Conservative Provocateur

Revising American History: Trump’s Statement About The National Archives Fact Checked-Shocking Results

7 min read

One of the long-time plans of the Marxist left is to change the foundations of American history, or at least erase the parts that make it difficult for the government to have a massive centralized authority by which to control the free people of the United States of America. According to sources, we are one step closer to see everything we love about America re-written by radicals.

The following statement by Donald J. Trump, 45th President of the United States of America, which he released on Monday, was fact-checked and found to be: TRUE.

“The Radical Left controlled NARA (the National Archives and Records Administration), now becoming more famous than ever, placed a “Harmful Content Warning” on The Constitution of the United States, labeling our Country’s governing document as “harmful,” among other things. This Warning includes the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence. Remember, this is the group wrongfully complaining about me—and instigating the Raid on Mar-a-Lago.”

Trump linked to an article by Haley Strack in the Federalist in his statement.  Strack reported on the further usurpation of our Republic through our National Archives.

“The National Archives Records Administration placed a “harmful content” warning on the Constitution, labeling the governing document of the United States as “harmful or difficult to view.” The warning applies to all documents across the Archives’ cataloged website, including the Bill of Rights and the Declaration of Independence,” Strack wrote.

“NARA’s records span the history of the United States, and it is our charge to preserve and make available these historical records,” the administration said in a statement. “As a result, some of the materials presented here may reflect outdated, biased, offensive, and possibly violent views and opinions. In addition, some of the materials may relate to violent or graphic events and are preserved for their historical significance,” according to a statement on their website.

And yep- there it is:

NARA’s Statement on Potentially Harmful Content

The Catalog and web pages of the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) provide access to many millions of descriptions and digital copies of the permanent records of the United States federal government.

The Catalog and web pages contain some content that may be harmful or difficult to view. NARA’s records span the history of the United States, and it is our charge to preserve and make available these historical records. As a result, some of the materials presented here may reflect outdated, biased, offensive, and possibly violent views and opinions. In addition, some of the materials may relate to violent or graphic events and are preserved for their historical significance.

The National Archives is committed to working with staff, communities, and peer institutions to assess and update descriptions that are harmful and to establish standards and policies to prevent future harmful language in staff-generated descriptions.

Frequently Asked Questions

What harmful or difficult content may be found in the National Archives Catalog and our web pages?

Some items may:

reflect racist, sexist, ableist, misogynistic/misogynoir, and xenophobic opinions and attitudes;
be discriminatory towards or exclude diverse views on sexuality, gender, religion, and more;
include graphic content of historical events such as violent death, medical procedures, crime, wars/terrorist acts, natural disasters and more;
demonstrate bias and exclusion in institutional collecting and digitization policies.

Why does the National Archives make potentially harmful content available?

NARA’s mission is to preserve and provide access to the permanent records of the federal government. NARA, working in conjunction with diverse communities, will seek to balance the preservation of this history with sensitivity to how these materials are presented to and perceived by users.

How is this material described, and why are some of the terms used in the descriptions harmful?

Archivists choose what language to use when describing materials. Some of these descriptions were written many years ago, using language that was accepted at the time.

Archivists often re-use language provided by creators or former owners of the material. This can provide important context, but it can also reflect biases and prejudices.
Archivists often use a standardized set of terms, such as the Library of Congress Subject Headings, to describe materials. Some of these terms are outdated, offensive, or insensitive.
In the past, the National Archives  has not had standards or policies to help archivists avoid harmful language.

How are archivists working to address this problem and help users better understand such content?

Examples include:

informing users about the presence and origin of harmful content;
revising descriptions and standardized sets of descriptive terms, supplementing description with more respectful terms, or creating new standardized terms to describe materials;
researching the problem, listening to users, experimenting with solutions, and sharing our findings with each other;
evaluating existing processes for exclusionary practices or institutional bias that prioritize one culture and/or group over another;
making an institutional commitment to diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility.

How do I report potentially harmful language in archival descriptions in the Catalog?

Please note: this process applies only to language found within Catalog descriptions of the records, not to the content of the original historical records. The National Archives does not alter the content of the original records.

You can help us by reporting potentially harmful language that you see in archival descriptions in the National Archives Catalog.

Email us at and include:

the title of the description
the National Archives Identifier (NAID) number
a quote of the specific language you feel is harmful
a suggested alternative if you have one

NARA will determine whether or not we will change or remove terms from archival descriptions.  We will weigh potential harm against considerations such as input from affected communities, accurate preservation of the historical record, professional best practices, and allocation of staff resources.

Consider their guiding principles:

Guiding Principles for Reparative Description at NARA

January 10, 2022

The National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) preserves and makes accessible the permanent records of the United States federal government. Archival records are the raw materials of history, and archivists’ work to make them publicly available can impact how events are remembered, whose stories are told, and which communities can find their experiences reflected in the national narrative. NARA’s records capture millions of stories across hundreds of years and their contents continue to have a real, direct impact on people’s lives. NARA’s records are the people’s records, and they should be equitably accessible.

NARA has a responsibility to repair inequities through our archival descriptive practices; this work is known in the larger archives profession as reparative description. We are committed to working with staff, communities, and peer institutions to assess and contextualize or update harmful descriptions and to establish standards and policies to guide staff in future description work. In this work, we will be guided by the following principles:

Transparency—We will find innovative ways to inform the public about the origin of our archival descriptions, including whether the language is original to the record’s creator or was written by NARA staff. Where feasible, we will maintain and make available old/outdated versions of descriptions. We will create simple, accessible ways for users to give feedback and we will publicly document our efforts on our website so that we can be held accountable and further maximize NARA’s value to all of our users.

Language—We recognize the vastness of NARA’s holdings and descriptive metadata, and we commit to using innovative methods to find, assess, and repair descriptions with harmful terminology, valorizing terminology, and underdescription. We will seek to use individuals’ and communities’ preferred terminology, while recognizing that including outdated terminology in descriptions can provide researchers with important context and access points into historical records. We will work to alert users to such language and explain why archives workers have included it so we can truly make access happen for all.

Institutional change—We commit to a deliberative and thoughtful approach to archival description (including appraisal, processing, re-processing, digitization, and cataloging) that allows for community collaboration and cultural humility. We recognize the years of hard work put into achieving past description goals and providing basic access to our holdings, as well as the efforts of individual archives workers across NARA to implement reparative description. We commit to supporting archives staff and building our future through our people as we ask for their time and expertise to move forward.
Collaboration—We will listen to and seek ongoing input from marginalized people, colleagues within and outside of the archives field, and peer institutions about our descriptive practices. We will not only connect with our current users but also work to build and rebuild relationships with these communities through specifically acknowledging past wrongs, being transparent about our limitations, and following through on our commitments.

Iterative/reflective process—We will commit to making reparative description an ongoing, iterative process, not a one-time project. We welcome and will seek to implement public, stakeholder, and staff feedback, and we will continuously reflect upon our process to identify ways to improve.

Leadership—We acknowledge that people and organizations representing marginalized communities have led the archives profession in developing reparative description best practices, and we continue to learn from their work. We will seek to recognize their leadership and build on lessons learned as we work to fulfill NARA’s own potential as a leader for government archives in implementing large-scale reparative description.

About Pete Santilli