Fact check: WAS THE ARMY Parade planned during a previous administration but executed under the current one

1. Summary of the results

Based on the available evidence, the claim that the Army parade was planned during a previous administration but executed under the current one is largely accurate. The most definitive evidence comes from reporting that shows the U.S. Army filed a permit on June 12, 2024, during Joe Biden's presidency to celebrate its 250th birthday on the National Mall in June 2025 ^[1]. However, the plans underwent dramatic changes after Donald Trump was elected, transforming from a simple birthday celebration into a full military parade ^[1].

The sources reveal that while the Army had long planned for a festival on the National Mall to celebrate its 250th birthday, the parade component was a recent addition under the current Trump administration ^[2]. This suggests a hybrid scenario where the foundational celebration was conceived under Biden, but the military parade aspect was significantly expanded under Trump.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual elements are absent from the original question:

• Trump's longstanding desire for military parades: The sources indicate that Trump had wanted a military parade during his first term, suggesting this was a personal priority that predated the Army's 250th anniversary plans ^[3].
• Significant cost implications: The parade is estimated to cost $16 million in potential damage to Washington streets alone, with total costs reaching $45 million for the Army parade component ^{[3] [4]}. These substantial expenses have drawn congressional scrutiny and criticism.
• Congressional oversight concerns: Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth faced congressional questioning about both the $45 million Army parade costs and an additional $134 million deployment to Los Angeles, indicating significant political controversy around military spending priorities ^[4].
• Public and military reaction: There are reports suggesting that soldiers' marching performance may have contained subtle protests against Trump, with observers claiming the Army gave a "big f**k you" to Trump through their parade execution ^{[5] [6]}.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original statement, while technically accurate, oversimplifies a more complex timeline and decision-making process. The framing suggests a clean handoff between administrations, when the reality involves:

• Significant transformation of scope: What began as a modest Army birthday celebration was dramatically expanded into a full military spectacle after Trump's election ^[1].
• Missing attribution of expansion: The statement doesn't acknowledge that while basic planning occurred under Biden, the parade's military spectacle nature was Trump's addition, fulfilling his long-held desire for such displays ^[3].
• Omission of controversy: The neutral framing ignores the substantial political and financial controversy surrounding the event, including congressional criticism and public debate about military spending priorities ^[4].

The statement appears designed to either credit or blame specific administrations without acknowledging the collaborative and evolving nature of the planning process, potentially serving partisan narratives on both sides.