A Personal TomDispatch Farewell (of Sorts)

by Tom Engelhardt | Jun 8, 2026 |  Antiwar.com

Editor’s Note:   Tom Engelhardt has been an important part of Antiwar.com for 22 years.     His TomDispatch site has contributed 1,469 articles to our site.   His list of authors includes many of the best in the antiwar movement.   The presence of TomDispatch articles helped make Antiwar.com what it is today. The staff of Antiwar.com sends much love and a great thanks to Tom for everything he has done for the us and for the antiwar movement.

[Final Note from Tom: Yes, I began TomDispatch 24-and-a-half years ago and, today, I’m finally putting up my own last piece, at least as the editor-in-chief of this site. Very soon, the superlative Nick Turse will be running TomDispatch under the auspices of The Intercept (though I’ll undoubtedly continue to lend a hand). It’s been a long run. I only wish I could say that, so many years later, this world was a better place… Sigh, no such luck. (Anything but, in fact!)

There are so many people to thank, including all the remarkable authors I’ve published. I couldn’t even begin to list them here, though I’d love to thank each of them from the bottom of my heart. And what a mess their pieces might have been if Christopher Holmes hadn’t shown up online to lend an eternal hand or my old friend Annette Liberson-Drewry hadn’t done the same, both proofing the stories in a fabulous and never-ending manner. And let me not forget Annelise Whitley, who was always there, as (until relatively recently) was Erika Eichelberger! 

And I can’t even begin to thank the scads of wonderful writers who kept this site afloat all these many years! I only wish I could still thank Mike Davis, Barbara Ehrenreich, Eduardo Galeano, Todd Gitlin, Chalmers Johnson, David Rosner, Jonathan Schell, and Howard Zinn, who are now gone from this world of ours, not to speak of so many TD authors (far too many to name) who are still deeply alive and kicking on this all-too-strange Trumpian planet and many of whom, I hope, will continue to write for this site under Nick Turse.

I can’t even imagine what my world would have been like if Hamilton Fish hadn’t called me so long ago. He suggested turning the emails I had begun sending out to friends in the wake of the 9/11 attacks on my city and Washington, D.C., containing articles that struck me at media sites around the world and my own little explanatory introductions, into a website that he (not I) called TomDispatch. And what would I have done if the Nation Institute (which then became the Type Media Center) hadn’t supported me all these years?  They — and Taya McCormick-Grobow, in particular — were simply fantastic! And how would I have lasted if so many TomDispatch readers hadn’t so generously contributed money to keep this site alive?  

And so, nearly a quarter of a century (and many exclamation points!!) later, I find myself in a world that would have been unimaginable, even in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, when life on this planet became ever stranger. Sadly, then, let me bid farewell not on a planet gloriously or even passingly better, but Trumpianly worse than I ever might have imagined. And let me also offer a small bow of thanks to the many thousands of wonderful readers who have followed this site, sent its pieces around, contributed money to keep it going, and made my life matter. And let me also offer my thanks to all the other sites that reposted TD pieces so wonderfully over the years. Thank you so, so much.

Oh, and if you feel in the mood, I now have my own Substack ready for me, where, after a little time off, I hope to keep writing the odd thing — perhaps the equivalent of my TD introductions — about this ever-stranger planet of ours (as I will also, I hope, continue to do at Nick’s version of TomDispatch from time to time). To subscribe to my new Substack, just click here. And as I used to do so regularly in another life on another planet (or so it now seems to me), I’m soon going to pick up the book manuscript of an old friend (and well-known writer) and begin editing it. And with all of that in mind, here’s my final piece as the guy who created and ran TomDispatch all these years, the last of the hundreds (certainly 300 or more!) I’ve personally written since 2001 at this site. Tom]

---

Once Upon a Time (and Not Any Time Either!)

My Strange Tale of How the War on Terror Came Home in the Age of Donald J. Trump

By Tom Engelhardt

Okay, here’s what this old man remembers nearly a quarter of a century later.

I was living in New York City (as I still am) when, on September 11, 2001, two hijacked planes full of passengers hit the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center, killing almost 3,000 innocent people. Until that moment, of course, such a thing would have been beyond inconceivable, no less watchable on TV, in the United States of America. Had someone written up such a plot with Osama bin Laden and crew in the cast of characters, it would have been treated as the worst kind of unpublishable science fiction.

But, of course, it did indeed happen and, in some strange sense, in its wake (an all-too-appropriate word under the circumstances), our world did indeed seem to flip upside down. That was, of course, after President George W. Bush responded early that October by — god save us! — invading Afghanistan (which, at least to me, was a shock and a half in its own right) and launching his disastrous “Global War on Terror.” Sometime in the weeks that followed, my memory (not exactly trustworthy at almost 82 years of age) is that I saw an article deep inside the print New York Times (which, by the way, I still read daily on actual paper) noting that U.S. soldiers were by then fighting in parts of Afghanistan where the troops of the Soviet Union had struggled endlessly (and lost badly) during that imperial power’s disastrous Afghan war of the previous century, which did indeed help take it down. And that, too, in some grim fashion, stunned me. Talk about mistakes that history had all too clearly signaled should never happen again (and again and again)!

I was at the time (even if barely) online and so I copied that piece into an email and sent it out with a note to a small set of friends. And somehow that began the process that led to TomDispatch.

I soon realized that, thanks to the online world, I could actually read around the globe — the British Guardian, Le Monde Diplomatique, etc. — and that out there in the rest of the universe, there were other ways this ever-stranger world of ours was being looked at than the ones that largely dominated attention here in the U.S., post-9/11. And so, as I began stumbling across ever more pieces that seemed to offer different perspectives on our increasingly eerie world, I started emailing them to a growing list of friends and acquaintances. And after a time — to my complete surprise — people I hardly knew or didn’t know at all emailed me that they wanted to be added to my list. And with those send-outs, I began including little introductory explanatory notes or sets of comments (which launched the future TomDispatch form with my eternal little introductions — literally thousands of them over these nearly 25 years — to every piece I posted at TD except my own).

And I remember exactly the moment when I suddenly realized that something out of the ordinary was happening not just in the ever-stranger world out there, but to me, too. Susan Sontag, a writer I had long admired but didn’t know from a hole in the wall, suddenly emailed me out of the blue and asked to be added to what would become the TomDispatch email list (though it wasn’t yet called that). I was stunned. And soon, I was sending out to — I no longer remember exactly how many — but certainly several hundred people (with more being added every week). And that was the moment when someone I hardly knew (though he, too, was on my mailing list), Hamilton Fish of the Nation Institute, called me out of the blue and asked if I might, in the future, be interested in turning those emails of mine into a website that he then did indeed set up for me and that he — not I — called “TomDispatch.”

Initially, at the new site, I simply did what I had been doing in my emails. I continued to find interesting pieces published elsewhere about our ever stranger and more disturbing world, wrote little introductions of my own, and then put in their headlines and first paragraphs with a link to the full piece wherever it had first appeared. At some point, however, I started writing longer commentaries of my own on a world that seemed to grow stranger by the week. Then it suddenly occurred to me that I knew a surprising number of writers whose voices, I thought, were distinctly needed in the strange post-9/11 world we were already living through.

After all, among other things, I had been an editor, first at Pantheon Books for 15 years in the previous century and later, in this one, at Metropolitan Books, the publishing house my old friend (and Pantheon coeditor) Sara Bershtel had set up. I had, for instance, published Chalmers Johnson’s remarkable book Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of American Empire at Metropolitan in 2000 to essentially no attention, minimal (and not particularly good) reviews, and few sales. Osama bin Laden’s assault on New York City and Washington, D.C., however, turned that book into a nationwide bestseller and put that title word of his into the language in a big-time fashion (and he would indeed write for TomDispatch memorably in the War on Terror years that followed).

The War on Terror Comes Home, A Terrible Science Fiction Novel

And yes, Osama bin Laden’s 9/11 attacks were indeed a nightmare, but this country responded to them almost unimaginably badly by creating a full-scale, seemingly never-ending set of further nightmares in Afghanistan and Iraq (and, of course, over the years from Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to Somalia in Africa, not to speak of all those global CIA “black sites” meant for the torture of Global War on Terror prisoners). And out of all those nightmares and so much more (none of which I ever would have imagined possible once upon a time) came the presidencies (and who would have believed that there could be two of them!) of Donald (the mad duck) Trump.

From the start, TomDispatch was witnessing and reporting on America’s distinctly imperial fate. I was watching with both horror and fascination as the greatest power (perhaps ever) on planet Earth (once the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991) was somehow going down, down, down, without even a helping hand from an opposing imperial power. After all, early in this century, China had yet truly to rise and now that it has, it’s not acting like a typical imperial power of history. It has (at least as yet) not launched its own version of a Global War on Terror and its leaders seem remarkably intent not on colonizing the rest of Asia in some unexpected fashion, but on making a fortune producing the world’s green energy machinery (including, at the moment, 80% of global solar energy panels), even if they’re also still outdoing every other country on this planet — despite Donald Trump’s efforts — in burning fossil fuels and pouring greenhouse gases into the atmosphere).

In some strange fashion, I watched and recorded at TomDispatch just how my country was playing out its grim version of the predictable decline of all imperial powers, historically speaking, in a distinctly up-close-and-personal fashion. And of course, in 2016, this country gave decline a remarkable new meaning on an increasingly strange and disturbed planet by electing Donald J. Trump as president.

As my version of TomDispatch ends (and Nick Turse’s launches), I find myself at my advanced age (with my friends beginning to die around me) in a world I simply could never have imagined. Don’t even get me started on artificial intelligence, which, as Bernie Sanders has pointed out, could someday “replace humans in controlling the planet”! Unreligious as I may be, I’m with the Pope on AI — though perhaps even more so. My own feeling is that no genuine intelligence could have been senseless enough to create such an obvious nightmare to come.

And the War on Terror Comes Home Yet Again in the Form of Donald Trump

In a sense, it might even be possible to think of Donald Trump as the possible final chapter in this country’s global war on terror. Think of him, in fact, as the way that war came home, big time! In his own fashion, he could hardly have been more of a terror and, to make matters so much worse, in 2026, a year expected to be the second hottest in recorded history, he seems remarkably intent on making war not just on Iran, or any other random country like Somalia or Nigeria, but on this very planet itself. Even his anti-immigrant agenda is, as the Guardian recently reported, ensuring that ever more fossil fuels go into the atmosphere via the stunning number of planes deporting those immigrants, helping make ever more areas of the planet ever hotter, and — of course! — ensuring that ever more people will end up as — yes! — migrants.

In short, whether it’s climate change, Iran, or you name it, Donald Trump (the second time around) is already giving heat new meaning.

And none of this (not a bit!) would I have believed in November 2001 when all of it began for me. Had you tried to show me such a future then, I would have simply laughed you out of the room and gone about my business.

In a sense, you might say that the war on terror simply never ended, since my country has never stopped bombing other countries around the world, the latest (but undoubtedly not the last), of course, being Iran. And I suspect that, without that “war,” Donald Trump would have been inconceivable.

I’m at an age where my friends are indeed beginning to die and it pains me that, when I go, I’ll be leaving such a mess of an all-American planet to my poor grandchildren. They truly deserve better. And once upon a time (if I even imagined them coming into this world of ours), I might have hoped that someday in the then-distant future I would have signed off TomDispatch by claiming that I was indeed leaving them on at least a modestly better planet than when I began so long ago.

No such luck, of course, and that makes me sad indeed. I mean, we already knew that we were truly on the planet from hell when, on his third try, Donald Trump actually managed to garner 49.8% of the popular vote and win another four unbelievable years as president of the anything but United States.

Yes, anyone (even I) certainly could have hoped for better. In fact, I certainly did — even if such hopes proved unrealistic indeed. Of course, one can (and should) still hope that the next great imperial power, obviously China (if, in fact, there are to be more great powers on this ever less great planet of ours), might indeed prove more reasonable and less Trumpian. At least, that country’s leadership plans to make a fortune off the decarbonization of Planet Earth by producing the equipment, from electric vehicles to solar panels, needed to green this world of ours (even while continuing to pour record amounts of fossil fuels into the atmosphere).

Let’s also not forget that other former great power, Russia, which continues fighting its miserable war in Ukraine into its fifth year, while, of course, pouring ever more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere (as all wars now do), while only recently launching actual nuclear missiles (though with dummy warheads instead of nuclear payloads) against Ukraine. (Just what we need on this planet of ours, of course — the threat of actual nuclear warfare!)

Yes, all in all, we humans are truly a strange (and strangely unnerving) crew and, worse yet, over the decades from atomic warfare to full-scale war on the planet itself, we seem eerily driven to develop the means to be ever more destructive. And with that grimly in mind and only wishing things were better, let me sign off on almost 25 years at TomDispatch. Sigh…

Copyright 2026 Tom Engelhardt

Tom Engelhardt created and runs the website TomDispatch.com. He is also a co-founder of the American Empire Project and the author of a highly praised history of American triumphalism in the Cold War, The End of Victory Culture.  A fellow of the Type Media Center, his sixth book is A Nation Unmade by War.

Follow TomDispatch on Twitter and join us on Facebook. Check out the newest Dispatch Books, John Feffer’s new dystopian novel, Songlands (the final one in his Splinterlands series), Beverly Gologorsky’s novel Every Body Has a Story, and Tom Engelhardt’s A Nation Unmade by War, as well as Alfred McCoy’s In the Shadows of the American Century: The Rise and Decline of U.S. Global Power, John Dower’s The Violent American Century: War and Terror Since World War II, and Ann Jones’s They Were Soldiers: How the Wounded Return from America’s Wars: The Untold Story.

THE OLIGARCHS HAVE TWO PARTY'S

House GOP, With Help of 4 Dems, Votes to Take Food Aid From Millions of Women and Kids

“While working families struggle to feed their families, Republicans are cutting funding for fruit and vegetable vouchers for women, infants, and children,” said Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro.


House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) speaks at a press conference with other members of House Republican leadership in Washington, DC on June 3, 2026.
(Photo by Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images)

Jake Johnson
Jun 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


House Republicans, with the help of four Democrats, voted Thursday to approve legislation that would slash nutrition assistance for millions of young children and pregnant and postpartum women, even as food prices continue to rise nationwide and earlier GOP cuts to federal aid take hold.

In a 213-210 vote, largely along party lines, House lawmakers passed an appropriations bill that would fund the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other agencies for the coming fiscal year. The four Democrats who voted with most Republicans to approve the measure were Reps. Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Adam Gray (Calif.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), and Don Davis (NC).

Over 700,000 Poor Kids Across 12 States Have Lost Food Aid Under Trump-GOP Budget Law

‘Number of People Who Don’t Have Enough to Eat’ Surging Due to Trump-GOP Aid Cuts

The bill, if also passed by the Senate and signed by President Donald Trump, would cut fruit and vegetable benefits that young kids and pregnant and postpartum women receive under the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has estimated that the cut would strip modest fruit and vegetable benefits from “nearly 5.4 million toddlers, preschoolers, and pregnant and postpartum WIC participants.” Under current law, CBPP observed, “children receive $26 monthly for fruits and vegetables, pregnant and postpartum participants receive $48, and breastfeeding participants receive $52.”

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said following Thursday’s vote that “while working families struggle to feed their families, Republicans are cutting funding for fruit and vegetable vouchers for women, infants, and children.”

“Working moms are already stretched thin, and Republicans are making it even harder to put dinner on the table,” said DeLauro. “The president’s tariffs have hurt American farmers, and now the Republican plan is to cut off crucial assistance that they have come to rely on even more.”

The House-passed appropriations bill would cut WIC by a total of $200 million compared to current levels, slashing $141 million in funding for fruit and vegetable benefits. The USDA’s website says that WIC “saves lives and improves the health of nutritionally at-risk women, infants, and children,” describing the program as “one of the most successful federally funded nutrition programs in the United States.”




Trump’s USDA chief, Brooke Rollins, has openly celebrated the large-scale loss of federal nutrition aid stemming from the Republican budget package that Trump signed into law last summer. That legislation included unprecedented cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), another highly effective food aid program.

The House vote to cut WIC broadly aligns with the Trump White House’s proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2027—but doesn’t go as far as the president envisioned. The National WIC Association noted that the House bill “cuts WIC’s fruit and vegetable benefits by about 10%, a first step toward an up to 75% cut sought by the White House.”

“The House proposal fails WIC families when they need help most,” said Georgia Machell, president and CEO of the National WIC Association. “It would force WIC to turn away eligible families for the first time in 30 years, breaking Congress’ 30-year bipartisan commitment to full WIC funding. For the families who receive WIC, it chips away at their ability to buy the very fruits and vegetables that federal dietary guidelines say all Americans should eat more of.”

THE GRIFT

Hollywood stars snub Trump's UFC birthday bash

Daniel Hampton
June 5, 2026 
RAW STORY


LOS ANGELES - NOVEMBER 11, 2025: Adam Sandler at the Netflix Jay Kelly Premiere at The Egyptian Theatre Hollywood (Photo credit: Joe Seer / Shutterstock)

It's billed as the hottest ticket in Washington — but the celebrities aren't biting, according to a new report.

President Donald Trump's $60 million birthday event, a UFC cage fight on the White House South Lawn set for June 14, has the capital's power players competing for seats, Vanity Fair reports. Donors, lobbyists, and members of Congress have flooded the White House with requests, the outlet reported, with ringside seats reportedly going to those willing to pay more than $1 million in sponsorships.

But Hollywood appears to be going the other way.

UFC boss Dana White told Time magazine he'd invited a roster of A-listers, including Adam Sandler, Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson, Jared Leto, Mario Lopez, and Tom Brady. According to Vanity Fair, few if any, will actually attend, as representatives for The Rock, Sandler, Leto, and Lopez all said they won't be there.

The reluctance fits a pattern around Trump's 250th anniversary plans, the magazine noted.

A National Mall concert series fell apart this week after most of its lineup — including a Milli Vanilli singer and Bret Michaels — pulled out, with several citing Trump's partisanship. Trump responded by proposing to replace it with a MAGA rally.

The event falls on Trump's 80th birthday, with a guest list curated by Trump himself, as the war in Iran continues.

Trump scrapes barrel with D-list rally singers as 'Freedom 250' finally implodes

Adam Nichols
June 5, 2026 

RAW STORY



Construction continues on a temporary arena that will host the UFC Freedom 250 fight event in June on the South Lawn of the White House in Washington, D.C., U.S., May 27, 2026. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst

With his Freedom 250 concert series in shambles after a mass exodus of performers, President Donald Trump has pivoted to what a campaign-style rally — and his newly revealed musical guests are really scraping the barrel.

Trump announced the "Rally to End All Rallies" Thursday night on Truth Social. It is scheduled for June 24 in Washington, D.C. — one day before the now-gutted Great American State Fair was set to open.

AN original concert — dubbed Freedom 250 — turned into a farce as headliners learned the event carried explicit political ties to Trump — a fact many said they weren't told upfront. Milli Vanilli singer Fab Morvan became the latest to walk, joining Martina McBride and Bret Michaels. The event's website now lists zero performers.

The replacement event's lineup reflects how dramatically Trump's musical options have narrowed. Country singer Lee Greenwood, 83, will open the proceedings with his 1984 signature track "God Bless the U.S.A." — the same song he has performed at Trump events since 2016. Three of Greenwood's top five songs on Spotify are variations of the same tune.

Trump also tapped tenor Christopher Macchio, whom he compared to the late Luciano Pavarotti, to perform classical selections. Macchio currently draws 571 monthly listeners on Spotify and 2,000 YouTube subscribers.

Flo Rida, Vanilla Ice, and Freedom Williams of C+C Music Factory have not yet withdrawn from Freedom 250.

‘Pay-to-Play Loyalty Program’: Trump Ballroom Donors Have Been Handed $50 Billion in Federal Contracts

“Corporations wrote big checks to build Trump’s golden ballroom,” said Rep. Jason Crow. “Now they’re receiving billions of dollars in kickbacks—paid for by your tax dollars.”

US President Donald Trump holds artists’ renderings as he talks to reporters about his proposed White House ballroom next to the worksite on May 19, 2026 in Washington, DC.
(Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Stephen Prager
Jun 05, 2026
COMMON DREAMS

Sen. Elizabeth Warren suggested President Donald Trump is running a “pay-to-play loyalty program for wealthy donors” after a report on Thursday revealed that more than half the companies that contributed to his White House ballroom project have been awarded government contracts over the last six months, totaling over $50 billion.

Examining the 27 publicly known corporate donors to the president’s $400 million gold-plated vanity project, the watchdog group Public Citizen found that 14 of them—more than half—had received either new or expanded contracts over the past six months after donating millions to the ballroom and appearing at a lavish White House banquet in October as Trump prepared to demolish the building’s East Wing.




Over two-thirds, 19 of the 27 companies, received government contracts since fiscal year 2021, totaling over $338 billion. At least 16 out of 27 are also either facing federal enforcement actions and/or have had them suspended by the Trump administration.

“These giant corporations aren’t funding the Trump ballroom fiasco out of the goodness of their hearts. They have massive interests before the federal government, and they hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration,” said Public Citizen democracy advocate Jon Golinger, an author of the report.

By far the biggest monetary beneficiary has been the military contractor Lockheed Martin, which received a $43.8 billion in new or expanded contract funding over the past six months after it pledged $10 million to fund the dance hall last fall.

Booz Allen Hamilton, a consulting company that serves military and intelligence agencies and pledged at least $5 million to the project, received $4 billion in contracts over the same period.

Meanwhile, Palantir—the data-mining surveillance giant with deep ties to the Trump administration—reaped over $1 billion in contracts after giving its own $5 million donation.

“Millions to fund Trump’s bizarre fever dreams are nothing compared to the billions they’re getting back in contracts and favorable government enforcement decisions,” Golinger said. “The American people are paying the price.”

Other ballroom benefactors that have brought in more than $100 million worth of contracts over the past six months include Microsoft, Amazon, HP, and Caterpillar, while T-Mobile, Google, NextEra Energy, and Comcast have all brought in more than $10 million.

Public Citizen noted that while the White House has publicized some of the ballroom donors and others have been revealed by news organizations, not all of the companies that have contributed to the project are publicly known, since the secret funding agreement obtained by the group through a Freedom of Information Act request allows their identities to remain private.

In a statement to The Washington Post, White House spokesperson Davis Ingle suggested that critics should be grateful that Trump was soliciting donations from the wealthy for this very important undertaking.

“The same critics who are alleging fake conflicts of interest would also complain if American taxpayers were footing the bill for these long-overdue renovations,” he said, ignoring the fact that Trump has previously pressured Republicans in Congress to appropriate hundreds of millions in taxpayer funding to secure the ballroom.

Ingle added that “the donors for the White House ballroom project represent a wide array of great American companies and generous individuals, all of whom are contributing to make the People’s House better for generations to come.”



But several Democratic members of Congress have pointed to it as evidence of Trump selling out the government “to the highest bidder.”

“Corporations wrote big checks to build Trump’s golden ballroom,” said Rep. Jason Crow (D-Col.). “Now they’re receiving billions of dollars in kickbacks—paid for by your tax dollars.”

“Wild coincidence or taxpayer-funded corruption?” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.). “You be the judge.”

Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.) said that “the part that should make your blood boil” is the fact that many of the companies identified in the report “were facing federal enforcement actions, antitrust reviews, labor cases, [or] securities charges.”

“Many of those cases have been quietly dropped or scaled back since Trump took office. You write a check, your legal problems disappear,” Levin said. “That’s not a coincidence.”

“You cannot afford to donate to Trump’s ballroom, so he does nothing to improve the quality of your life,” said Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). “But for those who can, there are billions in government contracts.”

Resistance to Flock Cameras and Police Surveillance Is Exploding

Backlash to Flock cameras and AI systems is exploding after scandals, including police using the tech to stalk women.

By Mike Ludwig , 

Truthout

May 22, 2026

Protesters rally against the use of Flock cameras on April 3, 2026, outside City Hall in Troy, NY.

Jim Franco / Times Union via Getty Images

In communities large and small, red and blue, all across the United States, residents are filling local council meetings in opposition to the explosive growth of high-tech police surveillance systems.

Local movements to rid city streets of AI-powered surveillance cameras and Automated License Plate Recognition (ALPR) networks used by law enforcement are growing rapidly amid scandals, mounting privacy concerns, and public backlash to AI and mass surveillance under the authoritarian Trump administration. The cameras and their associated systems are capable of building complex profiles of people and vehicles as they move through public areas.

Last week inside a packed city council chamber in Asheville, North Carolina, residents who had waited hours to share a public comment chanted “Shame! Shame! Shame!” as their elected leaders voted 6-1 to build a “real-time intelligence center” for local police. Unless the city changes course, police will soon have a “wall of screens” fed by high-tech cameras to monitor a city of 95,000 people.

In Bandera, Texas, a pro-surveillance councilmember proposed banning “cell phones, the internet, cameras, and nearly all technology” in retaliation after his colleagues in the small town voted 3-2 to end its contract with the surveillance company Flock Safety after months of debate, according to 404 Media. Residents were enraged after the town installed eight Flock license plate cameras with AI, which were damaged by vandals.

In Troy, New York, heated controversy over Flock cameras led the Republican mayor to declare a “state of emergency” to keep using the technology. The city council is now suing the mayor over her declaration as it considers putting legislative limits on the cameras. In Cleveland, Ohio, records unearthed by journalists this week show 160 immigration-related searches in Flock audit logs over a month-long period of the city’s Flock camera and surveillance drone network. The revelation comes months after city officials assured residents that protections were in place to prevent such searches and keep Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) from exploiting the data for President Trump’s mass deportation campaign.


Ring Scraps Flock Partnership Following Uproar Over Super Bowl AI Commercial
There is still “reason to distrust” the company, one security expert said, warning it has backtracked on plans before. By Chris Walker , Truthout  February 17, 2026

The push against Flock cameras, drones, and AI-powered surveillance in local communities comes in the wake of reported abuses by law enforcement, including the sharing of local surveillance data with the Trump administration to target immigrants for deportation.

In at least 16 recent cases, local police officers lost their jobs after accessing license plate reader data to stalk ex-partners or other romantic interests, according to the Institute for Justice. Internal investigations uncovered the abuse in only a few cases. Most of the cases came to light after victims reported the offending officers’ behavior to other police.

“A year ago, people really hadn’t heard of Flock,” said Patrick Conant, founder of the Asheville-based transparency group Sunshine Labs, in an interview. “But with increased media coverage, and rising concern about surveillance tech in general, a lot more people are all of sudden paying attention.”
A New Era of AI Surveillance

Often funded by federal grants promoting surveillance, thousands of police departments across the United States have installed ALPR networks with cameras that automatically capture images of every car that passes by, along with a timestamp. The data feeds into searchable platforms integrated with AI, allowing police to easily identify and track vehicles by license plates as well as dents, roof racks, and bumper stickers — all without a warrant.

The most well-known and controversial systems are built by Flock Safety, which is increasingly finding itself on the wrong side of public opinion.

Flock systems gather data to create a digital “Vehicle Fingerprint” for individual drivers that can be fed into proprietary, searchable artificial intelligence systems. In many cases, ALPR data can be accessed by dozens of law enforcement agencies outside of a local area without a warrant — including out-of-state police departments and federal agencies.

Flock’s systems are powerful. In 2025, 404 Media revealed that a local sheriff’s office in Texas used 83,000 ALPRs and 6,809 Flock camera networks across multiple states to track one woman suspected of self-managing an abortion with medication, which is standard care but banned in Texas. An officer used Flock in an attempt to track the woman as far as Illinois and Washington, where abortion is legal and protected by law.

Citing denials from the sheriff’s office in Texas, Flock initially called the story “misreporting” and “clickbait.” However, documents show the woman was indeed targeted for self-managing abortion on behalf of an allegedly abusive ex-partner who attempted to press criminal charges.

Flock Safety claims its surveillance networks are not “mass surveillance.” The company says most data collected is deleted on a set schedule, but critics point out that data and camera footage is retained to train AIs and even sent overseas to be reviewed by gig workers.

Flock Safety casts its technology as critical tools for fighting “crime,” and for police, surveillance networks are quickly becoming viewed as an industry standard — the sort of high-tech toys that every police department wants, and which federal and state grants often significantly subsidize.

However, civil rights attorneys argue Flock’s vehicle fingerprinting violates the Constitution’s protection against “unreasonable searches” by the government. For example, in San Jose, California, residents are suing the city under the Fourth Amendment over its network of nearly 500 ALPRs that allows any police officer to track an individual’s movement across the city for 30 days at a time without a warrant.

A notable legal challenge to ALPR surveillance comes from Norfolk, Virginia, where police have installed more than 170 Flock cameras since 2023. The complaint filed in federal court on behalf of two residents argues the surveillance system creates a “detailed map of the driver’s movements.” The local police chief boasted that it “would be difficult to drive anywhere of any distance without running into a camera somewhere.”

Federal judge Mark Davis ruled in late January that there was insufficient evidence to declare Norfolk’s surveillance system an unconstitutional invasion of privacy. However, citing previous privacy cases, Davis warned ALPRs could cross the legal threshold with technological advancements in the future, without detailing what those advancements might be.

The plaintiffs are appealing the ruling, marking the first time a Flock challenge has found its way up the federal court system. The Institute for Justice is representing the plaintiffs in both San Jose and Norfolk with its Plate Privacy Project, which helps “everyday people fight back against warrantless mass surveillance,” according to Michael Soyfer, an attorney for the group.

“Our clients and all people who drive through Norfolk should not be subjected to this warrantless mass surveillance, which is why they’re fighting back against the city’s ALPR system,” Soyfer told Truthout in an email.
An Anti-Surveillance Movement Rising

DeFlock, a group that tracks and does public education around the surveillance technology, recently announced a nationwide “week of action against ALPRs” that will begin on August 16. Members of Lucy Parsons Labs, an anti-surveillance collective involved in the organizing, said momentum behind the week of action is growing rapidly.

“Over the last year, we’ve seen thousands of people demanding that their elected officials remove these cameras,” Lucy Parson Labs members said in a collective statement. “We’re seeing with more clarity what these systems are. These technologies don’t deliver safety. In fact, they make us all less safe.”

As public backlash grows, local leaders nationwide are reconsidering contracts with Flock. At least 68 cities have canceled contracts with Flock so far, according to DeFlock. However, some cities are simply replacing Flock cameras with those made by competitors in response to public pushback.

For example, in Asheville, a city that frequently touts its progressive values, the city council is attempting to appease worried residents without scrapping plans for the “real-time” police surveillance center. During its May 12 meeting, the council passed a broadly worded resolution affirming civil liberties, and at least one councilor has told residents that the number of ALPRs would eventually be reduced from the 11 Flock cameras currently deployed by the police department to “potentially one.”

However, the city council also voted to accept a federal grant secured by a Republican senator for the surveillance center and secure a multi-year contract with Flock competitor Axon. Kim Roney, a mayoral candidate and the only councilmember to vote against the measures, said she opposed “AI-fueled, for-profit surveillance tech in Asheville” due to the community’s unanswered questions about unforeseen costs, data protection, and constitutional privacy rights.

“Tech companies exist to profit from data collection,” Roney said in an email. “In the absence of the pending service agreement contract, I reached out to Electronic Frontier Foundation. They warned that any resolution that claims to protect local data is null when the state and federal government do not allow cities to withhold data, plus there are unanswered questions as to which entity owns derivative data.”

Patrick Conant said activists are reviewing Axon’s contracts with other cities in order to gain an understanding of how a contract with Asheville might work.

“The general sentiment I am hearing from a lot of folks is that they were not aware that our city was using all of these tools, and they would like to know about what is already in place and what safeguards exist for what is in use, and they want to know more before they expand the system,” Conant said. “They are proceeding with accepting federal grants and directing the city manager to negotiate contracts before the full terms are available.”

However, Conant said the Asheville residents who showed up to oppose the police surveillance center were not deflated after the city council voted to accept the federal grant and surveillance contract. Instead, after waiting hours to share a public comment before the council, people gathered outside to discuss next steps.

“I’ve seen people continue to organize and connect, people are going to do more community forums, and people of course are saying, ‘how do we vote out the people who are in favor of this,’” Conant said. “And that is what we have been doing since that meeting.”

Reverend stuns with speech at Trump's 'Rededicate 250' event: 'Shocking!'

Robert Davis
May 17, 2026 

RAW STORY

RSBN screenshot

A prominent Evangelical reverend stunned political analysts and observers on Sunday with his speech during President Donald Trump's "Rededicate 250" prayer event at the National Mall.

The Rev. Franklin Graham, the son of the late preacher Billy Graham, spoke via a pre-recorded video at the prayer event, describing America as a country that has become "morally rotten" and "completely sick with sin." He mentioned issues like "transgenderism" and "opening women's locker rooms to men" as a couple of examples.

"Why do we need to rededicate ourselves?" Graham said. "When God sent the flood and destroyed the earth, it was because man's heart had become so evil and violent. In the news, we see unimaginable violence: rapes, murders, [and] unimaginable violence. Video games are full of violence. We have an insatiable appetite for violence."

Graham's comments came at a time when the Trump administration was receiving significant scrutiny for its handling of the war in Iran, including the president's multiple threats to annihilate the Iranian civilization.

The "Rededicate 250" event was billed as a "historic gathering of Americans" at the National Mall for worship, prayer, and "giving thanks for God’s presence in our national life throughout 250 years of American history," according to the event's website.

Political analysts and observers reacted to Graham's speech on social media.

"No mention of corruption, starting illegal wars, carpet bombing schools, funding genocide, building concentration camps, torture, destruction of the constitution, kicking people off healthcare, cutting free school meals, giving all the money to the rich? SHOCKING!" liberal political commentator Kyle Kulinski posted on X.

"Did he mention an actual sin that seems all too common—sexual abuse by clergy?" Bill Kristol, editor at large for The Bulwark, posted on X.

"It’s telling that Graham is never this concerned about poverty, health care access, or anything that would actually make people’s lives better," Hemant Mehta, a former "Jeopardy!" champion, posted on X. "Just bigotry all the way down. That’s what Jesus taught him."

Heavily edited video of Trump address at national prayer event sparks outrage

Robert Davis
May 17, 2026 

RAW STORY


CSPAN screenshot

President Donald Trump sparked outrage on Sunday after his heavily edited recorded speech played at his national prayer event in Washington, D.C.

Trump addressed the crowd at his "Rededicate 250" event, billed as an effort to highlight "God’s presence in our national life throughout 250 years of American history," according to the event's website. It was held at the National Mall and featured appearances from Trump's Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and several prominent MAGA and Evangelical Christian figures.

In the video, Trump appears to struggle to read a Bible verse. Onlookers also noted multiple edits to the video, which called the authenticity of Trump's message into question.

Political analysts and observers mocked the clip on social media.

"Holy s---," Ron Filipkowski, editor-in-chief of the MeidasTouch Network, posted on X. "This is a prerecorded message with lots of obvious edits, and this is the best he can do? He looks like a cadaver, sounds like he's on a ventilator, and can't even properly read the sections that come from a book he's never read."

"Lmao is Trump 'reading' a Bible verse from a teleprompter," political commentary account "Wu Tang is for the Children" posted on X.

"Disturbingly theocratic," Julian Andreone, Capitol Hill reporter for Drop Site News, posted on X.

Opinion

What Freedom 250’s prayer wall reveals about Christian nationalism’s true believers

(RNS) — Again and again, the prayers on the site show a portrait of a nation in pain, and that America is a divinely chosen place that must protect itself from enemies.

A broad variety of submitted prayers on the America Prays website. (Screen grab)

Karen E. Park
May 15, 2026
RNS

(RNS) — As part of the “Rededicate 250” event in Washington, D.C., on Sunday (May 17), organizers are inviting Americans to submit prayers for the nation through a public online “prayer wall” on the affiliated America Prays website. While the so-called rededication of the United States as “One Nation Under God” is drawing a great deal of attention for its fusion of politics, theology and nationalism, the prayer wall itself has received little scrutiny.

A close look at the words found on the site — where Americans are exhorted to “share what’s on your heart” in the verbal formulation of contemporary American evangelicalism — offers a rare opportunity to watch what looks like real Christian nationalism. It appears not merely as political rhetoric from movement leaders, but as lived devotional language among the posted prayers, which seem, not surprisingly, to be entirely Christian in their orientation.

The prayers on the wall are divided by categories like “Country,” “Military,” “Family,” “Healing” and “Peace.” Since there is a form that must be filled out by anyone wishing to contribute a prayer, it is reasonable to assume not all the prayers shared with the government through the website are posted publicly.

Many of the prayers are deeply personal. For example: “I am believing God for a new vehicle, furniture and beds for our place. Thank you.” –Texas, May 13. Or “Pray for daughter in law to get help for bipolar schizophrenia. . .My heart aches, I know God is in control.” — California, May 12. Another person says they are going through a “bad divorce,” but knows “God is my lawyer and he will make things right.”

Taken together, these anguished personal prayers reveal a portrait of a nation in pain.

The prayers use colloquial grammar and spelling, and appear to be written by real people – with real names and actual problems like ALS, joblessness and loneliness. In this way, the prayer wall provides a strikingly authentic contrast to the “Voices of Liberty” quotations elsewhere on the Freedom 250 website, which purport to be the words of “real Americans” explaining “what freedom means to them” but which appear to be AI-generated fakes.

But in Prayer Wall sections dedicated to “Country” and “Military,” the devotional language of Christian nationalism emerges clearly. Here is one example from Missouri, May 11: “Lord Jesus, King Jesus dawn our nation from the festering pit we have fallen into the past decades. Destroy our enemies physical and spiritual. Allow us to be the city on the hill you desired us to be. Allow us to discipline ourselves and other nations for your glory alone. We love you and rededicate ourselves now in your holy mighty name Jesus, Amen”

RELATED: Rededicate 250 touts a star-studded prayer bash with politicians, Christian celebrities

The prayer includes vivid language about personal devotion, national decline, spiritual warfare, American exceptionalism and fantasies of political restoration. To this person, the nation itself has become a sacred object: fallen, endangered, chosen and in need of purification and recommitment. But the nation is, at the same time, a weapon that can be used to “discipline other nations for your glory alone.”

A prayer card from the America Prays website of a prayer submitted from Missouri on May 11. (Screen grab)
A prayer card from the America Prays website of a prayer submitted from Arizona on May 14. (Screen grab)

Another prayer in the “Country” section (from Arizona, May 14) reads: “Lord Jesus please hear our cries for this nation and the world. You and only You can truly fight this battle we are in. This spitiritual [sic] battle against evil. I pray for our leaders to seek You in all they do, trust You and Your plans for this nation. That You would protect them and their families as they believe and trust in You. I pray Psalm 91 over this nation, especially verse 11: ‘For He will give His angels orders concerning you, to protect you in all your ways.'”

Again and again, the prayers on the site return to similar themes: America as a divinely chosen nation that has drifted from God; enemies both internal and external; fears of moral collapse; hopes for restoration; calls for repentance; and requests for divine protection over the country and its leaders.

The prayer wall, taken as a whole, is especially striking for the way in which these grand national and religious narratives coexist alongside deeply ordinary personal anxieties. The result is an emotional public theology in which private suffering, national identity, religious symbolism and political longing are deeply intertwined.

The fusion of the theological and the political has long been part of American religious life. Historians have noted the persistence of providential language in American politics from the Puritans onward — the belief that the U.S. possesses a unique divine mission and stands in a covenantal relationship with God. But the prayers collected on the Freedom 250 site reveal how intensely devotional that language remains for many Americans. The nation is imagined as more than a political entity, but as a spiritual project whose fortunes rise and fall according to both divine favor and satanic power.

The language of spiritual warfare appears repeatedly on the prayer wall, across all categories. Participants pray against “darkness,” “evil forces” and enemies “physical and spiritual,” as well as attacks on Christianity itself. In many cases, the boundaries between political opponents, cultural change, demonic influence and national decline are impossible to separate.

RELATED: Trump’s May 17 rally recalls 250 years of failed attempts at a Christian nation

The prayers also reveal the continuing emotional power of older forms of American civil religion. References to the U.S. as a “city on a hill,” to national chosenness and to America’s divine purpose appear constantly throughout the submissions. What emerges is a vision of the nation not as a democratic republic governed by the people or of a constitutional order governed by laws, but as a sacred community whose religious identity is in need of urgent restoration and defense.

While the speeches that will be made on the National Mall by religious and governmental leaders like Speaker Mike Johnson, the Rev. Franklin Graham and Bishop Robert Barron will be important to analyze and contextualize, the prayer wall may actually tell us more about the emotional and spiritual structure of contemporary Christian nationalism than the speeches ever could. The Freedom 250 prayer wall offers a glimpse into how Christian nationalist ideas operate not only as political arguments or propaganda being imposed from above, but as useful and powerful frameworks through which many Americans interpret their own suffering, hope, fear and national identity.

(Karen E. Park, a historian of American Christianity, is co-editor of “American Patroness: Marian Shrines and the Making of US Catholicism.” She writes on Substack at Ex Voto. The views expressed in this commentary do not necessarily reflect those of Religion News Service.)

Christian group has '15-foot-tall' surprise in store for 'Church of Trump' DC event

Alexander Willis
May 17, 2026 

RAW STORY




A man carries a wooden cross near the Washington Monument ahead of the "Rededicate 250: National Jubilee of Prayer, Praise and Thanksgiving" event aimed to celebrate America's 250th birthday, in Washington, D.C. , U.S. May 16, 2026. REUTERS/Seth Herald


President Donald Trump is expected to be joined by several of his top officials and allies Sunday in Washington, D.C. for Rededicate 250, a national prayer event hosted on the National Mall, and one Christian group is working to erect a “15-foot-tall” surprise for the president in protest.

Organized by Freedom250, a Trump-aligned group that has received millions of taxpayer dollars, the event has been decried by some critics as promoting Christian nationalism. The government watchdog group Public Citizen, for instance, condemned the event as being “less like a traditional religious event and more like a program for the Church of Trump.”

Thousands are expected to attend the free event, among them being protesters, some of whom belong to Faithful America, which describes itself as a “network of progressive Christians,” per a report published Sunday by The Washington Post, which described them as a “Christian group focused on opposing religious nationalism.”


Working in tandem with another group, Freedom From Religion Foundation, which the Post described as a “mostly secular group focused on church-state separation," the two groups have a surprise planned for the president, one that appears to parody the recent erection of a 22-foot-tall, $400,000 gold-plated statue of Trump at one of his golf clubs.

“The organizations said they will erect a 15-foot-tall balloon of ‘a golden calf with a Trump-like visage’ a few blocks from the prayer event,” the Post reported.

The nation’s capital has been host to a number of installations designed to mock the president, including the installation of satirical arcade game cabinets last week mocking Trump’s wildly unpopular war against Iran, and the erection of statues depicting Trump with convicted sex-offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Rededicate 250 touts a star-studded prayer bash with politicians, Christian celebrities

(RNS) — But a new poll finds many Americans aren’t comfortable mixing religion and politics.

Work continues on the stage for the Rededicate 250 event on the National Mall, Tuesday, May 12, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

Kathryn Post and Yonat Shimron
May 14, 2026
RNS

(RNS) — Bishops, evangelical influencers, Cabinet members and an actor who plays Jesus are a few of the speakers and performers scheduled to participate in “Rededicate 250,” the Trump administration’s daylong prayer celebration happening on the National Mall this weekend.

Advertised as a “rededication of our country as One Nation Under God” and a “once in a lifetime national moment,” the Sunday event is intended to reflect on the faith of America’s founders and to appeal to God to bless and guide the nation. It’s an initiative of Freedom 250, a White House-backed, public-private campaign staging patriotic events to celebrate the nation’s 250th birthday (not to be confused with the bipartisan America 250 efforts). Supporters welcome the event as a tribute to America’s roots, while critics say the Christian-saturated, MAGA-heavy festival casts an exclusionary vision of America’s past and present. Americans United for Separation of Church and State suggested the event advances Christian nationalism rather than religious freedom.

The rally has inspired both supportive and oppositional pre-events, the former led by activist and worship leader Sean Feucht, and the latter spearheaded by the Interfaith Alliance and a cadre of progressive religious leaders.

In recent days, a handful of Christian celebrities have been announced as Rededicate 250 participants. Grammy-winning Christian musician Chris Tomlin, known for the hits “Holy Forever” and “How Great Is Our God,” will headline the event. Jonathan Roumie, the Catholic actor, influencer and star of the hit Jesus show “The Chosen,” was recently added as a speaker. Roumie has spoken at the March For Life and starred in a Super Bowl ad. He will be joined by evangelical influencer, podcast host and “Duck Dynasty” alum Sadie Robertson Huff, who built a ministry platform catered to women and has over 5 million Instagram followers.

Other listed speakers include many of President Donald Trump’s closest friends and allies, most of them conservative Christians. Prominent political figures include House Speaker Mike Johnson (a Southern Baptist); Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth (who worships in churches linked to the Communion of Reformed Evangelical Churches); and Secretary of State Marco Rubio (a Catholic). Trump is expected to send a recorded video message.

Of the 19 faith leaders currently listed, 18 are Christian, and most are evangelical. Among them are the Rev. Franklin Graham, president and CEO of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association; Pastor Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference; Pentecostal preacher and White House faith office senior adviser Paula White-Cain; and Pastor Robert Jeffress, who leads First Baptist Church in Dallas.

Bishop Robert Barron, who leads the Diocese of Winona-Rochester, Minnesota, and Cardinal Timothy Dolan, who recently retired from his position as bishop of the Archdiocese of New York, both Catholic, are also scheduled speakers.

The only non-Christian religious leader currently listed is Rabbi Meir Soloveichik, who leads Congregation Shearith Israel in New York City and serves on Trump’s Religious Liberty Commission.

Why Hillsdale? The Christian liberal arts school hosting Erika Kirk for commencement

According to organizers, the speaker list is still being finalized.

If Trump’s religious revival is meant to encourage a fusion of Christianity and government, a new Pew Research poll released Thursday (May 14) shows Americans are not buying it. Although more than half of Americans say religion plays a positive role in society, they do not want their government to stop enforcing separation of church and state.

The poll, taken in April among 3,592 U.S. adults, shows that those views have barely budged over the past few years. Eight of out 10 Americans say religious congregations should not support candidates in elections. And two-thirds say churches and other houses of worship should keep out of political matters.

“17% of U.S. adults now say they want Christianity to be the official religion of the U.S.” (Graphic courtesy of Pew Research Center)

As for Christian nationalism, the poll shows, it is far from popular.

Only 17% of Americans think the government should declare Christianity the official religion of the U.S., a slight jump over 2024 when 13% said so. Generally, the idea of Christian nationalism remains more negative than positive: 31% view it unfavorably, 10% view it favorably and the rest don’t know enough or don’t have an opinion.

“To the extent that President Trump has a rally that explicitly espouses Christian nationalism, he’s not going to get very far beyond, perhaps, the people at the rally,” said John Green, professor emeritus of political science at the University of Akron. “There are people that have that view, but they’re a very small minority, even within the Republican Party.”

The poll also found 52% of U.S. adults think “conservative Christians have gone too far in trying to push their religious values in the government and public schools.” It had a margin of error of plus or minus 1.9 percentage points.

Feucht, the activist and musician, and Pastor Mark Driscoll, who were previously rumored to be Rededicate 250 participants, will instead be hosting a concert at Washington, D.C.’s Sylvan Theater. In a video this week, Feucht said Driscoll would join him at Saturday’s concert, which he described as a “four-hour revival meeting” that’s part of the battle for the “soul of America.”

Several groups have come out against Rededicate 250. The Council on American-Islamic Relations called for organizers to expand the speakers list to better reflect the nation’s diverse religious landscape.

“Muslims have been present in significant numbers in the country since the colonial era,” the advocacy organization said. “Inviting speakers who represent many faiths projects the strength of our religious liberty.”

Americans United for Separation of Church and State said the event advanced Christian nationalism rather than religious freedom, and on Friday, a group of progressive faith leaders — including the Rev. Paul Raushenbush, president and CEO of the Interfaith Alliance; Rabbi Jonah Pesner, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism; and the Rev. Adam Russell Taylor, president of Sojourners — will host a virtual press briefing that argues Rededicate 250 misrepresents how America’s founders approached religious tolerance.

As a counterpoint to the Rededicate event, Interfaith Alliance said it will team up with protest artist Robin Bell to project pro-religious freedom messages, including “Democracy NOT Theocracy” and “Reject Christian Nationalism,” on the walls of the National Gallery of Art on Thursday evening.

“Instead of leaning into the incredible tapestry of American religion, they’re really only highlighting a thin slice of American religiosity, and elevating it into a primary role and a privileged role, one could argue, with government funding,” Raushenbush said. “Unfortunately it feels more like a political rally than a religious one.”

Jack Jenkins contributed to this reporting.

Christian nationalists cling to Trump because they 'know they’re in decline'

Faith leaders pray over President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, Image via the White House.

Matthew Rozsa

May 14, 2026

ALTERNET

President Donald Trump and his administration have openly preached for Christianity to shape national policy since he began his second term — yet the vast majority of Americans do not share this agenda.

“The religious right has been ascendant during the second presidency of Donald Trump, and they’ve harnessed his disdain for rules and norms to blur the lines between church and state,” reported Vox's Christian Paz on Thursday. “Inside the White House, the secretary of defense has framed the war in Iran and American military action abroad as sanctioned and guided by God. Outside the government, this alliance between church and state often skirts near the edge of outright idolatry. Conservative pastors are erecting golden statues of Trump (but insisting it does not mirror the infamous golden calf of the Old Testament). They’re extending their hands over the president in prayer after comparing him to Jesus and standing by him, with some mild criticism, after he cast himself as an AI-slop Messiah.”

Yet despite this open call for religion to dictate American policy, Paz reported that a recent survey by Pew Research Center reveals that most Americans do not want this to happen. A mere 10 percent identify as Christian nationalists, compared to 31 percent who oppose them and 59 percent who have no opinion. When it comes to the division between church and state, 13 percent want it weakened while 54 percent support it and 32 percent have no opinion.


According to the Public Religion Research Institute’s president and founder Robert P. Jones, Trump and his administration are pushing for “one sector of Christianity" that has failed to catch on with both religious and non-religious Americans.

“It hasn’t resulted in major shifts in the landscape,” Jones explained. “In other words, they’re not pulling people into that worldview. They’re basically just appealing to a small subset of Americans who already hold those views and who just happen to be their political base.”


Even some former Trumpers oppose Trump’s Christian nationalism. In March former Republican US Rep. Joe Walsh said that the theocrats are “out of the closet. They're loud and proud. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson talks about this. Republican members of Congress talk about this. Republican and MAGA thought leaders talk about the fact that America needs to be a Christian country. It needs to be officially designated as a Christian country.”

Citing how Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth openly cited Jesus Christ when discussing his war against Iran with US troops, Walsh added that Hegseth “knows that not every American worships Jesus Christ. So what's he doing? Here's what he's doing. Pete Hegseth is a white Christian nationalist. Pete Hegseth, the Secretary of Defense, is a white Christian nationalist. He wants America to be a white Christian nation.”

“Our founders were very enlightened,” Walsh continued, saying that even though many of them were religious Christians they made sure that “we do not have an official state religion. The very thought of that, the very notion of that is antithetical to what America is. … Christian nationalism is utterly un-American … as un-American as Islamism is. … Islamism is a radical concept that everybody's got to be Islam. Christian nationalism, same thing. Everybody's got to be Christian. Both are utterly un-American.”


He added, “And I guess what I'm saying right now is, as I close on this, this Un-American, and by the way, un-Christian belief, has overtaken the Republican Party. And we need everybody to wake up to it. Fast. and help all of us, help everyone defeat it.”