293

Donald Trump would rip up documents after reading them—White House aide (www.newsweek.com)

submitted 5 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Former President Donald Trump would rip up documents and throw them on the floor after reading them, a former White House valet told the January 6 House committee.

His testimony points to possible document destruction by Trump when he was still president. It is illegal under the Presidential Records Act for a president to destroy official records as the form part of the national archive. Trump is already awaiting trial on charges of hoarding presidential documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

In newly released and heavily redacted testimony, the employee told the committee on June 10, 2022, that Trump habitually destroyed documents after reading them. When a committee member asked: "Do you remember the president ever tearing up or destroying documents that he had seen?" the employee replied: "That's typically what he would do once he's finished with a document. He would tear everything, tear newspapers, tear photos."

He added: "He liked to look at pictures and he would just tear it once he's done looking at it and just throw it on the floor."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago

When you’re the president, you get your documents served up however you damn well please. While it may seem ridiculous on the surface, it is much better to have information delivered to the president in a format that he/she is comfortable with rather than having valuable seconds wasted in a crisis because Donny or Joe doesn’t know how to get their PDF window open again.

Furthermore, new technologies often introduce new vulnerabilities. Keeping things old school is actually a relatively effective security technique.

Basically, presidents are usually creatures of their time, and that time is often prehistoric.

[-] [email protected] 12 points 5 months ago

That's not at all what I was saying. I have no problem with the notion of them printing out stuff on paper for the president to read. The thing that doesn't make sense to me is why they can't just print two copies so he can rip one up and they'll still have the other to archive (or why they can't just archive the electronic copy, or whatever).

[-] [email protected] 19 points 5 months ago

Two reasons spring to mind.

First, some documents really are that sensitive. There are moments when nobody outside of the situation room would have clearance to handle documents that are being actively used in a crisis. Routine stuff gets copies made all the time, but the really sensitive stuff tends to go directly to the resolute desk with barely a moment to spare. The book Secrets by Daniel Ellsberg gives a pretty interesting look into how briefings are made and delivered.

Second, there are a large number of messages given to the president via handwritten notes. Sometimes the president responds to a note with another note. These are the kinds of documents that Trump could do the most damage by destroying because they are the only record of communication between the president and another person.

There has just never been a president brazen enough to rip up documents in this manner before. It is moments like these when the Justice department is supposed to step in and enforce the rule of law, and it is entirely to discourage malicious actors like this.

[-] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago

All have to be archived and accounted for.

this post was submitted on 24 Mar 2024

293 points (96.5% liked)

politics

18881 readers

4595 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News