Skip to main content

In scathing report, White House accuses Smithsonian of presenting ‘a radical view of American history’

A Smithsonian Institution sign is seen on the National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall on March 28, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

(WASHINGTON) — The White House released a scathing 162-page report accusing the Smithsonian Institution of engaging in “extreme political activism” and presenting “a radical view of American history.”

The report, which was published on Saturday, July 4, particularly took aim at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History (NMAH), accusing its leadership of adopting “an ideological framework that no longer treats the American story as a shared national inheritance to be taught or celebrated, but as a political instrument to divide, dispirit, and discourage our citizens.”

The report accuses the museum of “anti-White activism,” “illegal alien activism,” and “transgender activism.” It also includes many photos of materials the White House has identified as problematic.

Asked about the report, a spokesperson for the Smithsonian, which oversees 21 museums, galleries and the national zoo, told ABC News that the institution remains committed to impartial learning.

“For more than 180 years, the Smithsonian has served the American public with nonpartisan and independent scholarship, and we remain committed to doing so,” the spokesperson said on Sunday.

In his most recent public comments, Smithsonian Secretary Lonnie Bunch told NBC’s “Meet the Press” in an interview that aired Sunday morning that the institution is “in pursuit of the promise of America.”

The report, which was published by the White House’s Domestic Policy Council, comes amid an ongoing White House review of the Smithsonian as well as a separate internal review launched by the Smithsonian into its own exhibits and processes. Asked about the status of the internal review, a spokesperson for the Smithsonian did not comment.

The White House review was launched in response to President Donald Trump’s March 27, 2025 executive order, “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.”

The executive order directed Vice President J.D. Vance, in consultation with the president’s advisers on domestic policy, “to remove improper ideology” from Smithsonian institutions, arguing that materials that cast America in a “negative light” have no place in federal cultural institutions.

“The serious concerns raised in this report are not about a few exhibits or a few controversial labels,” the report says. “As it stands today, it would benefit most Americans, especially parents bringing their children for a tour, if the Smithsonian’s flagship history museum had a label at every entrance that reads: ‘Warning: the exhibits in this museum were prepared by people who don’t want you to love your country.'”

What’s in the report?

The report includes dozens of examples of exhibits and materials in exhibits that the White House has determined to be examples of “radical activism.”

For instance, the report highlights an exhibit titled “Many Voices, One Nation,” and claims that its contents attempt “to instill within visitors its belief that migration and immigration, including the granting of citizenship to illegal aliens, is a defining modern-day civil rights and human liberty issue.”

The report also takes issue with displays about transgender people, including an exhibit titled “Girlhood” that profiled transgender media personality and LGBTQ+ rights advocate Jazz Jennings.

“One of the clearest examples of NMAH’s radical ideology is its refusal to correctly identify or define what a woman is,” the report states — reinforcing language from Trump’s January 2025 executive order, which outlined that this administration’s policy would be to “recognize two sexes, male and female” based on biology.

Overall, the report takes issue with materials addressing “white supremacy,” “racism” and the country’s history of “slavery,” “conquest” and “exclusion.”

The report claims that the museum fails to substantially represent the founders of the United States and that the exhibits cast America as “a problematic country irredeemably conceived, founded by deeply flawed men, and still operating today as an instrument of systemic racism and oppression.”

Sarah Weicksel, executive director of the American Historical Association, previously told ABC News that the White House is seeking to create “a narrowly sanitized version of the American past” at federal cultural institutions “that fits comfortably” into Trump’s executive order.

The American Historical Association (AHC), which represents 10,000 historians across various educational and cultural institutions in the U.S., has publicly defended the Smithsonian and urged the White House to “respect and value the expertise of the historians, curators, and other museum professionals who conduct the review and revision of historical content according to the professional standards of our discipline.”

ABC News reached out to AHA for further comment.

What comes next?

The report does not specify action points related to correcting the so-called “activism,” but does reference the fact that the Smithsonian Institution is largely funded by the federal government and U.S. taxpayers.

“That means the public has a right to expect that it will operate as a faithful steward of the Nation’s historic and cultural heritage, not as a vehicle for ideological campaigns,” the report says.

According to the Smithsonian Institution, which oversees 21 museums and galleries and the national zoo, it currently receives more than $1 billion in federal funding — about 62% of its funding — and the remainder of the funds come from “trust funds or non-federal funds, including contributions from private sources” and revenues from Smithsonian enterprises.

Bunch has been leading the Smithsonian since 2019 but the institution is overseen by a 17-member governing body, known as the Board of Regents. Bunch, who met with Trump at the White House on Aug. 28, 2025, repeatedly affirmed the Smithsonian’s “independence” from political influence.

Referencing his conversations with Trump in a Sept. 3, 2025 letter to the institution’s employees, Bunch underscored the independence of the Smithsonian, saying it was “paramount.” He also told employees that the institution remains committed to telling the “American story” and “will always be, a place that welcomes all Americans and the world.”

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Trump will need China for his new economic war against Iran. Good luck getting Xi on side

Beijing (CNN) — When US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent unveiled “Operation Economic Outcast,” threatening damaging new sanctions on countries that refuse to stop doing business with Iran, he didn’t name the one country that could decide its success or failure: China.The world’s second largest economy has long been a critical economic lifeline for Tehran, buying up the vast majority of its oil exports – worth an estimated tens of billions in US dollars last year – in addition to other trade.Bringing it on board with the White House’s latest effort to subdue an Iranian leadership stubbornly defiant after almost six months of war, however, is an extremely tall order.Beijing flatly rejects what it calls “unilateral” US sanctions and has long defended its right to regular trade with partners like Iran and Russia. It also surmises that Washington would be wary of triggering a broader economic confrontation that would hurt both countries, right ahead of the US midterms.On Tuesday, following Bessent’s presser, China’s Foreign Ministry vowed to “take all necessary measures” to safeguard its “own legitimate rights and interests” in the face of US sanctions threats.“Economic warfare and maximum pressure will not help resolve the issue; they will only further intensify tensions and conflicts, create spillover risks, disrupt the global economic and financial order,” ministry spokesperson Lin Jian said.Bessent’s threat also comes ahead of a highly anticipated visit by Chinese leader Xi Jinping to the US next month, where the two sides could make progress on extending a critical trade truce set to expire later this fall.Trump earlier said that he did not ask Xi “for any favors” on Iran during a May meeting between the two – a statement, which, if correct, will likely smell to Beijing of American desperation to end the conflict.What’s left now is a careful calculus for both countries in how they navigate what Bessent has said will be a period of “quiet diplomacy” – or privately issuing ultimatums to Iran’s economic partners, which the Treasury chief did not specifically name during his press conference.Chinese analysts suggest limited space for Washington’s demands: “China is unlikely to accept a situation in which Washington determines what Chinese companies can legally trade with third countries,” said Zhao Long, director of the Institute for International Strategic and Security Studies at the Shanghai Institutes for International Studies.“That would establish a precedent that US secondary sanctions can effectively determine China’s commercial relations with third countries,” he said.What Washington could doChina imports Iranian oil using a shadowy system that’s by design insulated from the US dollar system – and sanctions.Private, so-called teapot refineries, purchase and process US-sanctioned Iranian crude, relying on a network of ports, financial institutions and tankers that are often similarly firewalled from international exposure. China hasn’t recorded these purchases officially in years, since after the US re-imposed sanctions on Iran when the first Trump administration backed out of the Obama-era Iranian nuclear deal.But pressure points do exist, analysts say.“When you look at the upstream ownership of these entities, you’ll find many are directly or indirectly held by major Chinese state-owned entities that are heavily integrated into the US dollar system,” said Max Meizlish, a senior research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tank in Washington.“By sanctioning their subsidiaries, the US can apply pressure on the parents to divest at risk of being deemed as providing direct or indirect support to sanctioned entities,” he said.Bessent earlier this year said Washington has sent warnings to two unnamed Chinese banks about their role in Iran-linked transactions. When asked on Monday during his press conference what measures the US would take against non-compliant Chinese banks and shipping firms, he said “no one is above” facing US sanctions.Despite the tough talk, Beijing has seen the US threaten – and then back off – sweeping sanctions before. And it also knows Washington is acutely aware of China’s significant economic leverage over the US, especially in the form of its grip on the global supply of strategically critical rare earths.“If Washington crossed that threshold (of sanctioning major Chinese banks), Beijing would almost certainly respond, and the political atmosphere for a summit (between Trump and Xi) would deteriorate sharply,” said Sun Chenghao, a senior fellow at Tsinghua University’s Center for International Security and Strategy in Beijing.Such a move might not automatically cancel their meeting, but it would “shift the summit from stabilization toward damage control,” he said.Summit considerationsBoth sides will be weighing up the impact of escalation to that summit, expected to be the first state visit by Xi to the US in 11 years.While Beijing will not want to be seen to be cooperating with a sanctions regime it opposes, there are careful maneuvers it could take – such as quietly reducing oil purchases or elevating its political messaging to Tehran and efforts to encourage restraint.Chinese purchases of Iranian oil have already declined sharply compared to last year as the US blockade has constrained Iranian crude exports.Chinese analysts have also in recent weeks suggested there are overlaps between the interests of Washington and Beijing, especially in terms of seeing trade flows restored in the Strait of Hormuz, which has been choked by the conflict, and restoring broader regional stability, also conductive to trade.And Beijing has in recent days re-upped its messaging urging restraint and normal operations around the Strait.In a joint statement following a meeting with Jordanian King Abdullah II in Beijing on Monday, Xi called for the restoration of “normal passage” through the Strait and a “comprehensive solution” to the conflict.Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Miao Deyu said last week while hosting Iranian officials in Beijing that China was “actively committed to promoting peace talks.”Even still, Beijing has shown itself wary of playing a direct mediator role in the conflict, preferring a position where it protects its own economic interests – and plays up its image as a stable power that supports regional peace, in contrast to Washington’s vacillations.Any cooperation with the US in restoring regional peace “should not be reduced to ‘doing Trump a favor,’” said Zhao in Shanghai.“Beijing is willing to contribute to ending the crisis, but it is not willing to become an instrument of Washington’s maximum-pressure strategy.”The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story