Trump is clearly bitter that his name is not on the Kennedy Center facade. The tarp that covers the original name still hangs, hiding the humiliation of Trump’s name removal.
Last week he cut down 40 weeping willow trees on the Center grounds, which symbolized a grieving nation, grieving for the assassinated President Kennedy.
This week, the Kennedy Center is removing a piece of outdoor art called “Blue,” which was installed in 2019. The artist, Joel Shapiro, thought it was a permanent installation.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts began removing a major outdoor sculpture from the center’s grounds on Wednesday. The work, installed in 2019, was targeted for elimination after President Trump’s takeover of the center, according to internal documents obtained by The New York Times.
The Kennedy Center made no advance announcement of its plans to remove the towering, vivid blue metal sculpture of a stick-like human figure, called “Blue.”
On Wednesday morning, the limbs and torso of the figure were wrapped in protective material; an arm was the first to be removed.
The Kennedy Center confirmed in a statement on Tuesday that the sculpture was being deinstalled and that a foundation dedicated to the artist would determine its next location. It did not say the reason for the removal but noted that the deinstallation of artworks that had been donated or lent was common practice for conservation or preservation purposes.
A news release from around the debut of “Blue” describes it as a permanent sculpture for the grounds.
“We are deeply grateful to Joel Shapiro for the years ‘Blue’ has spent animating our campus and connecting visitors to his vision,” the statement said. “We are honored to have been stewards of his vibrant work and a part of his enduring legacy.”
Mr. Shapiro died in 2025. His daughter, Ivy Shapiro, who is president of his foundation, said in an interview that she thought her father would have been “alarmed” that the sculpture was being taken down from its intended location.
“In Joel’s mind, it was one of his greatest site-specific commissions, which celebrated joy, freedom and creativity,” she said.
Ms. Shapiro declined to discuss what she was told about the Kennedy Center’s reasoning for removing the sculpture. Her father had given it to the center as a gift, but she said that it was now owned by the foundation, and that she would like to see it installed at another public site.
The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Josef Palermo, who was laid off in March as the curator of visual arts and special programming at the Kennedy Center, wrote in an essay for The Atlantic that he had been instructed to remove works from the center’s permanent art collection, and told that Mr. Trump’s renovations would include new art.
In an interview on Tuesday, Mr. Palermo recalled that “Blue” had been “targeted early on” and said he took issue with the lack of an announcement.
“The Kennedy Center,” he said, “is in effect holding these pieces in trust for the American people, and there should be a lot more transparency.”
The sculpture is on the grounds of the Reach, an addition to the Kennedy Center that opened in 2019. The sculpture was completed that same year by Mr. Shapiro, whose public art is found in cities around the world. One of his most prominent works is a tree-like bronze sculpture, called “Loss and Regeneration,” that is situated outside the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington.
“Blue,” which is visible from the Potomac and roads traversing the Kennedy Center, has become a local landmark. In a video about the work that was posted by the Kennedy Center around the time of its debut, Mr. Shapiro said he designed it so the figure would appear in different positions depending on the vantage point of the viewer.
“It’s about action and risk and performance and energy,” he said of the work. “It’s a celebration of possibility.”
Of course, Trump had to remove a sculpture that celebrated “Joy, freedom, and creativity.” These are qualities that Trump has never experienced and does not appreciate.
Will it be replaced by a statue of Trump? Gold, of course.
The Washington Postobtained internal financial documents of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. The documents confirm what many suspected: the Trump takeover was a financial disaster.
Before Trump, the Center was decidedly nonpartisan. Its board contained members of different political parties and no political party. When Trump took over, he cleaned out the entire board, excepting members of Congress whom he could not fire. He replaced the board with Trump loyalists, who tried to turn the institution into a monument to Dear Leader Trump. And the board fired the key members of the staff, who were professionals.
Once Trump’s name was added to the facade, artists and performances canceled, and ticket sales dropped precipitously.
Trump’s people said that any problems were inherited from the previous board and pretended that the Trump-Kennedy Center was better, more successful than ever.
Lies. Lies. Lies.
Someone handed the Center’s financial documents to The Washington Post.
Reporter Jonathan Edwards wrote:
““The center took a huge hit when the takeover happened,” and then appeared to stabilize, according to an official familiar with the center’s financial situation. But after the name change, “it was just an absolute fiscal cliff. Donors disappeared, ticket sales disappeared, artists disappeared — like it was doomsday.”
One outside observer said that the fallout after the name change was catastrophic. A spokesman for the Kennedy Center said that any financial problems were the fault of the previous management.
But common sense suggests that putting Trump’s name on a memorial to John F. Kennedy was disastrous, not only because patrons were repelled by the name change and by the politicization of a beloved arts institution, but because the new, inexperienced staff was incompetent.
As is often said, whatever Trump touches soon dies.
Trump’s lawyers yesterday threatened to demolish the Kennedy Center if he is not allowed to close it for two years and renovate it. His “expertise” as a builder makes him uniquely qualified to rebuild the Kennedy Center, his lawyers said.
He forgets that his full-time job is President. He has no time to manage construction, although he is very good at destruction. In New York City, he was never known as a “master builder.” He cut corners. He hired undocumented workers to save money. He stiffed subcontractors.
When he built Trump Tower, he saved money by not installing fire detectors. An apartment owner died a few years ago because he didn’t get out in time no fire detector or smoke alarm). He promised to donate the elegant friezes at the front of Bonwit Teller to the Metropolitan Museum, but he demolished these priceless items because it would cost too much to preserve them.
After he became President in January 2025, Trump has been determined to remake the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts into one of his possessions.
He fired the bipartisan board and replaced it with his trusted associates. His board immediately named him chairman of the board and voted to put his name on the building, which was named in 1964 to honor the memory of the assassinated President John F. Kennedy.
In response to the addition of Trump’s name, performers and major productions began canceling, the Washington National Opera moved out, and ticket sales sharply declined. The Center’s revenues plummeted.
The board’s response to the wreckage they created was to propose to close the Center for two years for renovations.
Joyce Beatty, a board member and a member of Congress from Ohio, sued to restore the building’s original name and to prevent the board from closing it for two years. She prevailed in court, and a federal judge ordered the board to remove Trump’s name from the building, the website and all other places and to stop plans to close the Center without providing a reasonable explanation.
In court yesterday, the Trump administration’s lawyer said that the President would demolish the building if he was not allowed to close it and renovate it.
The John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts will eventually have to be demolished unless President Donald Trump is allowed to save it, Justice Department lawyers representing the center argued in a court filing posted late Monday.
The center, which the lawyers described as “structurally unsound, fundamentally unsafe, and embarrassing to the Nation’s Capital,” faces “terminal decline” without Trump’s experience as a real estate developer and fundraising prowess, assistant attorney general Brett Shumate and two other department lawyers wrote.
“Without those efforts, the Center will deteriorate further into an unsafe, decrepit structure that will be required to be taken down,” Shumate wrote. It could be replaced by a structure “such as a large outdoor amphitheater,” he added.
Trump is a big baby. If he can’t put his name on the Kennedy memorial, he will tear down the Center altogether, as he tore down the East Wing of the White House without seeking permission to do so. He is determined to put his name on the Kennedy Center, and the board recently voted to try again.
He is a model of stolen honor. The world knows that he is obsessed with Obama and Biden, but neither of them has a monument that Trump can deface. Next best: Put his name on Kennedy’s memorial center. He was admired, revered, and idolized as Trump has never been and never will be. So, of course, Trump has to slap his name on the Kennedy Center.
What else will Trump rename to honor himself? The Lincoln-Trump Memorial? The Washington-Trump Monument?
One of Donald Trump’s first acts when he returned to the Presidency was to take full control of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. During his first term in office, Trump never attended any event at the Kennedy Center.
In 2025, Trump fired its board of directors, all except members of Congress, whom he can’t fire. He replaced the bipartisan board with his cronies, who promptly named Trump the chairman of the board. The board proceeded to fire the professionals who ran the Center and to adopt a resolution renaming the Center. Henceforward, the board decreed, the Center would be known as the John F. Kennedy and Donald J. Trump Center for the Performing Arts.
That decision led the Center into a spiral of decline. Many performers and shows cancelled. The Washington National Opera moved out. Ticket sales dropped.
The Kennedy Center suffered incalculable reputation damage after he politicized it. Why did he do it?
Despite his wealth and notoriety, Trump was never accepted into the world of high culture in New York City. He was never invited to serve on the boards of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Lincoln Center, Carnegie Hall, the Museum of Modern Art, or any of the city’s other prestigious institutions of high culture. Nor was he known as a donor to those institutions.
He built his brand as a brash businessman who hung out in night clubs with mobsters and beautiful women and sought recognition in the gossip columns of the city’s tabloid press. He was rich, and he was a celebrity, but he was never admitted into elite circles.
His vendetta against the Kennedy Center should be seen in that perspective.
His puppet board at the Kennedy Center did his bidding. In addition to adding his name to the facade of the building, the board decided to close the Center for two years for repairs and renovations. The closure would halt the embarrassment of canceled performances and empty seats. Some critics worried that Trump would tear down the Center as he tore down the East Wing of the White House. Act fast and don’t apologize.
One board member, Congresswoman Joyce Beatty of Ohio, sued to stop the board’s decision to rename the Center and also to close it for two years for Trump-directed “renovations.”
U.S. District Judge Christopher R. Cooper ruled on May 29, 2026, that the Kennedy Center board did not have the legal authority to rename the institution. He said that Congress had established the name by statute and only Congress could change it. He ordered the removal of Trump’s name from the building and from all official Kennedy Center materials. Judge Cooper gave the board a deadline of 14 days.
The Kennedy Center board considered an appeal to delay or reverse the order but ultimately complied. Workers began on June 12 to erect scaffolding in front of the building, moving at a snail’s pace, and began removing Trump’s name at 1:20 a.m. on June 13.
Since then, the facade of the building that shows its name has been covered by white tarps.
At first, Trump petulantly said that Congress should run the Kennedy Center, but he soon reverted to control mode.
On August 13, 2026, the Kennedy Center board voted to put Trump’s name back on the building. It wants to add an inscription saying the center was “Restored and Renovated by President Donald J. Trump,” despite Judge Cooper’s earlier ruling. And it voted to name the large plaza in front of the Center for Trump. It also voted to close the Center for two years, which Judge Cooper said it could not do without more detailed plans and reasons.
Congresswoman Joyce Beatty is suing to reverse the board’s defiance of Judge Cooper’s May 29 decision.
At the same time, the Trump administration is appealing Judge Cooper’s original order.
Judge Cooper could hold the board in contempt of court. Or he could order them not to change the name, as he did in May. Or he could accept the new wording for the facade, which seems unlikely. Or the board could challenge Judge Cooper’s decision to higher courts. Or Congress could step in and rewrite the statute so that Trump could add his name.
Why is the board so insistent on honoring Trump? His hand-picked President Richard Grennell praised Trump for “his visionary leadership.” Board members appointed by him have lavished praise on him.
Trump needs this sycophantic behavior. At his Cabinet meetings, Cabinet secretaries mouth the same obsequious language, stoking his ego, which is insatiable.
Why does this squabble over the Kennedy Center even matter? The U.S. is stuck in a war with Iran that has caused loss of life, depleted our supply of weapons, and harmed the global economy by limiting the flow of oil.
But Trump is deeply engaged in his vanity projects, of which this is one. He is obsessed with his ballroom, which has been stopped by the courts temporarily but is under construction. He assumes it will be known as “the Donald J. Trump Ballroom” forever. He intends to build a 250′ triumphal Arch, despite overwhelming public opposition. He ripped out Jackie Kennedy’s rose garden and paved it over.
He’s doing something to the portico of the White House, but it is hidden by huge shrouds. He is installing a permanent helipad on the White House grounds. He is renovating the Lincoln Bedroom into who-knows-what. He wants to paint the historic grey granite Eisenhower Office Building white, although preservationists have warned him against it (the paint won’t last and it is likely to damage the granite).
All of this is about leaving a permanent mark on D.C. He was not engaged in vanity projects during his first term. Now, at the age of 80, aware of his mortality, he is obsessed by his passion to create a permanent legacy.
Of the many monuments in Washington, D.C., that honor presidents–the Washington Monument, the Jefferson Memorial, the Lincoln Memorial, the Kennedy Center–all were created after the honoree was dead.
Perhaps Trump, who is deeply insecure despite his braggadocio, is afraid he won’t be honored after his death. He remains angry that he never was accepted into the top ranks of New York City’s elite. They treated him like scum. That may be why he is so intent on building Trump monuments while he can.
Act first, get permission later from commissions packed with your flunkies.
Greg Olear, author and blogger, saw Christopher Nolan’s film The Odyssey at a matinee on the first day it was released. His review is informed, thoughtful, and incisive. If you never read The Odyssey, you will enjoy reading Olear’s review and learning about it; if you have read it, even long ago, you will enjoy his review.
I saw the film two days ago in the one movie house in the village of Greenport, NY. No IMAX 70 theater. The Odyssey is spectacular. If it doesn’t win the Academy Award, I willl be astonished. So too for Matt Damon and Anne Hathaway, both of whom are wonderful.
The critical reviews that I read were picky and insubstantial. Elon Musk was outraged by the film’s ethnic diversity. Helen of Troy is portrayed by a Black woman, Athena is brown-skinned. One character, a soldier in Odysseus’ army, is well-known as trans (Elliott Page).
Musk allegedly has hired Mel Gibson to make a new film about Homer’s classic, one that is “historically accurate.” Bring it on. Homer never mentions the race or ethnicity of his characters.
The works attributed to Homer were created around the 8th to 7th century BCE, probably between 725 and 675 BCE, as oral poetry. Who knows what is historically accurate?
The great effect of the film is that it is a great motivator to read the original. It may even contribute to a revival of the classics.
May the deities bless Christopher Nolan, who brought the film to life.
Past a certain point, recorded history recedes into darkness, just as our individual memories of early childhood vanish into a twilight oblivion. If the siege of Troy by the Mycenaean Greeks isn’t a false historical memory—and I don’t think it is; I think it’s an actual historical event—then the war took place in a past so remote that its events have merged with fiction, mythology, and dream so as to be indistinguishable.
How long ago was it? By the time Homer came along, some three thousand years ago, the Trojan War was already a distant memory. Between the fall of Troy and The Odyssey of Homer came the Late Bronze Age Collapse of 1200-1150 BCE, followed by the Greek Dark Ages, a gaping historical hole of some 400 years during which all of the ancient societies of the Eastern Mediterranean and the Near East abruptly and simultaneously went dark.
There is much we don’t know, may never know. Heck, we’re not even sure if Homer is real. The late academic and translator E.V. Rieu, who founded Penguin Classics, tells us that “[i]t is beyond question that he is the earliest surviving Greek writer; probable that he lived in the tenth century before Christ in one or other of those cities which the Greeks had established on the Aegean coast of Asia Minor; and quite likely that he actually committed his poems to writing, though the art was still perhaps hardly known save to the minstrel family to which he belonged. The rest, including his blindness, is legend or guesswork, and there is nothing to be gleaned from the text that gives us any insight into the poet’s personality. Rieu wrote that in May of 1945. Since then, scholars have come to believe that Homer, if he lived at all, was active in the eighth, not the tenth, century BCE.
It was long assumed by scholars that Troy itself was mythical. Not so. Troy was a real place. It stood at the southern shores of the Dardanelles, at the entrance to the narrow strait connecting the Mediterranean to the Black Sea. And there is evidence that a sack of the city did take place, right around 1180 BCE—in the middle of the Collapse. Was there really a Trojan War? Like, why would a people invest so much time and energy in recounting the events of a world-altering conflict that was pure fiction?
I’ve read The Odyssey twice—once in high school, for English class; and once a year or two after college, to reacquaint myself with what is one of the foundational texts of Western civilization. I liked it better the second time; I no longer joked about wanting to hurl my copy into the wine-dark sea.
Odysseus is a cool cat. Unlike Frodo and company in Lord of the Rings, who survive their perilous travels by dumb luck—the miraculous intervention of an eagle or an elf or whatever—Odysseus relies on his cunning to make it through. He is, after all, the mastermind of the “hollow horse” stratagem that broke the stalemate and won the war. He’s not a big strong brute; he’s a smarty—a character I can get behind. And the themes of The Odyssey—homecoming, exile, fidelity, honor, memory, and the Mycenaean Greek iteration of PTSD—are evergreen.
When I heard that Christopher Nolan, the auteur filmmaker who brought us Inception, Tenet, and Oppenheimer, was making The Odyssey—and with Matt Damon, of all people, in the title role—I was puzzled. The trailers I saw looked meh. Would this be a big flop? How on earth would he pull it off?
Most importantly: what is Nolan’s vision for the source material? What novel take would he bring to literally the oldest plot known to man? And: why did he feel the need to make TheOdysseynow, at this moment in history? I was less excited about the movie as I was curious. Not wanting it spoiled, I went to the Friday matinee—the first available showing.
First things first: The Odyssey is a lights-out, unequivocal masterpiece. It’s so good, on so many levels. But Anne Hathaway is the highlight. She plays Penelope—Odysseus’s wife, the Queen of Ithaca, who works dutifully at her loom waiting for her long-lost husband to come home, as a throng of uncouth, cruel, Hegsethian suitors commandeer the palace, in the hopes of winning her hand once it is determined that Odysseus is dead. (Spoiler alert: Unlike Mitch McConnell, he is not.) There is none of the warm, chipper, happy-go-lucky Prada-Devil assistant here; it’s a dark part, and she plays it dark. It’s an exquisite performance.
As usual, I underestimated Matt Damon. Oppenheimer got its share of critical flowers, but as I’ve written here, it’s basically two Wikipedia pages in film form. The problem, I realized on Friday, is that Oppenheimer, the character, is kind of dull. Only when Matt Damon shows up does Oppenheimer pick up the pace and become entertaining. In TheOdyssey, Nolan makes the wise decision to dispense with the dull centerpiece guy entirely and make the whole film about the Matt Damon character.
Odysseus is no physical marvel. He’s a soldier, so he’s not soft, but he’s an archer, not a swordsman. Damon is Jason Bourne fit, but, although he’s actually 5’10”, he looks smaller on screen—he’s literally a short king!—whereas Agamemnon, the King of Mycenae and the leader of the Greeks, is a veritable giant, imposing and terrible. In Troy as in the NBA: size matters.
As for Nolan’s novel take, his original vision? He simply makes the story as realistic as possible—and, given the inherent challenges of making a tale involving Cyclopses and Circean pigs realistic, he pulls it off beautifully.
In an early scene, Odysseus and Penelope are in bed, their toddler son Telemachus asleep nearby, and he is lamenting the fact that he has to leave to go to a war he doesn’t particularly want to fight in. The official reason Agamemnon summoned all the vassal kings to sack Troy is because the Trojans have kidnapped his brother Menelaus’s wife. That would be Helen, whose face, as Menelaus notes in the film, launched a thousand ships (even though those lines were written by another British Christopher, Marlowe, in 1604). Duty and honor demand that the Greeks assemble to bring her home.
But the great Mycenaean king, Odysseus tells Penelope, has an ulterior motive. “He wants to control the trade routes.” In other words, the Dardanelles that Troy sits upon are the Late Bronze Age Straits of Hormuz. All that sacrifice, all that bloodshed, all that destruction—all for a little more coin. So “dedicated” is Agamemnon to his imperial designs that he sacrifices his daughter, Iphigenia, to Artemis, for [checks notes] favorable winds. Yikes.
When I first read The Odyssey, I found the Penelope/Telemachus storyline dull. (I was too young to really get it). That’s not the case in the film. The father is gone and may never return; the mother is besieged like Troy itself by the same ilk of ruffians, and is holding out as long as she can; the son understands all of this, but is too raw and soft and young to do anything about it. No one takes him seriously. The kid needs to grow up, and grow up fast; if not, his mother will be taken by one of the odious suitors, and he, Telemachus, will surely be slain, so that the victor can assume the throne of Ithaca himself.
Those are the stakes.
Robert Pattinson, who plays the villainous lead suitor, Antinous, is not going to be denied. It is a delightfully “meta” moment when he contrives to be alone with Penelope, and tries to persuade her to abandon hope of Odysseus’s return and instead marry him; this is freakin’ Edward from Twilight, still one of the most attractive men alive, veritably catapulting pheromones at her; if she isn’t tempted by that, nothing will tempt her.
Agamemnon’s homecoming ends quickly and tragically—with his wife, Clytemnestra, murdering him, to avenge the sacrifice of their daughter to the gods. (In the mythology, Clytemnestra and Helen are half-sisters; in the film, they are twins, both played by Lupita Nyong’o—much to the dismay of MAGA nation, who cannot conceive of a Black woman’s face being worthy of launching even a couple of dinghies, let alone a thousand ships.) Hoping to avoid a similar fate, Odysseus, with the divine guidance of his patron Athene, returns to Ithaca in disguise as an old beggar, to assess the situation before he makes his move.
One of the weaknesses of Nolan as a filmmaker is that, as great as his movies are, they lack emotional wallop. He can be cold and dispassionate, and when I watch the films, I rarely respond emotionally to them. For example, in Oppenheimer, when the test bomb explodes successfully, we are supposed to be emotionally moved; I wasn’t. That weakness is not on display here. Whether it’s the sublimity of the source material, or simply, as one review has it, that Nolan has finally “learnt to write women,” there are a number of moving sequences in The Odyssey. The moment when Penelope realizes, beyond all doubt, that the beggar in her dining hall is indeed Odysseus is the single best part of the movie.
(The runtime, incidentally, is two hours 52 minutes, which is about as long as it takes a lead-footed New Yorker to drive from Troy to Ithaca.)
Nolan brings out the inherent feminist elements of The Odyssey. In Homer’s world, the women—whether they are gods or mortals—are more powerful than the men. Whatever Agamemnon’s ambitions, the impetus of the Trojan War is the kidnapping of Helen of Troy (which, if we believe the mythology, was itself the result of a squabble among the goddesses Athene, Aphrodite, and Hera). The suitors in the hall at Ithaca are intimidating dudes, but they would fight to the death to claim Penelope’s hand; she has enormous influence over them. It is a nymph, Calypso, who rescues Odysseus and nurses him back to physical health—and helps ease him back into reality. (My theory is that the reason Odysseus dilly-dallied on Calypso’s island for seven years is because that’s how long it took him to come up with a plausible excuse for why he remained “stranded” for so long with his gumad Charlize Theron.) Athene is the goddess that gives him protection. In Mycenae, mighty Agamemnon, the king of kings, is felled by his wife. And as to the epic’s other men? They are pigs—as Circe well knew.
Why did Nolan make this movie now, at this moment in history? J. Robert Oppenheimer and Odysseus have something in common: both used their superior intelligence to devise a way to sack a city and, in so doing, win a war. Both men had to live with the consequences of that: the guilt, the weight of the responsibility for the lost lives and the mindless destruction, the glory, the infamy—all of it. Oppenheimer and The Odyssey are both about brilliant, complicated men coming to terms with their pivotal roles in a great war.
There are several mentions in the film of the Sea People. To Penelope, they are terrifying heralds of what feels to her like the end of the world. Odysseus feels the dread, too. His stratagem, brilliant as it was, was a trick that took advantage of the honor of the Trojan people. It worked, yes; but it was a dick move. He violated Zeus’s Law, as he says in the film—and without that, what remains? In the final analysis, what was really won?
Assuming the sack of Troy was real, the Late Bronze Age Collapse happened so soon after the Trojan War that one can reasonably conclude that the latter somehow led to the former. Petty squabbles among the Greeks and Troy weakened all the kingdoms, leaving them vulnerable to invasion by the Sea Peoples—or so the film intimates. Does Nolan see a parallel between then and now?
Traditionally, this kind of epic is populated by characters with British accents. But Nolan—who was born in London and speaks with a British accent himself—made a different choice. The characters all talk like Americans—as if Troy and Ithaca were in Upstate New York and not the Aegean.
This serves two purposes. First, it makes it seem like these characters, for U.S. audiences at least, exist in the here and now, heightening the realism. Second, it equates the Mycenaean Greeks on the verge of the Late Bronze Age Collapse with the United States in A.D. 2026.
We don’t know what caused the Collapse. Probably it was the result of a number of factors that happened simultaneously: plague; famine brought on by climate change; needless wars over trade routes; alliances breaking down; income inequality exacerbated by a ruling oligarchy; bad leadership; and, maybe, the Sea Peoples. Whatever the cause, the Collapse was the end—not of the world, as Penelope feared, but certainly of a long and fruitful chapter of history.
With the looming stock market crash brought on by speculation in AI and data centers; the burning-of-Library-of-Alexandria-level destruction of our government’s investment in medical research; the fracturing of NATO; the avarice of Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and the rest of the Epstein class; the irrevocable warming of the planet caused by manmade climate change; and the worst possible people governing the country, the end of our current chapter seems imminent.
How did we get here? How did it come to this?
Our enemies the Russians did not invade the United States. They were not strong enough to do so. Instead, they tricked the American electorate into installing a Kremlin stooge in the White House—not once, but twice.
Odysseus devised his famous stratagem three thousand years before the signing of the Declaration of Independence. Even those who haven’t heard of Homer, much less read his work, know of the trick. It’s been famous for thousands of years.
Trump may be more porcine than equine—a Circe product. Even so, after all this time, we should have been able to spot a Trojan horse.
The story of the John F.Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts is tragic. It was one of the nation’s finest venues for the arts. It contained an opera company, an orchestra, performances of all kind, and a beautiful art collection.
Soon after he was elected, Trump decided to impose his ideas, his board, his leadership on the Kennedy Center.
He quickly replaced the board, his board made him its president, and installed his own people. He fired the professional arts administrators and named Richard Grennell as its executive director, despite his lack of any experience in arts management.
Grennell laid off hundreds of employees. The board voted to add Trump ‘s name to the facade of the Center. Overnight, it became the Donald J. Trump and John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts.
The rank politicization of the Center’s programming was deeply polarizing. Ticket sales plummeted. Artists cancelled their performances.
Where once the Kennedy Center was proudly nonpartisan, Trump purged anyone not aligned with his views and his cult.
Faced with a dwindling audience and boycotts by artists, the board announced that the Center would close for two years for”renovations.” Observers worried that Trump intended to tear the building down.
In response to a lawsuit followed by a Congressionally appointed member of the board, a federal judge ordered the board to remove Trump’s name from the facade, the signage, and everything else.
Today, the once vibrant Kennedy Center is mostly empty. The opera left. The symphony has no schedule. Few people visit.
Trump gutted the Kennedy Center. Did he do it on purpose or was it the result of incompetence? Was he envious of John F. Kennedy? Or did he miscalculate his ability to manage a performing arts center?
This article is an interview with long-serving volunteer tour guide. After it appeared, the Kennedy Center suspended the tours.
Federal Judge Christopher Cooper turned down a request by the current administration of the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts to delay his previous order to remove Trump’s name from the building and all other signage.
Soon after his inauguration, Trump replaced the bipartisan board of the Kennedy Center with his allies, who promptly selected Trump as chairman of the board. The only non-Trump Democrat appointee who remained was ex-officio member Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-Ohio). The other board members tried to prevent her from participating in votes, but she persisted and filed the lawsuit to take Trump’s name down.
Trump has nearly destroyed the Kennedy Center since he took control. He replaced key administrators with his lackeys. The shake-up alienated audiences and performers. Artists canceled their performances, and ticket sales plummeted.
The board addressed the crisis by deciding to close the Kennedy Center for two years for renovations, possibly total demolition. The federal judge blocked that decision.
The dilemma now is that the Kennedy Center sits mostly empty now, with nothing lined up for the next season, when the board expected that the Center would be closed for renovation.
The Washington Post reported:
A federal judge Friday denied the Kennedy Center’s last-ditch motion to delay removing President Donald Trump’s name from the performing arts venue, as crews erected scaffolding next to the building less than 12 hours before the court-ordered deadline to do so.
U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper ruled that the Kennedy Center’s lawyers failed to demonstrate they were likely to win their appeal or that the center would suffer “irreparable harm” if Trump’s name were removed….
In February 2025, Trump purged the center’s board of trustees and replaced them with political allies who then elected him board chair. In December, those loyalists voted to rename the venue, and a day later, crews added Trump’s name to the exterior.
Trump claimed that the board’s vote to do so was a surprise, but he had joked about naming the center after himself for months. Within hours his name was on the website, and the next morning the building’s sign read: “The Donald J. Trump and The John F. Kennedy Memorial Center for the Performing Arts.”
Justice Department lawyers representing Trump later acknowledged that, given the speed with which the signage was installed, it had been “prepared and/or purchased prior to the Board’s vote the day before.”
Did you see the Tony awards last night? It was a great show, celebrating Broadway, celebrating the young people who sing and dance and act, and the creative talent of all ages and kinds that create magic onstage.
For years, I have thought about the contrast between The Oscars and the Tony awards. I watch both, and every year I find the Oscars slow, sometimes tedious, and the musical numbers are usually dull.
Why?
The answer is obvious. The people who do the musical numbers at the Oscars were assembled to perform, they rehearse and rehearse, and they put on a good show. But never as good as the Tony awards.
Why?
Because the musical numbers at the Tony awards are performed by singers and dancers who have performed those numbers hundreds of times, eight shows a week.
In Trump’s ongoing effort to stamp his atrocious taste on the nation’s Capitol, he is pushing full-steam-ahead to gain required approvals for his disgustingly gaudy Triumphal Arch. To make sure that he would gain the support of two review panels, he fired all their members and replaced them with Trump flunkies. Hundreds of letters poured in, overwhelmingly opposing the Arch. No matter. The “Commission on the Arts,” wholly owned by Trump gave their approval without dissent to what will be the largest such arch in the world and the gaudiest.
The Commission of Fine Arts on Thursday approved President Trump’s plan to build a 250-foot triumphal arch in Washington, even after the president rejected the panel’s suggestion to remove the large statues of golden eagles and a winged angel atop the structure.
“Washington is not a static city,” the panel’s chairman, Rodney Mims Cook Jr., said before making a motion to fast-track approval of the project. “It must grow to allow the next 250 years of Americans to celebrate their accomplishments.”
He added that the arch was “beautiful.”
Mr. Trump did agree to accommodate some of the panel’s suggested changes, including removing the statues of gold lions that were positioned lower on the arch.
The arts panel, which is filled with Mr. Trump’s appointees, has an advisory role on the design of the project, but no enforcement power. The same panel also fast-tracked approval of Mr. Trump’s $400 million ballroom, bypassing the normal review process on a project that would transform the profile of the White House.
Thomas Luebke, the panel’s secretary, said to the board members before the motion that a project such as the arch would normally undergo an additional review.
“There is a final design that would normally come after this with more documentation of the issues of details, structure, everything else about it,” Mr. Luebke said. But, he added, the panel could also “choose, just like you did with the ballroom, to say ‘We’re done.’”
The future of the arch is still uncertain, however. The plans are scheduled to go next month before the National Capital Planning Commission, which is also controlled by allies of Mr. Trump. The project also faces a legal challenge.
A group of Vietnam War veterans has sued to stop construction of the arch, citing a lack of congressional authority and arguing that the arch would obstruct the view between the Lincoln Memorial and Arlington National Cemetery. Many critics of the plan have contended that the grandeur of the arch detracts from the solemnity that should be observed at the cemetery nearby.
The architect designing the monument, Nicolas Leo Charbonneau, said Mr. Trump had rejected the suggestion to remove the large statues atop the structure because the arch is a monument for the living, not the dead.
“The intent of the arch is a celebration in America of 250 years of greatness, freedom, and posterity, for which we can only thank the wisdom of our founders and God’s providence,” he said. “While it may celebrate the victories of America in various theories of war and the sacrifice of our fallen heroes, it is not primarily monument dedicated to the dead, but to the living.”
The structure will allow 80 visitors per hour to go inside the arch, Mr. Charbonneau said.
Before the vote, Mr. Luebke informed members that they had received about 600 new messages about the project. Only one letter writer was in favor of the project without major changes, he said.
Mr. Luebke said about half of those writing letters raised concerns about the arch’s closeness to Arlington Cemetery, “that this in fact disrespects the cemetery and military sacrifice,” he said. “The other ones have to do with misuse of public funds, that it’s a gaudy or synthetically incompatible design, that is authoritarian,” among other concerns.
Elizabeth Merritt, deputy general counsel for the National Trust for Historic Preservation, testified that her organization “remains extremely concerned about the location, the height, the scale, and the design of the proposed arch.”
“Arlington National Cemetery is a living memorial that hosts hundreds of funeral services every month,” she said. “The arch, as proposed, would dominate the national cemetery.”
In the lawsuit seeking to block construction of the arch, Vietnam War veterans maintain that Mr. Trump cannot build it without the authorization of Congress. They cite the Commemorative Works Act of 1986, which details a multistep process for authorizing and designing commemorative works in the District of Columbia and says any such work must be “specifically authorized” by Congress.
But in legal documents, the Trump administration has argued that congressional actions in the 1920s connected to the design of the Arlington Memorial Bridge already give it the legal right to build the arch.
Congress at the time authorized “construction of two tall columns surmounted by statues on Columbia Island,” the administration wrote. “Although those columns have not yet been built, the statutory authority to build them remains.”
The Federal Aviation Administration is also reviewing whether the arch could pose an aerial hazard, an evaluation that it requires for all structures more than 200 feet tall. The arch would sit about a mile from a Pentagon heliport and about two miles from Reagan National Airport, one of the country’s busiest flight hubs.