The fake historian advising Trump's anti-Smithsonian crusade
Last Friday, President Trump released an executive order directing officials to install signs outside the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History (NMAH) informing visitors that the museum presents history inaccurately.
The order is the latest attack in a lengthy campaign by the Trump administration to discredit and control the Smithsonian Institution. The Trump administration has argued that the institution, which includes 21 museums and the National Zoo, has a liberal bias.
The order cites a 162-page report released by the White House on July 4. The report, written by the White House Domestic Policy Council, argues that the “Smithsonian Institution, and the National Museum of American History in particular, under its current leadership and current interpretive ideology, cannot be trusted to tell America’s story honestly and in a way that is inspiring, unifying, and worthy of our great republic.” The report criticizes the NMAH for “extreme political activism,” “anti-White activism,” “transgender activism,” and supporting illegal immigration.
The executive order states that the temporary signs outside the museum should tell visitors that exhibits should be altered to reflect the report’s findings and “direct visitors to locations and resources for accurate information regarding America’s history.” It does not specify where visitors will be redirected.
Trump’s war against the Smithsonian began shortly after the start of his second term. In March 2025, Trump issued an executive order entitled “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History” that stated that the Trump administration would “restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness.” The Trump administration has since threatened to withhold federal funding, ordered a comprehensive review of eight museums, and released a list of exhibits it did not agree with.
Congress has also gotten involved in the Trump administration’s battle. Last week, Anthea Hartig, the director of the NMAH, was questioned by a House subcommittee, during which Republicans accused the Smithsonian of being “infected by a woke ideology.”
“Examining the harder chapters of our history is not the same as hostility toward America,” Hartig said in her testimony. “We can and do honor the Declaration, the Revolution, the Constitution, and our national symbols, and also tell the truth about the times the country fell short of its own founding ideals. Telling our history fully is not anti-American.”
So why does the Trump administration care so much about controlling the Smithsonian Institution? One factor: the influence of right-wing Christian nationalist “historian” David Barton and his son Tim.
Who are David and Tim Barton?
The father and son are founder and president, respectively, of WallBuilders, a Christian nationalist advocacy organization founded in 1988. WallBuilders aims to “teach US history and how our beginnings were overwhelmingly rooted in Christian ideology.”
Despite having no degree in history, David Barton calls himself a historian. He has amassed a large collection of documents related to America’s founding and published several books. For decades, he has pushed the view that the founding fathers never intended for there to be a separation between church and state. David Barton’s work has been rejected repeatedly by actual historians. Most notably, a book he published in 2012 about Thomas Jefferson was pulled from the shelves by its publisher after a group of historians from Christian universities accused him of including distortions and false information.
This has not prevented David Barton from gaining political influence. In Texas, David Barton has advised the Texas State Board of Education on public school curricula. According to Barton’s own social media posts and statements, he has attended several meetings at the White House during Trump’s second term and has been in communication with Trump officials about the “crazy stuff” in the Smithsonian museums.
How the report mirrors the Bartons’ ideology
While the exact role of the Bartons has not been disclosed by the White House, there are several instances in which the report closely mirrors their ideology.
For example, the report accuses the NMAH of presenting slavery too negatively. “[The museum] should tell the story of how the colonies inherited slavery from both global and European slaving practices, but also how the words, actions, and ideas of America’s Founders helped spark a worldwide movement that ultimately ended slavery,” the report states.
The Bartons strike a very similar tone, arguing that the issue of slavery actually demonstrates “American exceptionalism.” A page on their website says, “[A]nti-American revisionism forgets that America’s record of anti-slavery actually is exceptional compared to the rest of the world.”
Both the Bartons and the report treat Christopher Columbus as an “American” hero and any attempt to criticize his actions as an effort to undermine the American historical narrative. Additionally, the report calls out the Smithsonian for its support of the 1619 Project, which the Bartons criticize frequently.
The report also alleges that the NMAH does not give proper attention to the founding fathers or the Declaration of Independence because it does not want to show that Christianity had an influence on them. The report states, “it was Christian moral philosophy that undergirded the Declaration of Independence’s assertion of God-given, unalienable rights.”
The idea that historians downplay the role of Christian values in the founding is something the Bartons have championed for many years. In a May podcast episode, Tim Barton said, “Literally the first paragraph [of the Declaration of Independence], they talk about the laws of nature and nature’s God. That’s the foundation that they’re building on.”
What the Bartons say about their involvement in the Smithsonian report
Over the last year and a half, the Bartons have frequently discussed the Trump administration’s campaign against the Smithsonian and repeatedly suggested that they have been involved.
On an April 2025 podcast episode, David Barton said that he and his son had discussed the Smithsonian “a little bit when we were up in DC with some individuals with the White House.”
Later, in a podcast episode from January 6, 2026, the Bartons said that the White House had asked them to help identify problematic Smithsonian exhibits. “Dad, you and I have gone through and reviewed several of the Smithsonian [museums] and there’s some crazy stuff there,” Tim Barton said. “You turned that over to the White House on how bad the stuff was, how misleading it was,” David Barton replied.
In a June 1 episode, Tim Barton said, “We might have been invited to help with some other initiatives and projects going on” as a “rebuttal” to the Smithsonian’s programming for America 250. The White House report was released a little over a month later.
Most recently, on a podcast episode released last week, Tim Barton said that members of the Committee on House Administration, which held a hearing last week about the report, had called the Bartons for advice on questions to pose during the hearing. One member of the committee, Rep. Barry Loudermilk (R-GA), also said on a separate podcast that he had spoken with the Bartons on the day of the hearing.
What comes next for the Smithsonian?
Neither Trump nor Congress has the power to oust museum leadership. This power lies with the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents. So, Trump and Congressional Republicans are focused on stacking the board with conservatives.
There are currently three vacancies on the board and three more will open in October. The board nominates members itself and sends their names to Congress for approval. But according to the New York Times, Vice President JD Vance, who is a member of the board, has “delayed action on the names because President Trump hoped to substitute more like-minded candidates.”
On a podcast last week, Loudermilk said that he was working with the White House to try to make these leadership changes. In what he described as a “half-serious comment,” Loudermilk said, “Let’s just let David Barton… or some of these others obtain some of the artifacts that [the Smithsonian has]... And let’s just let those guys run our national museums.”
I really admire the courage and sentiments expressed by Anthea Hartig in defending the Smithsonian. Loving one's country doesn't necessarily mean you absolve it of all its faults in displays of blind patriotism. A nation which doesn't reckon with the dark elements of its history isn't well poised to succeed going forward, and I think the U.S.'s deep divides and ensuing political gridlock are evidence of that.
Or to put it another way, let the real historians do their jobs. Reality doesn't have a liberal bias.
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH. WAR IS PEACE.