Click here to enjoy the video: https://youtu.be/CzWCQaltw_c
On Sunday morning, President Trump said that the Department of Education would investigate the use of The New York Times' 1619 Project in California public schools. @Ociteman: California has implemented the 1619 project into the public schools. soon you won't recognize America. 
@DJT Department of Education is looking at this. If so, they will not be funded!
@TheSharpEdge It's not just California, Mr. President. ALL of our schools have been infiltrated with anti-American indoctrination of our children. PLEASE eliminate common core and hold radical, activist teachers accountable. Our children's futures are at stake! [VIDEO 2] So, exactly what is the 1619 Project?
According to Conservapedia, the 1619 Project is a controversial collection of revisionist history developed by The New York Times to "reframe" American history exclusively around slavery and racism. The project has received significant praise from Marxists, politicians, activists, and journalists, but consistent criticism from historians. The project was founded by New York Times columnist Nikole Hannah-Jones in 2019 and saw a surge in popularity in 2020 in the wake of the civil unrest that stemmed from the death of George Floyd.
The resulting riots, theft, destruction, and general devastation to several major cities in the U.S. is something Hannah-Jones is proud of, responding that "it would be an honor" when a pundit commented that the rioting in 2020 should be named the "1619 Riots".
The 1619 Project is named after the tragic year slaves from Africa first arrived in Virginia, and its premise is that America’s 18th-century founders fought a revolution “to ensure that slavery would continue,” that slavery was part of “the brutality of American capitalism … low-road capitalism … winner-take-all capitalism … racist capitalism.”  [VIDEO 3]
Nikole Hannah-Jones was born in Waterloo, Iowa, to father Milton Hannah, who is African American, and Mother Cheryl A. Novotny, who is of Czech and English descent. In 2015, she became a staff reporter for The New York Times. She wrote the opening essay for the 1619 Project.
The 1619 Project is an ongoing initiative from The New York Times Magazine that began August 14, 2019 . . . [which] "aims to reframe the country's history by placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of our national narrative."
Hannah-Jones has written about topics such as racial segregation, desegregation and resegregation in American schools and housing discrimination, and has spoken about these issues on national public radio broadcasts. She writes about her vision of systemic and institutional racism perpetuated by official laws and acts.
This hate-filled woman claims, "The white race is the biggest murderer, rapist, pillager, and thief of the modern world." and that "Christopher Columbus and those like him were no different than Hitler" In her clouded hatred, Hannah Jones has overlooked the most important issue. 
Nikole, did you know, almost 70 percent of black children are born to single mothers? Those mothers are far more likely than married mothers to be poor, even after a post-welfare-reform decline in child poverty. They are also more likely to pass that poverty on to their children. Sadly, these families are a largely low-income—and disproportionately black—phenomenon. [VIDEO 4]
So why does the Times, like so many who rail against inequality, fall silent on the relation between poverty and single-parent families? Forty years ago, there was a resounding cry of outrage echoed throughout Washington and the civil rights movement in reaction to Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s Department of Labor report warning that the ghetto family was in disarray.
His prophetic report prompted civil rights leaders, academics, politicians, and pundits to make a momentous—and, as time has shown, tragically wrong—decision about how to frame the national discussion about poverty.
In the first five years of the sixties, the economy generated 7 million jobs. About half of all blacks had moved into the middle class by the mid-sixties, but now progress seemed to be stalling. Moynihan, then assistant secretary of labor and one of a new class of government social scientists, was among the worriers, as he puzzled over his charts.
Instead of rates of black male unemployment and welfare enrollment running parallel as they always had, in 1962 they started to diverge in a way that would come to be called “Moynihan’s scissors.” In the past, policymakers had assumed that if the male heads of household had jobs, women and children would be provided for.
This no longer seemed true. Even while more black men were getting jobs, more black women were joining the welfare rolls. Moynihan and his aides decided that a serious analysis was in order. [VIDEO 5]
Convinced that a movement for equality as well as for liberty,” was now at risk, Moynihan wanted to make several arguments in his report. He pointed out single-parent families were on the rise in the ghetto. But other points sparked a partisan dispute that has lasted to this day.
Moynihan argued that the rise in single-mother families was not due to a lack of jobs but rather to a destructive vein in ghetto culture that could be traced back to slavery and Jim Crow discrimination.
Moynihan described, through pages of charts and graphs, the emergence of a “tangle of pathology,” including delinquency, joblessness, school failure, crime, and fatherlessness that characterized ghetto—or what would come to be called underclass—behavior.
Moynihan knew the dangers ghetto self-destruction posed to the basic socializing unit” of the family. And he suspected that the risks were magnified in the case of blacks, since their “matriarchal” family had the effect of alienated and abandoned mothers.
Moynihan wrote. “By and large, adult conduct in society is learned as a child.” What children learned in the “disorganized home[s]” of the ghetto was that adults do not finish school, get jobs, or, in the case of men, take care of their children or obey the law. Marriage, on the other hand, provides a “stable home” for children to learn common virtues.
Separate and unequal families, in other words, meant that blacks would have their liberty, but that they would be strangers to equality. Ghetto families were at risk of raising generations of children unable to seize the opportunity that the civil rights movement had opened for them.
The black pride of single parenting in the black culture made it hard to grapple with the increasingly separate and unequal family, but feminism made it impossible. Fretting about single-parent families became not only racist but also sexist, an effort to deny women their independence, their sexuality, or both.
The executive branch also offered warm greetings to the single-parent family. Clearly less concerned with conditions in the ghetto than with satisfying feminist advocates, the Carter administration named a black single (divorced) mother to lead the 1976 campaign event.
By 1980, when it finally convened after numerous postponements, the White House Conference on the Family had morphed into the White House Conference on Families, to signal that all family forms were equal.
[VIDEO 7] Liberal advocates had two main ways of dodging the subject of family collapse while still addressing its increasingly alarming fallout. One way was to talk about children not as the offspring of individual mothers and fathers responsible for rearing them, but as an oppressed class living in generic, nebulous, and never-to-be-analyzed “families.”
...which did not seem to include either a stable domestic life or, for that matter, fathers.
The Children’s Defense Fund the best-known child-advocacy group to impose a gag rule on the role of fatherless families in the plight of its putative constituents. For that silence, these children’s advocates deserve much of the blame. No doubt that most of these children are destined to grow up poor and to pass down the legacy of single parenting to their own children.