Smithsonian Issues Update on Trump's Impeachment Exhibit Controversy
Newsweek reached out to the White House for comment by email outside of normal business hours on Saturday evening.
The museum removed references to Trump's two impeachments from its exhibit on presidential impeachments last month, igniting a debate about historical accuracy and political influence in public institutions.
The controversy centered on "The American Presidency: A Glorious Burden" exhibit, which included a temporary label about Trump's impeachments that was added in September 2021. Trump remains the only U.S. president to have been impeached twice.
During his second administration, Trump has influenced the museum, which is independent of the government but receives funding from Congress. In March, he signed an executive order to eliminate "anti-American ideology" in the museum and to "restore the Smithsonian Institution to its rightful place as a symbol of inspiration and American greatness."
The Smithsonian confirmed the temporary label remained in place until July before being removed during a review of legacy content.
In a statement posted to the museum's website, the Smithsonian said the placard "did not meet the museum's standards in appearance, location, timeline and overall presentation."
"It was not consistent with other sections in the exhibit and moreover blocked the view of the objects inside its case," the statement continued. "For these reasons, we removed the placard. We were not asked by any Administration or other government official to remove content from the exhibit."
The museum assured that the exhibit in the coming weeks would see its impeachment section updated to reflect "all impeachment proceedings in our nation's history."
"As the keeper of memory for the nation, it is our privilege and responsibility to tell accurate and complete histories," the museum wrote.
The decision to remove the placard stoked concerns in the public about possible government interference, the shaping of public memory, and the integrity of historical curation at America's most prominent museum complex.
A Smithsonian spokesperson previously told Newsweek: "In reviewing our legacy content recently, it became clear that the 'Limits of Presidential Power' section in The American Presidency: A Glorious Burden exhibition needed to be addressed. The section of this exhibition covers Congress, The Supreme Court, Impeachment, and Public Opinion. Because the other topics in this section had not been updated since 2008, the decision was made to restore the Impeachment case back to its 2008 appearance.
Trump faced two impeachment efforts by Democrats during his first administration: First on December 18, 2019, and then again on January 13, 2021 - just one week before he left office. He was ultimately acquitted both times.
The first impeachment charged Trump with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress over his dealings with Ukraine. Both articles passed the House with no support from any Republicans, and some Democrats split from the party.
The second effort occurred following the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol, with some Republicans in the House - most notably Liz Cheney - breaking from the party and supporting the effort to impeach.
What People Are Saying
Political analyst Jeff Greenfield wrote on X: "Orwellian is a much-overused phrase; but forcing the Smithsonian to erase the fact of Trump's impeachments is right out of 1984. Did they drop that stuff down the memory hole?"
Senator Adam Schiff, a California Democrat, posted images of media coverage about Trump's impeachments on X, writing: "This is what Donald Trump wants you to forget. American never will."
Former GOP Congressman and Trump critic Joe Walsh called the Post's report on X: "Despicable. Reprehensible. Dishonest. Cowardly. Trump's 2 impeachments are historical facts. They are both part of American history. He's using the powers of his office to try to rewrite history. I'm done saying 'shame on him.' Shame on us for electing him."
A White House spokesperson told NPR: "We are fully supportive of updating displays to highlight American greatness. The Trump administration will continue working to ensure that the Smithsonian removes all improper ideology and once again unites and instills pride in all Americans regarding our great history."
The Smithsonian acknowledged the need for a comprehensive update of its presidential impeachment exhibit. The institution stated the impeachment section will be revised in the coming weeks to "ensure it accurately represents all historical impeachment proceedings."
No specific timetable was provided for when Trump's impeachments or other new content will be permanently reintroduced.
Related Articles
Removal of Trump From Smithsonian Impeachment Exhibit Sparks OutrageTiny Flying Reptile Found in Arizona Fills 200-Million-Year Evolutionary GapWho Is Kim Sajet? Donald Trump Fires National Portrait Gallery DirectorHistory-Making Carl Nassib Reflects as His Jersey Heads to the Smithsonian
2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why the market is shrugging off Trump's firing of the BLS chief
Trump fired the head of the BLS on Friday, but so far, markets have looked past the shock decision. Sources say there are a variety of other sources investors can use to assess the employment picture. Strong earnings and higher rate-cut odds are powering stocks higher on Monday. August kicked off with a shocker, with Donald Trump firing the head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics after a less-than-rosy July employment report. The move sparked prognostications about untrustworthy government data going forward and comparisons to China, which some believe is uninvestable due to issues with data quality. Then why is the market unfazed as trading kicks off on Monday? Stocks rallied to start the week, with the Dow up almost 500 points at midday and the Nasdaq Composite jumping as much as 2%. For now, markets are focused on other things, like the higher odds of a September rate cut after the employment picture suddenly soured. "Obviously, the firing was unconventional. That's pretty much everything with this administration compared to previous administrations, but at this point, there is so much private data that the market can look at other sources," Paul Hickey, cofounder of Bespoke Investment Group, told Business Insider. Apart from the BLS statistics that investors already parse, there's a patchwork of private and public data, including ADP data, hiring and firing data from a range of consulting firms, and labor market sentiment indicators from sources like the Conference Board. "There are private sources of data, and if they are moving in the opposite direction from the government data, then it becomes an indicator that something is off with the statistics,"Aleksandar Tomic, Associate Dean, Strategy, Innovation, & Technology at Boston College, told Business Insider. Trump said Erika McEntarfer's firing was justified and that the July data had been manipulated to make the administration look bad. He did not offer evidence for this claim, though White House economic advisor Kevin Hassett said the revisions in the data are "hard evidence." The July revisions were substantial, showing that the US added nearly 260,000 fewer jobs in May and June than had been initially reported. Trump and Republicans have also criticized earlier revisions, including last year's that showed over 800,000 fewer jobs added in the 12 months leading up to March 2024. The irony of Trump's anger over the July jobs numbers is that the weak report has pushed up the odds of the September rate cut to nearly 90%, getting the president closer to seeing the Fed loosen monetary policy as he's been demanding all year. But for investors, things like the robust GDP report for the second quarter and solid corporate earnings, particularly among mega-cap tech giants, are boosting the outlook for the market even as Trump's move stirs some uncertainty. For Sergio Altomare, a former senior enterprise architect at the Fed, the next big question is who will replace McEntarfer at the helm of the BLS. "I think the ultimate impact is going to take time to sort itself out, but I think really the immediate thing is, who gets appointed? What is their background? What does the data show? Is it dramatically different from what we're seeing?" Altomare said that it will be difficult to properly assess the impact of Trump's decision on financial markets until these questions have clear answers. Luckily for markets, some answers could come soon. Trump has said that in the coming days, he'll nominate a new BLS chief, as well as a replacement for Fed Gov. Adriana Kugler, who resigned on Friday. Both positions require confirmation by the Senate. It is also worth noting that some agree with the president's decision. For his part, investing legend Ray Dalio said on Monday that he, too, would probably fire the BLS chief. In a post on X, he described the agency's process for making key economic estimates as "obsolete and error-prone," with no plan to fix it. "The revisions brought the numbers toward private estimates that were in fact much better," Dalio said. Read the original article on Business Insider
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Japan trade negotiator to visit US to press for swift implementation of auto tariff deal
TOKYO (Reuters) -Japan's top tariff negotiator Ryosei Akazawa said he planned to visit Washington from Tuesday to press the United States to have President Donald Trump sign an executive order to bring an agreed 15% tariff rate on automobiles into effect. The U.S. last month agreed in a trade deal with Japan to lower existing tariffs on Japanese automobile imports to 15% from levies totaling 27.5% previously. Duties that were due to come into effect on other Japanese goods will also be cut to 15% from 25%. "We will push the United States to make sure that an executive order be signed on the agreed tariff on automobiles and automotive components as soon as possible," Akazawa told parliament. Referring to the problem of "stacking" where goods can be affected by multiple tariffs, Akazawa also said Japan wants to make sure that goods that are already levied at more than 15% would be exempt from the additional 15% rate.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Alaska Sen. Murkowski toys with bid for governor, defends vote supporting Trump's tax breaks package
JUNEAU, Alaska (AP) — Republican U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, speaking with Alaska reporters Monday, toyed with the idea of running for governor and defended her recent high-profile decision to vote in support of President Donald Trump's tax breaks and spending cuts bill. Murkowski, speaking from Anchorage, said 'sure' when asked if she has considered or is considering a run for governor. She later said her response was 'a little bit flippant' because she gets asked that question so often. 'Would I love to come home? I have to tell you, of course I would love to come home,' she said. 'I am not making any decisions about anything, because my responsibility to Alaskans is my job in the Senate right now.' Several Republicans already have announced plans to run in next year's governor's race, including Lt. Gov. Nancy Dahlstrom. Republican Gov. Mike Dunleavy is not eligible to seek a third consecutive term. Alaska has an open primary system and ranked choice voting in general elections. Murkowski is not up for reelection until 2028. A centrist, Murkowski has become a closely watched figure in a sharply divided Congress. She has at times been at odds with her party in her criticism of Trump and blasted by some GOP voters as a 'Republican in name only.' But her decision to support Trump's signature bill last month also frustrated others in a state where independents comprise the largest number of registered voters. She previously described her decision-making process around the bill as 'agonizing.' On Monday, she said it was clear to her the bill was not only a priority of Trump's but also that it was going to pass, so it became important to her to help make it as advantageous to the state as she could. 'So I did everything within my power — as one lawmaker from Alaska — to try to make sure that the most vulnerable in our state would not be negatively impacted,' she said. 'And I had a hard choice to make, and I think I made the right choice for Alaskans.'
