Trump goes to war against intelligence

President Donald Trump has yanked the security clearances of 37 current and former national security officials, an unprecedented move that has gutted parts of the intelligence community.

Since returning to the White House, Trump has wielded clearances as a political weapon, pulling them from perceived enemies, such as former President Joe Biden, New York Attorney General Letitia James, and other top Democrats. Now the purge has widened to career intelligence and some of the government’s most experienced analysts.

Several of those targeted had been involved in Russian interference or foreign election threats. And many had signed a 2019 letter warning that Trump’s dealings with Ukraine were serious enough to warrant impeachment proceedings. That letter resurfaced several weeks ago, when far-right conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer posted it on X and demanded that “dozens of anti-Trump officials from the CIA and [National Security Council]” who signed it lose their clearances.

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard speaks with reporters at the White House, on July 23.

Trump and his intelligence head, Tulsi Gabbard, delivered. Among those affected were Shelby Pierson, the official who warned Congress about Russia’s influence in 2020, as well as an undercover CIA analyst and Vinh X. Nguyen, a data scientist at the National Security Agency whose expertise in artificial intelligence had made him invaluable to the agency. Nguyen’s ouster stunned former colleagues, who warned his removal could set U.S. technology development back years.

The revocations are part of a broader campaign from Trump and Gabbard, echoing the president’s unfounded claims that intelligence agencies manipulated assessments about Russian interference in 2016. On Tuesday, Gabbard framed her actions as rooting out “politicization or weaponization of intelligence” but offered no evidence that the officials in question had mishandled classified material.

“Being entrusted with a security clearance is a privilege, not a right,” she wrote in a post on X, saying her actions followed Trump’s direction.

Critics say the opposite is true: The clearances themselves are being politicized. Virginia Sen. Mark Warner, the Senate Intelligence Committee’s Democratic vice chair, blasted the effort as a smokescreen.

“Hey it’s a day ending in ‘Y’ so Tulsi Gabbard has launched yet another weird gambit to distract from the administration’s failure to release the Epstein files,” he wrote on social media. Warner also told The New York Times that he’s introducing legislation to establish clear standards for granting and revoking clearances.

But Trump and Gabbard aren't acting alone. Attorney General Pam Bondi has convened a task force to reexamine the 2016 intelligence review, while CIA Director John Ratcliffe has declassified internal reports and even referred former CIA Director John Brennan to the FBI for further investigation. Together, the moves amount to a wholesale attempt to rewrite the history of Russian election interference.

The practical effects are mixed. Some of the 37 may not have held active clearances or government contracts. For current officials, losing clearance means immediate dismissal. For former officials, it strips them of the ability to consult or advise—roles many still play.

However, the symbolism is clear. Trump has weaponized the clearance system to punish critics, a strategy that will chill dissent inside agencies already wary of contradicting the White House.

Even those caught up in the dragnet mocked the move. When Trump pulled James’ clearance earlier this year, she shot back: “What security clearance?”

For lawyers like Mark Zaid, who represents intelligence officials and lost his own clearance under Trump, the hypocrisy is glaring. 

“These are unlawful and unconstitutional decisions that deviate from well-settled, decades-old laws and policies that sought to protect against just this type of action,” Zaid said in a statement to The Associated Press and others, calling the current intelligence leadership “a grave danger to national security.”

Trump commands Smithsonian to pipe down on ‘how bad Slavery was’

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump confirmed that he is going to force changes at the Smithsonian museums in Washington, D.C., including removing exhibits that talk about the ills of slavery.

Trump made the comment in a Truth Social post, in which he said that changes to the museums are part of his war on "woke”—a term conservatives can’t even define but usually refers to their anger at anything that promotes equal rights for people of color, women, and the LGBTQ+ community. 

"The Museums throughout Washington, but all over the Country are, essentially, the last remaining segment of 'WOKE.' The Smithsonian is OUT OF CONTROL, where everything discussed is how horrible our Country is, how bad Slavery was, and how unaccomplished the downtrodden have been — Nothing about Success, nothing about Brightness, nothing about the Future. We are not going to allow this to happen, and I have instructed my attorneys to go through the Museums, and start the exact same process that has been done with Colleges and Universities where tremendous progress has been made," Trump wrote. "This Country cannot be WOKE, because WOKE IS BROKE. We have the 'HOTTEST' Country in the World, and we want people to talk about it, including in our Museums."

“Whitewashing Black history” by Clay Bennett

Of course, slavery was objectively bad, and remains a stain in U.S. history. Millions of African Americans were enslaved in cruel conditions, finding themselves raped and beaten at the hands of the white slave owners who reaped the economic benefits of their indentured servants.

Indeed, the impact of slavery still hurts Black people in the U.S. today—with Black communities facing economic and educational inequities that trace back to slavery and Jim Crow segregation.

What's more, other parts of Trump's idiotic Truth Social post are also false, as Smithsonian museums absolutely do feature success stories. Not to mention, Trump's claim that the museums do not contain anything about the future is also absurd, as history museums by definition focus on history, which by definition is in the past.

Ultimately, Trump’s vow to be the arbiter of what is included in Smithsonian museums is the latest way Trump is trying to rewrite history—and make the entire country view America through his racist and egomaniacal lens.

Since his first term in office, Trump has tried to whitewash the United States’ history, including when in 2020 he announced that he was creating the 1776 Commission in order to make sure kids were not being taught that the United States is “an irredeemably and systemically racist country.” The 1776 Commission ended up releasing a report in January 2021, right before Trump was booted from office, that the American Historical Association said amounted to “a screed against a half-century of historical scholarship.”

Related | What Republicans really mean when they say ‘woke’

After taking office again in 2025, Trump quickly went to work to whitewash history, including stripping mentions of diversity and equity from government websites, which led to irrational things like the removal of photos of the Enola Gay B-29 bomber because it contained the word “gay.” A Defense Department tribute to Jackie Robinson, an Army lieutenant who became the first Black man to play Major League Baseball, was also removed. Additionally, articles about the Navajo Code Talkers, who in World War II used their native language to create a code that the Nazis could not understand that helped the Allied forces communicate battle strategy, were removed from the Defense website.

Trump also signed an executive order that deemed books that tell the story of slavery to be filled with “corrosive ideology,” and ordered them removed from the Smithsonian Institution and the national park system. And the Smithsonian changed an exhibit on presidential impeachment to make Trump's two impeachments look less damning.

Meanwhile, Trump is also attacking universities, threatening to pull funding if they do not bend to his will on everything from hiring decisions to admissions policies.

Trump during his first run for office declared that he “loves the poorly educated.” Now, he’s trying to ensure everyone in the U.S. is poorly educated, taught only his false and whitewashed view of history.

Why conservatives think American cities are hellscapes

Over the last week, President Donald Trump has tried his best to make a spectacle of sending federal agents and the National Guard into Washington to combat a nonexistent crime surge. The act has been a clear attempt to shift focus away from both his administration’s ongoing cover-up of its files on accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein, and the deterioration of the economy because of Trump’s tariff policies.

Violent crime in Washington hit a 30-year low last year, and that trend is continuing this year. However, Trump, a serial liar, has tried to counteract reality with conspiracy theories about crime statistics, and his conservative base is eating it up—but why?

Groundwork for crime narrative

In 2015 and 2016, as he pivoted from pushing the racist “birther” conspiracy theory about then-President Barack Obama and ran for president himself, Trump repeatedly claimed the country was in the middle of a dangerous crime surge, though the violent crime rate remained low. After he won the election, he used his inaugural address to speak about so-called “American carnage,” which he attributed in part to immigration—reinforcing the falsehood that Latino immigrants are mostly criminals.

Former President George W. Bush, right, and President Donald Trump, shown in 2018.

Trump’s demagoguery had deep roots in the Republican Party. Former President Ronald Reagan blamed societal ills on mythological welfare queens, and former President George W. Bush curtailed civil liberties and pushed for the invasion of Iraq based on fears of terrorist attacks from al-Qaida.

The conservative movement loves to connect fear of crime to rhetoric about racial minorities. It preys on deep-seated bigotry and motivates conservative voters to get out and vote, all as a way to stop the “other” from gaining control and allowing the spread of crime.

In more recent times, conservatives have circulated lies about the murder of Black teenager Trayvon Martin, and some right-wing circles have even celebrated his killer, George Zimmerman, as a hero. This resurfaced during Trump’s first term with the murder of George Floyd and the nationwide protests against police brutality that ensued. Instead of taking these organic expressions seriously, the right saw it as an affront to Trump and labeled even the most peaceful protests as riots blessed by top Democrats.

Trump loses to Biden, and the right doubles down on “crime”

After Trump lost the 2020 presidential election, he and the right were thrown off-balance. Reeling from this loss, he pushed for the violent attack on the government on Jan. 6, 2021, and then spent the next few years blaming Biden for a crime surge that began on his watch, during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Trump, alongside his propaganda allies at Fox News, saw crime begin to decline under Biden but kept pushing the lie that it hadn’t. To do otherwise would have undermined years of attacks against Democrats and would be an acknowledgement that the right’s “tough on crime” approach had not worked.

Then-candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign rally in Colorado last October.

The right blamed this supposed crime wave on migrants, reinforcing the conservative movement’s nativist, racist message. And they used the narrative to reinforce a long-held conservative bias against cities, which the right has railed against for their successful progressive policies and their racial and cultural diversity.

Much of this doesn’t make logical sense. The facts do not align with putting crime, racial minorities, and liberal policies all in a pile together. It makes even less sense when we remember that Fox News is headquartered in New York City, the metropolis Trump himself is a product of.

But the right loves conspiracies, and it is far easier for them to argue that liberal policies celebrating ethnic unity also promote crime than it is for them to live in reality.

Trump pulls the trigger

Trump understands his core audience more than he understands anything else in the world, and while complex ideas are out of his grasp, he is fluent in the language of bigotry.

Insurrectionists loyal to Donald Trump storm the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

By invoking crime, particularly at a moment of political vulnerability, he understands that he is activating long-simmering conservative resentments. By raising the idea of a crime wave occurring in cities with large Black populations, the tensions raised within the MAGA movement about Epstein can be eased, at least temporarily. 

This is why Trump can open prison cells and release Jan. 6 rioters who were tried and convicted, and also continue to proclaim that he is for “law and order.”

Right-wing lawmakers and media have sold conservative voters on a false narrative for so long that those voters truly believe Trump and his cohorts are fighting crime—even as they continue to cover up for an accused sex trafficker and pedophile.

Democratic leaders can bring tons of facts to conversations about crime, but most of the right is too far gone. They are too steeped in propaganda and paranoia to give reality a chance.

They were always going to believe the lies from Trump and the rest when it comes to crime. It was only a question of when it was going to happen.

Hunter Biden to Melania Trump: Bring it on

Following her husband’s lead of threatening everyone with lawsuits, first lady Melania Trump is demanding that Hunter Biden retract his statement that accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein introduced her to Donald Trump. If he doesn’t, she’s going to sue him for over $1 billion because she has suffered “overwhelming financial and reputational harm” over the comments.

What reputation does Melania Trump think she has, anyway?

Hunter Biden’s short response to her threat was “Fuck that!” which he delivered during an interview with YouTuber Andrew Callaghan. But Hunter’s longer response is even more hilarious:

“If they want to sit down for a deposition and clarify the nature of the relationship between Jeffery Epstein, if the president and the first lady want to do that … I'm more than happy to provide them the platform to be able to do it,” he said.

Per the BBC, Melania Trump’s threat was delivered by Alejandro Brito, who represents Trump in his lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal and Trump’s frivolous lawsuits against media companies.

But she’s got a few problems here as far as trying to extract a billion dollars—or even any dollars—from Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden. 

First, she doesn’t have the juice the president does. Donald Trump can leverage things like government approval of mergers. Melania Trump has no such direct leverage. What’s she going to do? Not invite him to be a volunteer to help decorate the White House for Christmas? No doubt Hunter Biden would be very sad not to have the opportunity to stroll among the blood-red trees that she thinks scream “Christmas!”

To be fair, Christmas decorations are very important for Melania Trump. But separating children from their parents, not so much. In a 2018 recording, she whined:

I’m working … my ass off on the Christmas stuff, that you know, who gives a fuck about the Christmas stuff and decorations? But I need to do it, right? … Okay, and then I do it and I say that I’m working on Christmas and planning for the Christmas and they said, ‘Oh, what about the children that they were separated?’ Give me a fucking break.

Indeed, why should Melania Trump waste her beautiful mind worrying about the effects of her husband’s immigration policies? She has other important things to do! Maybe she could revive “Be Best”—her vague well-being campaign from Trump’s first term—and demand that Hunter “donate” the customary Trump bribe of $16 million to the effort. 

These days, she is ostensibly keeping busy filming her Amazon documentary, focusing on her “day-to-day life, what I’m doing, what kind of responsibilities I have,” as she told “Fox & Friends” earlier this year. Honestly, it might be worth watching just to see what on earth she thinks are her responsibilities. Recall that the documentary is costing Amazon $40 million. Maybe she can threaten not to include Hunter in what is no doubt going to be a totally legit documentary and not just a payoff from Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos to the president’s family. 

President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump arrive to view opening night of "Les Miserables" at the Kennedy Center on June 11.

Or maybe she could just write another book about how hard this all is for her and then have a robot read it.

Melania Trump may not have paid much attention to the endless defamation lawsuits that Trump has filed, but you’ll note that most do not reach the discovery stage, thanks to the whole payoff thing. Trump is still dodging being deposed in his own lawsuit against niece Mary Trump. That’s why Hunter’s comments are so perfect. Lawsuits require discovery and depositions, not just waving around a letter demanding $1 billion. And we know full well that both Melania and Donald Trump do not want to talk about Epstein.

The second problem for Melania Trump is that Hunter Biden is only repeating things that have been reported in the media. It’s tough to make a defamation claim stick in that event. This isn’t a situation where Hunter popped off with something no one had ever heard. 

Finally, it’s not clear that she realizes that Hunter honestly doesn’t have anything more to lose. He’s been dragged through criminal cases, and the House won’t stop investigating him. He doesn’t have a billion dollars, so good luck getting that.

In other words, bring it on, Melania. All you’ve really done is tee up a lawsuit that would require the deposition of your husband about Jeffrey Epstein. Masterful gambit, ma’am.

How is the White House erasing history this week?

The White House is reportedly launching a sweeping review of Smithsonian museums to make sure they align with President Donald Trump’s sanitized version of U.S. history.

The news comes via a bombshell Wall Street Journal report, which details the White House’s push ahead of America’s 250th anniversary, which will be celebrated on July 4, 2026. In a letter to Smithsonian secretary Lonnie Bunch, three senior White House officials demanded that the museums embody “unity, progress, and enduring values that define the American story” in line with Trump’s March executive order on “Restoring Truth and Sanity to American History.”

Trump’s crusade to rewrite history will leave no stone unturned. The Journal reports that everything—from exhibition text and digital content to curatorial decisions, collection management, and artist funding—will be scrutinized.

The letter was signed by White House senior associate Lindsey Halligan, Domestic Policy Council Director Vince Haley, and Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought. And it calls for replacing “divisive or ideologically driven” language with “unifying, historically accurate” materials.

“This is about preserving trust in one of our most cherished institutions,” Halligan told The Journal. “The Smithsonian museums and exhibits should be accurate, patriotic, and enlightening—ensuring they remain places of learning, wonder, and national pride for generations to come.” 

People wait in line to enter the Smithsonian National Museum of African American History and Culture, in Washington, in 2017.

But this is a hard sell given Trump’s track record. His administration has aggressively purged diversity, equity, and inclusion content from federal websites, erasing mentions of Navajo Code Talkers from the Defense Department’s websites, and deleting tributes to Black, Hispanic, and female service members from the Arlington Cemetery website.

The White House’s latest Smithsonian effort takes place amid other recent controversies at the storied museum. In July, the museum removed a temporary installation referencing Trump’s two impeachments from an exhibit that also displayed artifacts related to the impeachments (or resignations) of former Presidents Bill Clinton, Andrew Johnson, and Richard Nixon. After facing public condemnation, the placards were restored, though with softened text and a less prominent placement.

And this is all part of the Trump administration’s broader effort to reshape history. Last week, the National Park Service announced it would reinstall a statue of Confederate General Albert Pike in Washington, D.C.—a man who advocated expelling free Black people from Arkansas—after protesters toppled it in 2020. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth dismissed monument removals as the work of “woke lemmings.”

The Journal reports the Smithsonian’s Board of Regents has agreed to a full review of its museums and zoo to root out supposed political bias. But Trump’s executive order accuses the institution of pushing a “divisive, race-centered ideology” that paints American and Western values as harmful. Vice President JD Vance, a board member, has been tasked with helping block funding for exhibitions that clash with Trump’s racist agenda.

The White House’s Smithsonian review will focus on eight museums in D.C., including the National Museum of African American History and Culture, the National Museum of the American Indian, and the National Portrait Gallery. In other words, expect more women and people of color to be targeted.

The process is slated to wrap up in early 2026, just in time for Trump to claim victory over “wokeness” during the anniversary celebrations.

It’s a stark example of how far Trump and his allies will go to purge anything remotely inclusive from America’s cultural memory. But this isn’t about “restoring truth”—he wants to rewrite it altogether.

GOP is freaking out over Texas Senate race

A prominent right-wing super PAC is begging its donors to help prop up Texas GOP Sen. John Cornyn's Senate bid, saying that if he is not the nominee, the seat could flip to Democrats next November, Punchbowl News reported.

According to a slide presentation from the Senate Leadership Fund—a super PAC tied to outgoing Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky—Cornyn is currently losing to scandal-plagued Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton by an average of 17 percentage points.

In the presentation, SLF noted that it may need as much as $70 million to help Cornyn survive the primary. They view this as a necessary expenditure as they fear Paxton could lose a general election to a Democrat. 

According to one slide in the deck, SLF presented polling showing Cornyn leads Democratic Senate candidate Collin Allred by 6 points in a hypothetical head-to-head matchup, while Paxton trails Allred by 1 point. What’s more, SLF said that if Cornyn loses the primary to Paxton, Republicans could need to spend as much as $250 million to prop up Paxton in a general election matchup.

Texas has been reliably Republican in presidential years, and no Democrat has won a Senate seat in the state since 1988. However, in a midterm with President Donald Trump in office, the seat could prove more competitive.

Back in 2018—Trump's first midterm year—Republicans barely held on to Texas' Senate seat, with Republican Ted Cruz defeating Democrat Beto O'Rourke by just over 2 points.

Paxton would be as much of a liability for Republicans as loathsome Cruz—or more.

Texas Sens. John Cornyn, left, and Ted Cruz pose for pictures in 2019 near Sarita, Texas.

Paxton was indicted on felony securities fraud charges, though they were later dropped in 2024, in exchange for agreeing to perform community service.

Paxton was also impeached by the state House in 2023 for alleged bribery and allegedly having an affair, but he was acquitted of the charges by the state Senate, which Republicans control.

And in July, Paxton's wife—state Sen. Angela Paxton—filed for divorce from Paxton, accusing him of adultery.

However, while those abhorrent actions would be a liability in a general election, Republican primary voters—who love Trump, a notorious adulterer and corrupt leader—are not as repelled by Paxton’s behavior. 

Indeed, SLF said in their slide presentation that Cornyn is losing because GOP primary voters view Paxton as more conservative.

Seeking to change his grim odds in the race, Cornyn has been desperate for Trump to weigh in on the race. Cornyn told Fox News in July that he has spoken to Trump about a prospective endorsement, saying that would guarantee him a primary win. 

Cornyn also pandered to Trump by trying to sic the FBI on the Texas Democratic lawmakers who fled the state to prevent Republicans from corruptly redrawing the state's congressional maps to rig the 2026 midterm elections. Trump ordered Texas to redraw the state’s congressional map, hoping it would make it harder for Democrats to win the U.S. House next November and save him from facing investigations and a check on his power.

Paxton is also hoping for Trump’s endorsement, going as far as reportedly stalking Trump on a recent trip to Scotland to win Trump’s blessing. 

Texas’ Senate contest is currently rated a “Likely Republican” contest by Inside Elections, a nonpartisan political handicapping outlet. 

This Texas Republican stalked Trump to get his endorsement—and flopped

To win President Donald Trump’s endorsement amid a rough GOP Senate primary, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton did what most of us would be too embarrassed to do: He stalked Trump.

CNN reports that Paxton made an unannounced visit to Trump’s golf resort in Turnberry, Scotland, last month, where he just happened to bump into the president. It’s unclear if Trump was expecting the pop-in, though they reportedly spoke about the primary, where Paxton is challenging incumbent John Cornyn from the right.

It’s not the only time Paxton has gone out of his way to win Trump over. Earlier this summer, a pro-Paxton political action committee aired its first TV ad in Palm Beach, Florida—right where Trump could see it from Mar-a-Lago—and far from Texas.

It’s the kind of pandering and political theater Trump has come to expect. In today’s GOP, making another man the centerpiece of your brand is seen as a strategic move, not an embarrassing one. Paxton flew 4,500 miles just to kiss the ring.

Republican Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, shown in January.

But Paxton’s gotta do what he’s gotta do to win this messy primary. And with Rep. Wesley Hunt eyeing a run, it could get even more volatile. But despite his cross-continental pilgrimage, Paxton has nothing to show for it. Trump hasn’t endorsed anyone, and sources close to the president say he’s holding back for now. He’s got time too: The primary isn’t until March.

Cornyn and Paxton, longtime rivals, are now in what’s becoming one of the marquee Republican showdowns of the 2026 midterm cycle. The two have never been allies. Cornyn has long viewed Paxton as a scandal magnet and legal risk, while Paxton paints Cornyn as a swampy moderate out of step with the MAGA base. The animosity runs deep, fueling an increasingly sycophantic race to win Trump’s favor.

Paxton might have the upper hand with the GOP grassroots—at least for now. Numerous public and private polls show him leading Cornyn in the primary. But he also carries baggage. He’s in the middle of a high-profile divorce after his wife accused him of adultery, a saga that could turn voters off as it becomes more public. He was also impeached by the Texas House in 2023 on charges of abusing his office to benefit a political donor—though he was later acquitted by the Senate.

Then there’s Paxton’s role in enforcing Texas’s near-total abortion ban. In March, his office filed the state’s first criminal charges under the law, arresting a Houston-area midwife and one of her employees. While that may appeal to hard-line conservatives, it could alienate suburban voters who have trended away from the GOP in recent years.

Trump’s team is watching the race closely, according to CNN, since the outcome could influence control of the Senate in 2026. With Republicans bracing for a possible loss of their House majority—despite aggressive gerrymandering—their Senate majority takes on increased importance. A flawed nominee like Paxton could give Democrats a shot in flipping the seat next November. 

“Winning is all that matters to the president,” an anonymous Republican strategist close to the White House told CNN. They also emphasized that loyalty isn’t the key to unlock Trump’s endorsement—it’s supposedly electability.

Republican Rep. Wesley Hunt of Texas, shown in 2023.

That’s why Cornyn may still have a chance. He’s a seasoned fundraiser, aligned with Senate leadership, and has never lost a statewide race. While Trump’s style may seem more compatible with Paxton, a messy general election in a state slowly turning purple might make Cornyn the safer choice.

There’s also the wildcard of Hunt, who could split the pro-Trump vote. A Black Iraq War veteran with ties to both MAGA activists and the GOP establishment, Hunt could force Trump to pick sides sooner than planned—or decide not to endorse at all. Hunt’s entry would only escalate the scramble for Trump's backing.

Still, Paxton leads most polls of the primary, and if he wins, it’ll likely boost Democrats’ chances of flipping the seat. Former Rep. Colin Allred has announced his campaign, and there are whispers that state Rep. James Talarico might join him in the primary. Texas has long been a white whale for Democrats—tantalizingly close in some cycles but always just out of reach. They believe a damaged GOP nominee like Paxton could tip the scales.

That’s exactly what national Republicans want to avoid. Senate Majority Leader John Thune and others have endorsed Cornyn, worried that nominating Paxton could jeopardize the seat—and the Senate majority.

Meanwhile, Trump is in no rush. As Texas Republicans trip over themselves to prove who's more loyal, he’s sitting back and soaking it in—relishing the spectacle of grown men groveling for his approval.

Bigoted congresswoman wants to spread hate across her home state

Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, one of the most hateful Republicans in Congress, just announced her campaign for governor of South Carolina in 2026.

In a video posted to social media Monday, Mace strongly aligned herself with President Donald Trump, despite once being one of his most vocal critics. The clip includes footage of Trump calling her a “fighter.”

She has reportedly been in contact with the White House about her plans, though it’s uncertain if she will receive Trump’s “complete and total” endorsement.

Not long ago, that might have seemed impossible. After Trump supporters attacked the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, Mace criticized Trump, saying, “I hold him accountable for the events that transpired.” One day after barricading her office, she told The State newspaper, “I can’t condone the rhetoric from yesterday, where people died and all the violence.”

Her former staffers say her behind-the-scenes reaction was even more theatrical. According to The Washington Post, Mace considered filming herself confronting the insurrectionists so that she could get punched and go viral as one of the fiercest anti-Trump Republicans. Her team talked her out of it. When asked about the story later, she deflected: “What you write doesn’t pass for real journalism.”

Despite her supposed outrage, Mace never voted to impeach Trump and soon stopped trying to distance herself from him. Trump repaid her wobbliness by endorsing a primary challenger in 2022—Katie Arrington—but Mace survived. By the next year, she’d morphed into one of his staunchest defenders.

Republican Rep. Nancy Mace of South Carolina, left, greets President Donald Trump as he arrives to address a joint session of Congress at the Capitol on March 4.

If that sounds like a political transformation, it wasn’t. Mace hasn’t changed; she’s just adjusted her approach. Her brand is whatever keeps her relevant. In 2023, she called herself “pro-transgender rights.” A year later, she introduced a resolution to ban trans women from using women’s restrooms at the Capitol—targeting incoming Democratic Rep. Sarah McBride, the first openly trans member of Congress. She also promoted broader legislation affecting all federal buildings and schools.

She has kept up this momentum into 2025. During a House Oversight Committee meeting in January, Mace tried to corner former Democratic Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland with a question about defining a “woman.” It failed. The next month, she used an anti-trans slur during another hearing, and when the late Rep. Gerry Connolly called her out, she declared, “I don’t really care.” In November, according to Newsweek, she tweeted about bathrooms 326 times over 72 hours, a few days after McBride’s election victory.

But Mace isn’t just running on culture-war issues. In February, she stunned the House by accusing her ex-fiancé of rape, assault, and sex trafficking—naming him and other alleged abusers during a speech. She also directly criticized South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, accusing him of slow-walking the investigation. Wilson, now a GOP primary rival, announced his bid for governor in June.

The Republican field also includes Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette and Rep. Ralph Norman, one of the most right-wing members of the House. Gov. Henry McMaster is term-limited and will not run again.

At 47, Mace has been preparing for this moment for years. She first gained attention in 1999 as the first female cadet to graduate from Charleston’s Citadel military academy. In 2014, she ran a long-shot Senate campaign against Lindsey Graham, earning just 6%. She didn’t win, but she made herself known.

Trump later hired her to boost his 2016 South Carolina primary effort—at a time when few Republicans wanted to be seen with him. After a brief stint in the state legislature, she flipped a Democratic-held congressional seat in 2020.

Since then, Mace has cynically reinvented herself several times. She’s aligned with Trump, broken away from him, then rejoined when it suited her. She’s called herself a centrist on some topics, then embraced the far right. Throughout, she has prioritized her own interests.

Recent polls suggest she might enter the primary with a slight advantage, but there is no clear front-runner yet. With 2026 likely to be a challenging cycle for Republicans, this race could offer an early glimpse of what the post-Trump GOP will look like in the South—if that exists at all.

Trump’s demand the Smithsonian erase history is equal parts terrifying and pathetic

If you’re planning a trip to the Smithsonian’s National Museum of American History, make sure to check out “The American Presidency: A Glorious Burden,” which will teach you about all the presidents who were impeached or resigned in lieu of impeachment. So there’s Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and … huh, that’s it. 

Yes, if you look for information on President Donald Trump’s two first-term impeachments, you won’t find it in this exhibit. The Smithsonian removed them in July.

The renowned museum told NPR it would put them back one day. Sometime in the future. It wouldn’t share a timeline.

It happened. Twice.

Until that day, if it ever comes, the Smithsonian is a part of Trump’s rewriting of history, one that treats his presidency like an unvarnished success, a testament to the greatness of the man himself.

Though the administration very likely forced this removal, the Smithsonian spokesperson is still obliged to pretend this is just a normal thing, no big deal, just regular museum stuff where you have to roll back history 18 years, you know? 

“Because the other topics in this section had not been updated since 2008, the decision was made to restore the Impeachment case back to its 2008 appearance,” the museum said in a statement.

You see, they can’t include Trump’s impeachments because it’s just so much work to update things, per the administration’s statement to NPR: “A large permanent gallery like The American Presidency that opened in 2000, requires [a] significant amount of time and funding to update and renew. A future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments.” 

That explanation might be a little less transparently bullshit if Trump’s twin impeachments hadn’t been included in the exhibit since September 2021. 

If you ask the White House, they will explain to you that this is really all about returning America to its former glory and, of course, eradicating forbidden diversity. Per White House spokesperson Davis Ingle, for too long, the Smithsonian “highlighted divisive DEI exhibits which are out of touch with mainstream America,” and that the White House is “fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness.” 

It’s not just that the administration wants to remove negative history about Trump, though that is a driving force. It’s also about wanting the Republican Party, the federal government, and everyone else to display constant fealty to Trump. That’s why you see GOP proposals to put him on the $100 bill and on Mount Rushmore, to rename parts of the Kennedy Center after him and his wife, and to rename the Washington subway system the “Trump Train.”

But it also extends beyond Trump. They want to rewrite American history more broadly so that it panders to those like Trump and his ilk: white, straight, cis, conservative, rich. Vice President JD Vance has been empowered to purge museums of anything that doesn’t align with Trump’s view of American history as an unbroken success story. Trump’s team has demanded that museums and the national parks remove anything that’s supposedly divisive, which broadly translates to things that make white people sad. 

It used to feel like saying Trump wanted to memory-hole the history he doesn’t like was a bit of a stretch. These days, though, if anything, it may be an understatement.

Trump seeks to leave his gold-plated stain on the White House

The second Donald Trump presidency is horrifyingly destructive, a bunch of end-times enthusiasts ripping the wire out of the walls, but have you considered that it is also persistently frivolous? Take for instance his $200 million ballroom addition to the White House, which he unveiled plans for on Thursday.

If you were wondering if this proposed addition will be a gilded palace as ugly as one of his homes or as his ongoing gold-plating of the Oval Office, the answer is yes: “Renderings provided by the White House depict a vast space with gold and crystal chandeliers, gilded Corinthian columns, a coffered ceiling with gold inlays, gold floor lamps and a checkered marble floor,” says CNN.

Even the rendering provided by the White House screams super-sized Mar-a-Lago ballroom, which is most definitely not a compliment. 

An American flag flies in front of the White House on July 23.

Trump really does see himself as a master developer, a very special boy because he—and he alone—can build a ballroom. 

“They’ve wanted a ballroom at the White House for more than 150 years, but there’s never been a president that was good at ballrooms,” Trump said on Thursday. “I’m good at building things and we’re going to build quickly and on time. It’ll be beautiful, top, top of the line.”

Truly, that is what the past occupants of the White House have yearned for, an ever-deferred dream that only Trump could fulfill. 

Trump keeps saying that the $200 million cost will be borne by himself and private donors, and that it will be his “gift to the country.” The notion that outside donors will pay for this garish thing is supposed to sound better than taxpayer dollars being spent on it, but all it really highlights is this is just another way to bribe the president.

Indeed, Trump has created many opportunities for donors to line his pockets in the hopes of receiving favorable treatment. You could buy his stupid memecoin, which might’ve gotten you invited to a dinner with him. If you’re a media company, you could agree to settle a frivolous lawsuit filed by Trump in his personal capacity, and donate millions to his future presidential library.  

Of course, the opportunity to make a teeny, little seven-figure donation to Trump’s inauguration fund in order to possibly avoid regulatory oversight has come and gone, so why not figure out a way to help “donate” to build America’s Ugliest Ballroom?

President Donald Trump speaks in the Roosevelt Room of the White House on July 30.

The fact this is even top of mind right now is ridiculous. Trump has been busy tearing the government down to the studs for months, but now he wants everyone to focus on his alleged ability to create beauty, to transform a space. He doesn’t have that ability, literally or figuratively. What he’s demanding is a hagiography, a rewriting of history that, as prize-winning reporter Jonathan Capehart put it on Thursday, is a funhouse mirror, a pretense at patriotism that is quite the opposite.

“Unapologetic patriotism is incomplete if it doesn't allow for a mirror to be held up to America, her people, and her president—to hold them all accountable when they have strayed from her founding principles,” Capehart said.

The desire to gold-plate the White House, to fritter away time on building projects and the like, highlights how un-serious Trump is. Yes, he’s deeply serious about using the government to destroy everything he hates, but he’s got people for that now—a whole Cabinet full. But he can’t help but fixate on imposing his tacky stamp on the country and forcing us to stare. 

It’s the same impulse behind the birthday military parade and apparently pressuring the Smithsonian to remove references to his two impeachments. His need for adulation—and gold leaf, apparently—is bottomless.