By Shannon Bow O’Brien
We may never get to the bottom of whether Donald Trump flushed documents down a White House toilet. “Fake story,” says the former president. “100% accurate,” retorts a reporter.
But even without having to unclog plumbing in search of missing papers, national archivists have their work cut out trying to plug potential gaps in the historical record of the 45th president.
On Feb. 7, 2022, it emerged that 15 boxes of documents and other items that should have been handed over to the National Archives and Record Administration had been found at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago residence.
Trump says he was told that he was under “no obligation” to hand over the documents, but the law suggests he may be mistaken here.
Specifically, Section 2071 of Title 18 of U.S. Code states that anyone who “willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys” records or documents filed in any public office can be fined or imprisoned for up to three years.
It’s deemed a more serious crime if documents are classified, in which case a penalty of up to five years imprisonment can apply.
In both cases, those held responsible are then disqualified from holding any office in the United States.
These requirements matter not only for posterity and the public record. They can also help build a complete picture of events that have lasting consequences. Among the records reportedly incomplete or missing from Trump’s tenure in the White House are phone logs from Jan. 6, 2021.
Saving the records
In 1957, the National Historical Publications Commission, a part of the National Archives that works to “preserve, publish, and encourage the use of documentary sources … relating to the history of the United States,” recommended developing a uniform system so all materials from presidencies could be archived. They did this to literally save presidential records from the flames: President Warren G. Harding’s wife claimed to have burned all his records, and Robert Todd Lincoln burned all his father’s war correspondence. Other presidents have had their records intentionally destroyed, such as Chester A. Arthur and Martin Van Buren.
So the government collects and retains all presidential communications, including executive orders, announcements, nominations, statements and speeches. This includes any public verbal communications by presidents, which are also placed as public documents in the Compilation of Presidential Documents.
These are part of the official record of any administration, published by the Office of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration on a weekly basis by the White House press secretary. In most presidencies, the document or transcript is available a few days to a couple of weeks after any event. At the conclusion of an administration, these documents form the basis for the formal collections of the Public Papers of the President.
As a political scientist, I’m interested in where presidents give speeches. What can be learned about their priorities based on their choice of location? What do these patterns tell us about administrations?
For example, Barack Obama primarily focused on large media markets in states that strongly supported him. Trump went to supportive places as well, including small media markets like Mankato, Minnesota, where the airport was not even large enough to fly into with the regular Air Force One.
Presidential speeches often give a very different perception of an administration. Without all the pageantry, you can quickly get to the point of the visit in the text.
In speeches that President George W. Bush gave in the 2002 midterm election period, he made the same joke more than 50 times as his icebreaker. He would apologize that audiences had drawn the “short straw” and gotten him instead of Laura. His commitment to that joke gave a glimpse of his desire to try to connect to an audience through self-deprecating humor.
I found something odd when I began to pull items from the compilation and organize my own database of locations for the Trump administration. I was born and raised in Louisville, Kentucky, and I pay attention to my home state. I knew that on March 20, 2017, Trump held a public rally in Louisville, where in a meandering speech he touched on everything from Kentucky coal miners to the Supreme Court, China, building a border wall and “illegal immigrants” who were, he said, robbing and murdering Americans.
But when I looked in the compilation in mid-2017, I couldn’t find the Louisville speech. No problem, I thought. They are just running behind, and they will put it in later.
A year later, I noticed the Louisville speech was still not there. Furthermore, other speeches were missing. These were not just any speeches, but Trump rallies. By my count, 147 separate transcripts for public speaking events are missing from Trump’s official presidential speech records. That’s just over 8% of his presidential speeches.
Ole Peter Hansen Balling, artist; National Portrait Gallery, Smithsonian Institution
What’s in, what’s out
The Presidential Records Act, first passed in 1978, says administrations have to retain “any documentary materials relating to the political activities of the President or members of the President’s staff, but only if such activities relate to or have a direct effect upon the carrying out of constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties of the President.”
An administration is allowed to exclude personal records that are purely private or don’t have an effect on the duties of a president. All public events are included, such as quick comments on the South Lawn, short exchanges with reporters and all public speeches, radio addresses and even public telephone calls to astronauts on the space shuttles.
But Trump’s large public rallies, and what he said at them, have so far been omitted from the public record his administration supplied to the Compilation of Presidential Documents. And while historians and the public could get transcripts off of publicly available videos, that still does not address the need to have a complete official collection of these statements.
Federal law says that presidents are allowed to exclude “materials directly relating to the election of a particular individual or individuals to Federal, State, or local office, which have no relation to or direct effect upon the carrying out of … duties of the President.”
The law has been interpreted to mean an administration could omit notes, emails or other documentation from what it sends to the compilation. While many presidents do not provide transcripts for speeches at private party fundraising events, rallies covered by America’s press corps likely do not fall under these exclusions.
Why does it matter?
Government documents are among the primary records of who we are as a people.
These primary records speak to Americans directly; they are not what others tell us or interpret to us about our history. The government compiles and preserves these records to give an accurate accounting of the leaders the country has chosen. They provide a shared history in full instead of an excerpt or quick clip shown in a news report.
Since 1981, the public has legally owned all presidential records. As soon as a president leaves office, the National Archivist gets legal custody of all of them Presidents are generally on their honor to be good stewards of history. There is no real penalty for noncompliance.
But these public documents, which I work with constantly, have so far always been available to the public – and they’ve been available quickly. Internal presidential documents like memos or email have a rigorous archival procedure that lasts years before they are even accessible. I have a record of every presidential speech from 1945 to 2021 – every president since Bill Clinton has all their public speeches available online. Until Trump, there have been no missing public speeches in the permanent collection. By removing these speeches, Trump is creating a false perception of his presidency, making it look more serious and traditional.
And by the way: That 2017 Louisville speech is still missing from the records in 2022. I’m hoping it might be found among those 15 boxes.
Editor’s note: This is an updated version of an article originally published on April 14, 2021.
Shannon Bow O’Brien is Associate Professor of Instruction at the University of Texas at Austin College of Liberal Arts.
Reader Interactions
Comments
Leave a Reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Flatsflyer says
Trump is a disgusting piece of ecurement. Everyone who has kissed his ass should, be tested for STD’s. If he was a real man he would stop his stupid maneuvering to cover up his deceitful criminal acts and take his punishment like a real human. The only thing we as a nation can hope for is that he drops dead, quickly.
beachcomberT says
Transcripts of presidential speeches and phone calls may be of some academic interest because they pertain to the president’s desired public image. But they are useless unless we can compare and contrast those documents with their email communications, both public and private. This is why Hillary Clinton’s abuse of email rules was a big deal, bigger than Trump’s apparent disregard or ignorance of rules about his own communications. Barack Obama, choosing to ignore Clinton’s flouting of email rules, was an accessory to her crimes, and should have been at least mentioned in passing in Atty General James Comey’s bombshell statements during he 2020 campaign.
Land of no turn signals says says
Didn’t president wantabe Hillary delete hundreds/thousands of E-mails?
Kat says
This cannot come as a surprise to anybody. The best ConMan of all time has systematically sought to hide/destroy any actual facts pertaining to him for decades. And so far, he’s gotten away with it throughout his entire life. When the hell will he be held responsible?
Jim says
But, but, but, what about Hillary’s emails? Smh
Robjr says
The imbecile’s standard response, fake news, plays like a tired rerun.
David Schaefer says
I have said this all along and those idiots still support him. Go figure and ask these people in Flagler County why….
David Schaefer says
He learned from his dada…..
But, but, but says
But, but,but, Hillary wasn’t the PRESIDENT and all they found was personal emails that were deleted. No comparison!
Timothy Patrick Welch says
Guess they should have waited to proceed with prosecution until they had all the data.
January 6 committee appears to be lacking or just not really trying.
Bob says
To all u Trump haters and those who still believe he was a Russian operative, read the Durham report
DaleL says
Clinton’s emails and Trump’s records destruction are not an either or proposition. I, for one, found Clinton’s defense to be weak at best. After Republicans, Trump in particular, pilloried Clinton with respect to her email deletion and let us not forget Benghazi, I find it insane that the same “Republicans” are attempting to give Trump a pass. Fair is fair, Clinton was investigated by the FBI during the critical presidential campaign. It is appropriate now for the FBI to investigate Trump’s handling of classified documents and official records.
Of interest is that a former civilian employee, Asia Janay Lavarello, of the Defense Department was sentenced just recently to three months in prison after admitting to taking materials containing classified information to her hotel room and to her personal residence. How is it that ordinary people seem to be held to a higher standard in this country, but not people such as Clinton or Trump?
Sherry says
trump absolutely “KNEW/KNOWS” ALL records and communications of the President of the US are “required” to be preserved. He viciously verbally attacked Hillary Clinton for the deletion of (determined to be personal and private) emails.
https://www.vox.com/2016/9/26/13067740/hillary-clinton-trump-emails
If trump is sooooo innocent why did he “steal” 15 boxes of official “Presidential” records. . . some of which are highly “CLASSIFIED”? Does anyone really believe he did not go through those boxes and destroy documents? Why did he flush documents down the toilet? Twice “Impeached” insurrectionist con man who was the “WORST” President ever!
Alonzo says
Was Hillaru Clinton emails about over turning an election or the coutry? The answer is no. Who looks worse?
Bartholomew says
Wrong article this is about Trump
Mark says
Whataboutism?
Mark says
$20 million dollars spent and found no wrong doing. Whataboutism?
Mark says
Whataboutism?
Shark says
T-rump said that anyone in the military is a sucker and loser and yet they still voted for a sucker and loser draft dodger!!!!
Shark says
Only because the republicrumbs are spineless!!!
Harry says
319 indictments under t-rump administration – this says it all!!!!!!
Fredrick says
@ Mark …Durham report shows what you will never admit….. You continue to be fooled by the smoke and mirrors that the MSM puts in front of you.
Publish the Durham report Flagler Live and the facts behind it….. Publish the report about the briefings prior to the debacle pull out from Afghanistan…. The list goes on and on…… I will not hold my breath while I wait. .
Steve says
To an extent I believe he reminds them of themselves Borish, loud, foul-mouthed sanctimonious, Boomer hacks living in their Glory Days or the coattails of others. Living vicariously thru another’s life because their Reality sucks. A feeling that they belong, and their concerns are being heard. It’s the Final shot at the Brass ring. He and they will be Societal pariahs sooner than later IMO
Steve says
Yup Winner today Congrats
Sherry says
OK Bob. . . suggest you actually read about the details of the tangled mess of the infamous Durham Report. . . “beyond” the BS of the “talking heads” at FOX:
This from the National Review:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/12/is-durhams-case-on-clinton-tied-lawyer-michael-sussmann-collapsing/
Pierre Tristam says
That didn’t take long. Here’s what we will publish.
Fredrick says
Just what I thought… How fitting. You hide your feeble response in the Daily Cartoon section/ nothing to refute the facts of the Durham report. And you fail to refute the facts of the report. Or address the report from the briefing in regards to the debacle of the pullout from Afghanistan. Sad Pierre… Very sad. Attach some links to the reports. Let your audience read it and draw their opinion. That is what journalists do. They investigate and report. They dig into something and find facts. You do that on occasion. But when it comes to the previous admin, you don’t even try, nor does the MSM.
The dude says
BUTTER EMAILS!!!
Pierre Tristam says
Fredrick, my staff of 600 will get on that ASAP, because hell knows you can only get those links on FlaglerLive (though somehow you got them easily enough). Plus, Carl Bernstein will come do an internship with us, so we’ll put him to work on this, too. Maybe we can ask the sheriff to investigate as well. Clearly it’s more important than local news.
Sherry says
OK Frederick . . . You also! Take a good read of National Review analysis of your precious Durham Report. . . there is “NO THERE THERE”, nothing but Republican BS speculation. . . just like trump’s “BIG LIE”:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/12/is-durhams-case-on-clinton-tied-lawyer-michael-sussmann-collapsing/