Hundreds of signs, merchandise and presentations by the National Park Service have been flagged by President Donald Trump’s administration for possible removal as part of its war against “ideological indoctrination.”

According to a NOTUS review of the material, an evaluation reveals that "in many instances, park staff acknowledged" the material was factual.

The removal reports were recently published online by an anonymous federal government employee and first reported by the Washington Post.

The removal requests were made to national parks, monuments and other sites. The order targets content that the administration deems “partisan” or “disparaging," according to Trump's executive order. Slavery, climate change and Native American issues were among the subjects to come under scrutiny.

The National Parks Conservation Association sued the Interior Department this month over removal of such content from park sites.

Whether the Interior Department and National Park Service subsequently reviewed each of the content reports isn’t clear. It has also avoided specifics on how much content is being removed or altered.

Molly Blake, a team member at Save Our Signs, told NOTUS the group has tracked hundreds of signs, displays and other material removed since Trump issued the executive order.

“The spreadsheet shows that the message that was sent is that we can’t talk about times in American history where people in power hurt other people. We can’t talk about times in American history where people’s civil rights were violated,” Blake said. “And that’s a really killing and disturbing development.”

A National Park Service spokesperson issued a statement calling such claims false.

The executive order has already had a chilling effect in some cases.

An exhibit at the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park that explores how people from different backgrounds can interpret archaeology in different ways was flagged as “factually accurite [sic], but submitting for review out of an abundance of caution,” the report said.

Another report that mentioned how Native American people were removed during development of the Transcontinental Railroad was also flagged, despite also being tagged as accurate by the reporting party.

“We understand a lot of folks are responding under duress, and I think that kind of comes out of some of the comments that have been leaked,” Blake said. “What I think is also just especially insidious is there’s no clear shared understanding of what it means to be quote-unquote ‘disparaging or inappropriate.’ And so then you get into these absurd situations where you’re reporting things that are historically accurate.”

Veteran economics reporter Catherine Rampell warns of “Warflation” in the weeks ahead.

In a post to The Bulwark, Rampell predicted higher prices are on the horizon for “anything that needs to be transported anywhere.”

“The top crude oil expert at S&P Global Energy warned that the military conflict has the potential to become 'the largest oil supply disruption in history,'" she writes. "That’s because about a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, on Iran’s southern coast.”

Oil prices are already skyrocketing, a reversal of a previous bright spot in affordability.

“But since we bombed Iran, energy costs have risen sharply. To put things in perspective: oil prices are up about 20 percent so far just this week," Rampell adds.

The downstream effect on various pricing issues will soon follow.

“Downstream firms that require [liquefied natural gas] to operate are closing shop, too. For example, the Gulf region is responsible for nearly a tenth of the global aluminum supply," according to Rampell. "Already this week, multiple major aluminum smelters had to initiate shutdowns; one company says it may take up to a year to restart production.”

Adding to the cascade are methanol and other chemicals, including fertilizers used to grow food supplies. “American farmers are freaking out,” Rampell claims, and buttressed the point by talking to an analyst.

Consumers may see “higher prices for bread within six to 10 weeks, eggs within a few months and pork and broiler chicken within six months,” according to an estimate from food-system expert Raj Patel.

Those are the obvious targets. But on the horizon are other products that will soon feel the effect of chemical price hikes.

Rampell writes, “Then there are the gazillions of consumer goods that people may not realize use petrochemicals as inputs. Those include clothes, iPhones, candy, dentures, dishwashing liquid, footballs, shampoo, toothpaste, lipstick, plastic toys, trash bags, umbrellas, tires — you name it.”

Not everyone is sounding the inflation alarm.

Forbes reports LPL Financial analysts have noted, “Across more than two dozen events since World War II, the S&P 500 averaged a one-day decline of about 1 percent, analysts said, adding markets tend to “absorb shocks” quickly before stabilizing and recovering “within a matter of weeks.” The S&P 500 dropped 1.2 percent when Iran attacked Israel in April 2024 and took just over two weeks to recover the loss, whereas the index rose 1 percent after the U.S. and Israel last struck Iran in June 2025.”

The underlying state of the economy, such as the health of the job market, interest rates and inflation, “matters more than the event itself,” LDL writes.

CNBC notes, “most economists say the impact from higher oil prices is difficult to gauge and could ultimately prove temporary, as has often been the case with past Middle East conflicts.”

Moreover, with the U.S. producing a larger share of its own energy, the broader economic impact of oil price spikes is not what it once was.

“In today’s American economy, spikes in oil prices do not present the same significant downside risk to top-line economic growth or inflation as they did a half century ago,” said Joseph Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM. “The American economy is far less exposed to economic and inflation disruptions while its overall size has tripled.”

Rampell says Trump isn’t deliberately trying to raise prices, and acknowledges that presidents really don’t have a lot of tools to fight inflation.

“But between tariffs, mass deportations (and a resulting depletion in the agricultural workforce), politicizing the Federal Reserve, and bombing Iran, Trump seems intent on proving us wrong.”

Friday nights are typically time for HBO’s “Real Time with Bill Maher.” But President Donald Trump decided to get an early jump on things before the show airs, reposting four times on Truth Social with various stories quoting him in unflattering terms about the comedian and host.

Trump may have been trying to get out in front of what should be a roast on the next version of the show. Maher’s guests for March 6 include author/TV host Annabelle Gurwitch, former CNN anchor Don Lemon and California Sen. Adam Schiff.

Despie Maher's moderation efforts in the wake of meeting Trump over dinner, the president has not stopped his criticism. Trump acknowledged following the dinner that he enjoyed Maher’s company, but that feeling appears to have swiftly deteriorated.

The Trump tweetstorm on Maher had several nuggets highlighted from stories that previously ran on KUTV.com, NewsMax.com, the NY Post and latenighter.com, along with his signature prose, including hits like:

Calling Maher “a jerk,” and said his much-publicized dinner with him was “a total waste of time.” He later retweeted a story from Newsmax repeating those comments.
... Saying Maher is “no different than Kimmel or Colbert,” two other talk show hosts who have taken shots at the president.
... And characterizing Maher as “extremely nervous” with “ZERO confidence in himself.”

The reposted stories with highlighted quotes date to an event organized last year by singer Kid Rock.

The prospect of a growing new spending measure related to the Iran conflict has GOP leaders getting ready for their own battle.

Fiscal hawks are said to be deeply unsettled by the cost estimates being floated on the spending request, Politico reports. They will likely be demanding offsetting spending cuts, even as pork is added to new proposals.

Closed-door briefings this week delivered the bad news on what was termed a “staggering price tag” for the Middle East conflict, with current spending for the Iran conflict estimated as high as $2 billion per day. The rapid depletion of munitions and the foggy outlook for a quick resolution to the war doesn’t help the outlook.

House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) had a blunt reply when asked to estimate the new spending.

“A lot,” he replied.

Speaker Mike Johnson indicated Congress would pass the spending bill “when it’s appropriate and get it right,” despite the current lack of specifics. “We’re waiting on the White House and [the Pentagon] to let us know, but we have an open dialogue about it,” Johnson said.

Senior Republicans told Politico they expect President Donald Trump’s administration’s spending ask to be in the tens of billions of dollars range. Trump officials have declined to provide specific numbers in the private meetings, according to six congressional Republicans granted anonymity to describe the internal discussions.

The request for supplemental funding could skyrocket once the ask is made to Congress, according to four other people with direct knowledge of the matter who spoke to Politico.

Potentially increasing the spending is tariff relief for farmers that farm-state Republicans will request, adding an estimated $15 billion, and billions of dollars in wildfire aid to get enough Democratic support for the spending.

“I haven’t seen any specifics … but if it’s unpaid-for, I generally have an issue,” Rep. Russ Fulcher (R-Idaho) said. Another House Republican granted anonymity by Politico added,“It’s not a ‘hell no’ (on spending), but it should be offset somehow.”

A planned House Republican policy retreat scheduled for Monday at Trump’s Doral, Florida resort will be a key to gaining hardliner support. Trump will be speaking, hoping to persuade the reticent pols to get behind the additional funding.

There are supporters for the additional spending request by the administration. House Foreign Affairs Chair Brian Mast (R-Fla.) said this week he would support an emergency funding bill spending tens of billions of dollars on the Iran operation alone.

But others are wary of the Trump pledge to do “whatever” it takes to win in Iran, including boots on the ground. Such talk sounds like “President Lyndon Johnson going into Vietnam,” said one House veteran to Politico.

Rep. Ryan Mackenzie was wary of the ultimate cost, noting that “as much as we need to neutralize their capabilities to continue to attack us, we do also need to make sure that we don’t get dragged into a forever war.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise promised “very serious conversations” on the spending, “because it’s important that the Department of War have the tools they need to keep America safe.”

One tool that could be deployed to get the spending passed, albeit a longshot, is a budget reconciliation bill. That requires complete Republican unity, allowing the request to reach Trump’s desk without Democratic support.

House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington (R-Texas) said in an interview this week he expected an initial emergency funding bill to pass. But an anticipated second request that could be even larger will be problematic.

“It’s not just for the current conflict,” Arrington said. “There are things that need to be retooled fundamentally at the Defense Department, and the president’s team is making a really good case for that.”

Rep. Ralph Norman, one GOP hard-liner who has objected in the past to big Pentagon budgets, now says he would “absolutely” support a $50 billion bill without offsets.

“I don’t like it, but with what this president’s doing with income — the GDP is increasing, the money he’s bringing in for other investments — to handicap him on that, that’s a problem,” said Norman.

The Senate promises to be a tougher nut to crack on spending.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), a senior member of the Defense Appropriations subcommittee, warned that the “administration should not be taking anything for granted.”

“If they come to us at the end of the month and say, ‘This is what we want, and basically, deliver the votes’ … it’s not a winning strategy, in my view,” she said. “You’ve got to start making the case.”

President Donald Trump’s administration has humbled some of the largest law firms and highest-paid individuals in the legal profession. And other businesses and individuals that potentially need his grace on their activities have to be watching and wondering if they are next.

That’s the conclusion of a New York Times opinion piece by contributor Jeffrey Toobin, which notes that bullies (i.e., the Trump administration) “are never satisfied with just a single capitulation.”

The lesson to be drawn is that government pressure is effective even when its actions are clearly unconstitutional.

What the opinion piece terms “nonstop chaos” caused by the Trump administration began last year with executive orders targeting progressive law firms that worked for Trump opponents and causes he doesn’t favor. The orders would have created insurmountable barriers to the law firms' corporate activities.

Some of the firms in the cross hairs of those orders opted to settle by offering the administration millions in pro-Bono legal work on favored causes.

Last year, four judges ruled that the executive orders targeting the law firms were unconstitutional. The Department of Justice appealed, but then decided earlier this month that it was dropping the plans.

The next day, the appeals were placed back on.

“The about-face was embarrassing, but it obscured a larger truth of this lamentable episode: President Trump had already won this fight months ago, when the American legal profession — especially its largest and richest law firms — lost. And that’s not funny at all.”

While the legal profession was initially targeted, there’s a broader application underway. The Trump administration has presented the same “extortionate choices” to a variety of targets, including universities and companies.

The implication of the administration's message is clear: “Agree to our unconstitutional demands and sacrifice your principles, or fight back and suffer our wrath in the form of lost patronage and dollars.”

In all of those cases, Toobin argues, “surrender looks — and perhaps even is — the path of least resistance.” But giving in may embolden further actions, “and you don’t have to be a lawyer to see that was a foolish choice indeed.”

There’s a “chasm of uncertainty” in the U.S. war actions, one media pundit opines.

Sarah Baxter, director of the Marie Colvin Center for International Reporting, peeled the onion of U.S. war schemes in an opinion piece for The iPaper. She indicated that despite the public bravado of the administration, there’s a lot that’s unknown and unplanned with regards to Iran.

President Donald Trump admitted as much in a CNN interview, Baxter cites.

“We don’t know who the leadership is. We don’t know who they’ll pick. Maybe they’ll get lucky and get someone who knows what they’re doing … We don’t know who is leading the country now. They don’t know who’s leading," Baxter writes.

Trump has attempted to frame the decision to launch the attacks as an end to the 47-year “forever war” started by Iran, Simon Henderson, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near-East Policy, told Baxter.

“The killing of Ayatollah Khamenei led to a feeling of euphoria and ‘we’ve succeeded’. To a certain extent Washington thinks, ‘we’ve won. All we have to do is tidy up,’ but we’re not there yet,” said Henderson “Even if we succeed, there are bound to be clashes and ugliness.”

Not only is the current leadership publicly unknown, but what comes next is also guesswork.

“Bluntly, Iranian exile politics is a mess," Baxter writes. Few Washingtonians have faith in the abilities of Reza Pahlavi, the son of the last Shah of Iran, to usher in democracy, as King Juan Carlos I did in post-fascist Spain in 1975. Competing groups vie for influence and accuse others of being spies and stooges.”

All of the uncertainty is likely bleeding over onto Middle East allies.

“Sunni Muslim nations like Saudi Arabia and the Emirates, who are quietly supporting the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Shia Iran, are wondering whether Trump can be trusted to stand by them.”

According to Henderson, “they placed their bets on Trump many months ago and hope their bets are still good. But they must be thinking, is he going to succeed or are they going to be left to drift?”

One advantage to the seeming uncertainty is it leaves a wide path to declare victory and go home.

Trump still believes things are on the right track, despite some setbacks. But his optimism isn’t shared right now by those outside the staunch MAGA supporters.

Several important MAGA media figures, such as Tucker Carlson and Megyn Kelly, have criticized the attacks on Iran. The President isn’t concerned with the chatter

“I think that MAGA is Trump — MAGA’s not the other two,” he said.

But the MAGA movement is "experiencing whiplash" after swallowing Trump’s campaign rhetoric about wanting to stop wars, Baxter claims. How long their support lasts remains to be seen.

Recollections differ between Vice President JD Vance and former New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan when it comes to their clash over immigration and the Catholic Church’s support for migrants.

Democratic operative Christopher Hale on X described Vance’s "escalating" clash with the Catholic Church.

Catholic convert Vance has stated that the Trump administration’s immigration policies prioritize the needs of American citizens, families and communities. That puts him at odds at times with the church on immigration issues.

Things peaked in a January 2025 interview in which Vance questioned whether the church’s pro-immigrant stance was influenced by financial gain to resettle immigrants using federal funds.

Dolan called the comments “nasty” and “untrue and scurrilous.” However, Dolan later said in a Feb. 19 interview with Catholic news outlet EWTN TV that Vance had apologized.

However, in a Washington Post interview, Vance claims such an apology didn’t happen, but hedged on specifics.

“I’m not saying he’s lying, but I mean, look, sometimes I say things too harshly. I say things too directly,” Vance said. He added that he told Dolan to “be careful your financial interests and the immigration issue don’t actually cloud your judgment.”

“I’m sure that I said something like that,” Vance added, “but I don’t remember exactly what I said.”

While Vance acknowledged the church has a duty to “minister to everybody,” he said he has a different duty.

“So that is going to inevitably lead to conflict between the government and the clergy,” Vance said. “What I try to do is come at that conflict in a spirit of charity.”

President Donald Trump’s hold over his MAGA supporters has truly slipped for the first time, contends Senior Editor Alex Shephard in the New Republic. And a prolonged conflict in the Middle East may lead to a further spiral downward.

So far, the story contends, "right-wing criticism of Trump’s war has mostly come from familiar MAGA cranks like Steve Bannon and Tucker Carlson. But it could quickly spiral out of control."

"If it does drag on, it will become even less popular, including among Republicans,” Shepard writes. “Facing sustained criticism from the MAGA faithful who rightly see the war as a 'betrayal,' Trump could well spiral into unprecedented territory.”

Trump has always dealt with extreme opposition, and has a history of turning critics around. This time is different, Shephard claims. Previous bold moves — like the assassination of Iranian Quds Force leader Qasem Soleimani in 2020 or the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January — weren’t the same as an extended regional war. If Iran proves to be that, Shephard says, that will hang over the presidency.

The potential problems on the horizon are dire. Trump is now historically unpopular and facing a potential midterm massacre.

“But what happens when he is even more unpopular, overseeing a foreign war that’s out of control, and no longer has control of Congress? What happens when the subpoenas and investigations — and yes, impeachments — start? What happens if this becomes a regional war? What happens if U.S. civilians, stranded in a Gulf state, are taken hostage? What happens if U.S. ground forces start aiding one, or several, factions in an Iranian civil war?”

All of that can cause further erosion in Trump’s support.

The President claims “MAGA is Trump,” Shephard writes. “Before too long, that may be pretty much all that MAGA is.”

A voter has accused Florida GOP gubernatorial candidate James Fishback of antisemitic rhetoric in a letter to the Sun-Sentinel media outlet published today.

Fishback called Israel’s Western Wall “stupid” in a February speech at the University of Central Florida. He stated that he had no interest in traveling to Israel if elected “just to kiss a stupid wall.”

Footage from that event sparked social media outrage, including from fellow GOP candidate Jay Collins, who said the remarks were “indistinguishable from radical terrorists.”

Fishback’s campaign has had several statements that have drawn fire for being anti-Israel, including a tweet in which he called the claim that criticism of Israel is antisemitic and that Israel is America's greatest ally a "scam" and "cringe and pathetic propaganda."

A letter to the editor from Holly Rothkopf of Boynton Beach, Florida published Tuesday by the Sun-Sentinel, added to the condemnations of Fishback and urged wider condemnations by Republicans.

“I urge the Republican National Committee to speak out forcefully against antisemitism in all its forms — harassment, intimidation, assault, vandalism and threats — and to disavow candidate Fishback,” Rothkopf wrote. “Our best future is to unite against hate and defend the truth.”

The Florida gubernatorial primary is on August 18. The state has been solidly Republican, boasting its governor and two senators as GOP members. The state also went for President Donald Trump in the 2024 election by 56 percent.

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it” is a famous 1905 aphorism by philosopher George Santayana. Its meaning is that understanding history is a key to progress.

A recent Washington Post story shows that efforts to remake the Smithsonian museum system are being pushed by the Trump administration. Their goal is to adjust what are termed “divisive narratives" and “improper ideology.”

Salon senior writer Chauncey DeVega contends such efforts are an attempt to control the past as a way to win the present and command the future.

“These types of bad actors will never be satisfied in their quest to remake society in their ideological and personal image,” DeVenga argues. “This explains why authoritarians and other enemies of democracy systematically target schools, universities, science, the arts, libraries, the independent news media and Fourth Estate, museums — anywhere knowledge is produced and critical thinking is taught. To control society, you must first control how people think.”

The Smithsonian previously removed references to Trump’s impeachment and role in the Jan. 6 uprising from the National Portrait Gallery. But recently, 64-year-old historian James Millward fought back, handing out printouts in the museum that stated that Trump was “impeached twice, on charges of abuse of power and incitement of insurrection.”

Millward knew that he was kicking a hornet’s nest. He’s a cofounder of Citizen Historians for the Smithsonian, an organization which “spent thousands of hours documenting every corner of the [museums] to document the changes being made under pressure from the administration.”

The museum sent armed guards to deal with him. The guards claimed that handing out literature and protesting in the museum was forbidden. They closed the gallery and sent him on his way.

DeVega noted, “What’s happening at the Smithsonian is part of a larger project in which Trump and the larger white-right want to create a fictionalized version of American history and life, where the only people who have a legitimate claim on the country are wealthy white men.” Others, DeVega said, “are at best a supporting cast. At worst, they are erased entirely, or cast as the anti-citizen, the Other, the enemy.”

Thus, the Civil Rights Movement for Blacks, women and LGBTQ, the labor movement and other challenges to authority are “distorted or ignored. They must be deleted, distorted or ignored. A usable past is a dangerous past,” DeVega argues.

Attempting to rewrite the past is a sign of weakness, DeVega concludes. He turned to Henry Giroux, social theorist and author of “Assassins of Memory,” a book that examines the politics of erasure,to underline that point.

“Only a regime uncertain of its legitimacy must police the past so aggressively,” Giroux said. “Authoritarian regimes — the Nazis, Stalin, Pinochet — have always understood that memory, culture, and education are crucial battlegrounds. Each appeared omnipotent, yet their obsession with silencing historians and artists revealed a profound fragility. Only insecure power fears memory.”

In the future, DeVega says, “resistance against Trumpism could very well mean taking photos of truth-telling exhibits before they are whitewashed or removed, hiding banned books and so-called degenerate art and secreting away important historical, cultural and artistic materials the regime wants erased. In ways small and large, the American people will have to become protectors of truth and reality itself.

"James Millward showed us what that looks like. He knows that democracy is not an abstraction. It is something we do and live.”

Three days into the attack on Iran, nervous Middle Eastern leaders are already looking for the conflict’s end.

Bloomberg News reports the United Arab Emirates and Qatar are quietly lobbying their allies in hopes of persuading President Donald Trump to shorten U.S. military operations in the region. Their hope is a coalition can quickly devise a diplomatic end to the combat to prevent further escalation and an energy price shock.

The diplomats requested anonymity from Bloomberg. But a Qatari assessment shared with the news outlet warned that a significant market price move would happen if shipping lanes in the region remain disrupted by the middle of this week.

UAE President Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan and Qatari emir Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani have spoken to a number of European leaders, Bloomberg said, including the UK’s Keir Starmer, France’s Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Friedrich Merz.

So far, any hopes of an early end to the combat seems wishful. The conflict escalated on Monday, as the U.S. slammed Iran and saw retaliation continue against Israel and neighboring Gulf states. The war is also widening, as Iranian-backed Hezbollah has joined the fray from its Lebanon base. News reports have previously claimed that there is no clear exit plan for the U.S. and/or Israel.

The Iranian Red Crescent Society claimed 555 people have already been killed in the conflict, with Israel claiming 11 deaths on its side. Four American troops have been reported killed in action, while three people were killed in the United Arab Emirates and one each in Kuwait and Bahrain.

Monday saw European natural gas prices spike more than 50 percent after Qatar shut down its liquefied natural gas production in the wake of an Iranian drone attack. The Qatar facility is the world’s largest exporter, and the Qataris warned that more severe price hikes could happen with a continued conflict.

The UAE and Qatar are leaving nothing to chance, even as they lobby for a diplomatic end to the conflict. Sources told Bloomberg that both are working to improve air defense capabilities, with the UAE focusing on medium-range missile air defense and Qatar hoping to enhance its ability to counter drone attacks.

The Patriot missile stocks of Qatar could be depleted later this week, given their rate of use, Bloomberg reports, citing an internal analysis provided by the country.