CBS News host Tony Dokoupil delivered what he described as a reality check during Wednesday’s broadcast of CBS Mornings, weighing in on the backlash facing President Donald Trump over his comments about U.S. history and the Smithsonian Institution. Trump had posted on Truth Social that the Smithsonian places too much emphasis on slavery and other negative aspects of America’s past, while not celebrating enough of the nation’s achievements and “brightness.” His remarks triggered criticism across much of the corporate media, with many accusing him of attempting to erase or downplay the history of slavery.

Dokoupil, however, told viewers that the former president’s message was not as radical as critics were portraying. He argued that Trump was essentially suggesting that the telling of American history should bring people together, instill pride, and highlight reasons to celebrate the country’s journey alongside its struggles. “American history shouldn’t be a thing of reverence. The country is not above critique,” Dokoupil explained. “But we shouldn’t look at our history with contempt, either. And there is some room for correction back toward the middle.”

He then drew a surprising comparison between Trump’s position and that of Lonnie Bunch, Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution. “In fact, Lonnie Bunch, who runs the Smithsonian, in a letter there, [Bunch and Trump are] saying quite the same things. The mission of the Smithsonian is to forge a shared history, a shared future, not just context, but hope to lead the country and communities together. That’s essentially what Donald Trump is offering here.”

In Dokoupil’s view, the controversy has been framed in overly simplistic terms. While critics allege Trump’s push is about sanitizing or whitewashing America’s past, Dokoupil insisted it is possible to tell the truth about slavery and systemic injustice without allowing those narratives to dominate the story of the nation. “In American history, what you are describing, that journey toward greatness is very real and we all have something to be incredibly proud of,” he said. “If you ask someone, is the world better off because of the existence of America and its people, to me, the answer is unquestionably yes.”

His co-host Vladimir Duthiers offered a note of caution, warning against efforts that might risk whitewashing. Duthiers emphasized that any attempt to diminish the brutal realities of slavery or gloss over systemic discrimination would do a disservice to truth. Dokoupil countered that acknowledging pride in the country does not require sugarcoating its darker chapters. Instead, he suggested that history can be told in a way that contextualizes both the triumphs and the failings without leaving Americans with the impression that their nation is defined solely by its sins.

The exchange came at a sensitive moment, as the White House prepares for America 250, the semiquincentennial commemoration of the nation’s founding in 2026. As part of those preparations, the administration recently directed the Smithsonian to adjust exhibits that are deemed problematic in tone, historical framing, or alignment with American ideals. The directive, issued in an August 12 letter, gave the institution 120 days to ensure that its presentations reflect “the unity, progress, and enduring values that define the American story.”

This push follows Trump’s March 28 executive order, which requires federal agencies to restore monuments removed during the Biden administration from national museums, parks, and memorials. The executive order and subsequent directives are seen as part of a broader effort to reassert traditional patriotic narratives in the nation’s historical memory. Trump and his allies argue that many liberals have gone too far in revising the past, pointing to removals of statues and memorials of figures such as Christopher Columbus and Confederate general Robert E. Lee as examples of overreach.

Critics on the left see the effort as an attempt to suppress hard truths about America’s legacy of racism and oppression. To them, framing history as primarily a story of progress risks minimizing the lived experiences of enslaved people and marginalized communities. For them, remembrance must center not only achievements but also the injustices that shaped the nation.

Dokoupil’s intervention highlights the challenge facing institutions like the Smithsonian: how to balance accuracy with inspiration, critique with pride. His remarks suggest that Americans need to avoid extremes—neither worshiping history uncritically nor viewing it solely through the lens of shame. He pointed to the Smithsonian’s own mission statement, which aspires to forge a shared history and shared future, as evidence that nuance is possible.

For CBS viewers, the discussion underscored how deeply divided public opinion has become over historical memory. To some, Trump’s critics appear determined to frame him as hostile to truth itself. To others, his directives represent an alarming step toward revisionism. Dokoupil attempted to carve out middle ground, urging Americans to recognize that pride and critique are not mutually exclusive. His central argument was that citizens should be able to leave the Smithsonian feeling both informed about the painful realities of slavery and uplifted by the broader story of American resilience and innovation.

The debate over how to tell America’s story will likely intensify as the 250th anniversary approaches. Monuments, museum exhibits, school curricula, and even pop culture have become battlefields in the larger culture war over identity, patriotism, and justice. In this climate, even modest calls for balance—like those from Tony Dokoupil—become lightning rods. Yet his remarks may resonate with viewers looking for a way to honor the complexity of the past without sacrificing a sense of pride in the country’s achievements.

Ultimately, Dokoupil’s comments were not just a defense of Trump’s statement but an appeal for a broader rethinking of how Americans view their history. He insisted that the country has much to be proud of, even as it confronts its darkest chapters, and that this balance is essential for forging unity. As the Smithsonian and other institutions adjust their exhibits in line with the White House’s directive, the questions he raised will remain at the heart of the national conversation: How should America tell its story, and who gets to decide what that story looks like?