to hate their history and their country. Corrosive outgrowths of that project have been seen, perhaps most acutely, at the Smithsonian museums in recent years, and the woke-scolding nature of their exhibits may be an explanation for their dwindling numbers over the course of the Biden administration’s tenure.
The Trump administration’s review will be all-encompassing and phased, starting with eight museums first: American History, Natural History, African American History and Culture, American Indian, Air and Space, National Portrait Gallery, and the Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden.
All aspects of each museum’s process will be reviewed, including public-facing content, the curation process, planning of exhibitions, how collections are used, and standards for narrative building.
Such a broad review appears to be necessary, as tourists and visitors to the museums in D.C. have offered images and insight to The Federalist detailing the countless examples of the far-left ideological capture of one of our nation’s greatest resources.
Information obtained by The Federalist shows that the Trump administration’s concerns are not unfounded.
Promoting Homosexuality and Not the American Flag
As the Trump administration works to restore a semblance of reality and prestige to the Smithsonian museums, it makes sense to start a review with the museum dedicated to American history.
At the American History Museum, which is located in the shadow of the Washington Monument, Americans who want to learn about their history must first be bombarded at the front entrance with a “pride-progress” flag.
A ‘pride-progress’ flag greets American History Museum visitors at its Constitution Avenue entrance
Image CreditCourtesy of Tourists and Visitors of the Smithsonian museums
True to form, one of the exhibits argues in favor of “transgender” athletes competing in sports against members of the opposite sex. It questions why anyone would think it necessary to test the sex of athletes before a competition, denying the advantage men have over women because of testosterone and other biological realities like bone density and muscle mass.
“Proponents believe that gender testing prevents transgender athletes and athletes with high testosterone levels from gaining an unfair competitive advantage,” it states. “However, critics argue that gender tests are humiliating and discriminate against athletes who challenge traditional gender norms.”
While visitors are greeted with the LGBT flag at the door, the exhibit about the U.S. flag — the Star-Spangled Banner exhibit — advances left-wing causes as well. On separate slides it shows the flag being used at an “immigrant rights rally” or with LGBT material. Other slides show the flag burning, being used at a Ku Klux Klan rally, or alongside anti-American propaganda.
‘America Is Evil’ and Also Needs Mass Illegal Immigration
Visitors can also get a preview of the future addition to the Smithsonian network, the National Museum of the American Latino, which is still in its planning stages but will ultimately be situated alongside the others on the National Mall.
“¡Presente! A Latino History of the United States” will be the first exhibit of that museum, yet those interested can look at it now in the American History Museum — but only if they want to be hit with anti-America propaganda.
At the outset, visitors are told to “reflect on the effects of colonization and slavery in the Americas and throughout the world,” which frames the entire exhibit as one where the United States is an evil force for destabilization and imperialism, and Latinos have been bearing the brunt of that burden for all time.
As writers at The Heritage Foundation put it three years ago, the exhibit is a “hothouse to curate grievances against the United States.”
“The Latino exhibit simply erases the existence of the Hispanic who loves, contributes to, benefits from and exemplifies the promise of American liberty,” they stated. “That is to say, it erases the Hispanic majority.”
The exhibit suggests that the United States stole one-third of Mexico’s landmass in 1848 with the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which recognized the Rio Grande River as the southern border of the U.S. and finalized Texas’ becoming part of the United States.
Stand-alone quote from the American History Museum
Image CreditCourtesy of Tourists and Visitors of the Smithsonian museums
A 2021 quote from artist-activist Judy Baca on a pillar in the exhibit states, “We didn’t cross the border; the border crossed us.”
The Texas Revolution, according to the exhibit, was actually a massive defense of slavery waged by “white Anglo Saxon” settlers against anti-slavery Mexicans fighting for freedom, not a Texan war of independence from Mexico.
It also pushes the idea that Cuban immigration had nothing to do with escaping Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, but was rather a movement motivated by economic considerations.
The exhibit strains to connect other left-wing ideologies to the narrative, including leftist propaganda on labor, education, housing, immigration, justice reform, and “LGBT rights,” while discounting American sovereignty.
America has utilized Western capitalism to oppress minorities, the planet, and the Global South, according to the exhibit, which therefore concludes that all the “oppressed” intersectional groups that allegedly exist in Latin America have been fighting for “global justice” against a domineering United States.
To that end, the museum uniformly presents indigenous populations positively or as victims, without qualifications about violence, child sacrifice, or other behavior.
The exhibit remarkably leaves out mentions of the abuses of left-wing dictators like Fidel Castro of Cuba and Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, while making sure to show how the United States backed right-wing dictators like Fulgencio Batista of Cuba and Rafael Trujillo of the Dominican Republic.
Immigration is yet another area where each story told is aimed at advancing the open borders narrative, completely discounting national sovereignty and suggesting that controlled immigration is a human rights abuse.
To further that narrative, the exhibit depicts migrants looking at Independence Day fireworks “through an opening in the U.S.-Mexico border wall,” and a description to the side of it called “Fear and Prejudice” quickly maligns Benjamin Franklin and essentially all founding-era leaders as having “feared non-White immigration.”
‘Fear and Prejudice’ section
Image CreditCourtesy of Tourists and Visitors of the Smithsonian museums
“Instead of being recognized as community builders, Latin American immigrants are sometimes described as ‘invaders,’” it states. “Many have risked their lives to immigrate because they believe in U.S. ideals such as democracy, equality, and opportunity.”
It makes no mention of the violent gangs and individuals committing crimes against Americans, their drugs that kill countless American people, or their economic effect in taking jobs and upending the lives of American citizens.
‘Profound Unsettling of the Continent’
The founding of America, from the colonial era through the revolution, was not a historic triumph of liberty, the American History Museum insists, but rather a “profound unsettling of the continent.”
“The continent’s population actually declined in this period as Old World diseases swept through Native populations that lacked immunity. Beyond that profound tragedy there would be new conflicts, new forms of freedom, new forms of slavery, and new ways of living together,” the exhibit states. “Our world today grows out of that unsettling history.”
Explicit Attacks on Benjamin Franklin
A visitor to the American History Museum cannot get two sentences into an exhibit about the scientific works of Benjamin Franklin without being bombarded, at every single turn, with mentions of slavery.
In fact, there is a QR code near the exhibit on the Star-Spangled Banner telling visitors they can find out more about his “electrical experiments and the enslaved people of his household.”
In an apparent attempt to undermine Franklin’s contributions to the American founding and to science, the Smithsonian says that “Franklin’s remarkable scientific accomplishments were enabled by the social and economic system he worked within.”
“Franklin enslaved people, perhaps as many as seven. Their labor helped to build his fortune,” the exhibit states, while speculating and admitting there is no evidence that the slaves “may have directly assisted his research.”
If one were looking to find out more about Franklin’s research, it would be tough to do in this exhibit which appears to entrap people by promising his scientific history, but then quickly turns into a diatribe about slavery.
“Franklin’s involvement with slavery is complicated. He published anti-slavery articles in his newspaper while also profiting from the sale of enslaved people and printed notices seeking the capture of escapees,” the exhibit states. “Later in life he took an overt stand against slavery, becoming president of the Pennsylvania Society for the Abolition of Slavery in 1787, supporting gradual emancipation. But Franklin never emancipated any of the people he enslaved.”
Almost as if the writers suddenly remembered that this was supposed to be about scientific research, not slavery, the exhibit states, “Franklin’s place in the nation’s history of slavery is part of his legacy, as is his electrical research that led to the smartphone.”
The constant mentions of slavery continue, with a small amount of scientific discovery or inventions woven in.
This 1763 engraving is one of dozens that bolstered Franklin’s fame as a scientist. It shows two of Franklin’s inventions: alarm bells that alerted him when the atmosphere became charged with electricity, and a lightning rod.
Missing from the image are the people whose labor freed Franklin to conduct his research: the women, indentured servants, and enslaved people who maintained his household, assisted him, or made or operated equipment.
The narrative goes on, and on, and on — continuing to make accusations and then admitting there is no evidence for them.
Benjamin Franklin was not just a founding Father, but a scientist. From 1746 to 1752, he conducted experiments that changed peoples’ understanding of electricity. The sparks of his inventive mind drove research and led to new inventions.
Those sparks crackle with the complications of his time. Enslaved people helped build his fortune, and may have participated in his research. We still have much to learn about that part of his scientific work.
The Coronavirus ‘Racism’ Psy-Op
An exhibit in the lobby of the second floor, immediately next to one of the museum’s main entrances, shows a “stop Asian hate” protest during the coronavirus — the “Asian hate” being a psy-op invented by the corporate media to hide the fact that the coronavirus did, in fact, come from China.
“As COVID-19 spread across the United States in early 2020, San Francisco’s Chinatown community was already shunned, even targeted by those who considered the disease ‘the China virus,’” it states. “Because Asian Americans had been subject to racist scapegoating and violence so often in the past, they organized a rally to call on their fellow citizens and residents “to fight the virus not the people.”
It’s Not Just the American History Museum
There is a huge amount of propaganda that needs to be cleaned up at numerous Smithsonian museums.
Americans would be better served if the Trump administration’s review forced the institution to have a fair and truthful depiction of their country, science, culture, history, and art.
