Let’s let’s say it’s Los Angeles, San Diego, and they just decide … ‘Oh, we’re gonna get rid of…history,” Kilmeade posed. “We got new history. This is America built off the backs of slaves on stolen land, and that curriculum comes in.”
This is what Trump was responding to. Regardless of the way that article’s headline also lying about what was being discussed, he did not threaten to cut funding for schools that teach about slavery. He threatened to cut funding for a school that decides to throw out history and introduce a new history in which slavery is the primary aspect of United States history.
This is distortion. This is a continuation of the well-established pattern of lying about what Donald Trump said. I don’t know how to make it any simpler than that.
No that’s just you putting your opinion and spin on it. You and Trump would prefer that they teach “slavery wasn’t so bad” or that it’s overblown? Nowhere does anyone teach that slavery is the primary part of American history.
Read the article, it talks about “slavery” and not the examples I gave above.
From that article:
This is what Trump was responding to. Regardless of the way that article’s headline also lying about what was being discussed, he did not threaten to cut funding for schools that teach about slavery. He threatened to cut funding for a school that decides to throw out history and introduce a new history in which slavery is the primary aspect of United States history.
This is distortion. This is a continuation of the well-established pattern of lying about what Donald Trump said. I don’t know how to make it any simpler than that.
No that’s just you putting your opinion and spin on it. You and Trump would prefer that they teach “slavery wasn’t so bad” or that it’s overblown? Nowhere does anyone teach that slavery is the primary part of American history.