Smithsonian Removes Trump's Impeachment References from National Portrait Gallery, Sparking Concerns of Bias.
The Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery has removed references to President Donald Trump's two impeachments from his portrait display, a move that has raised concerns about the institution's neutrality and alignment with the current administration.
According to reports, the updated exhibit now features a new photograph of Mr. Trump without any accompanying text block, unlike other presidents whose displays include extended biographical summaries. The removal comes as part of the museum's planned update of its "American Presidents" gallery.
Mr. Trump had previously ordered an internal review of all exhibits at the Smithsonian, citing his intention to ensure that they align with the president's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism and remove divisive narratives. While the White House has not commented on the specific changes made to Mr. Trump's exhibit, the move is seen as part of a broader effort to shape how federal institutions document U.S. history and culture.
Critics have pointed out that this approach represents a partisan attempt to reshape the narrative around historical figures, including those from previous administrations. The gallery has acknowledged its efforts to provide more concise information in new exhibits but maintains that references to presidential impeachments will continue to be represented in other museums within the Smithsonian complex.
The decision is likely to fuel further debate about the role of the National Portrait Gallery and the extent to which it should remain neutral, particularly in light of Mr. Trump's history of criticizing institutions for what he perceives as bias against him or his policies.
The Smithsonian's National Portrait Gallery has removed references to President Donald Trump's two impeachments from his portrait display, a move that has raised concerns about the institution's neutrality and alignment with the current administration.
According to reports, the updated exhibit now features a new photograph of Mr. Trump without any accompanying text block, unlike other presidents whose displays include extended biographical summaries. The removal comes as part of the museum's planned update of its "American Presidents" gallery.
Mr. Trump had previously ordered an internal review of all exhibits at the Smithsonian, citing his intention to ensure that they align with the president's directive to celebrate American exceptionalism and remove divisive narratives. While the White House has not commented on the specific changes made to Mr. Trump's exhibit, the move is seen as part of a broader effort to shape how federal institutions document U.S. history and culture.
Critics have pointed out that this approach represents a partisan attempt to reshape the narrative around historical figures, including those from previous administrations. The gallery has acknowledged its efforts to provide more concise information in new exhibits but maintains that references to presidential impeachments will continue to be represented in other museums within the Smithsonian complex.
The decision is likely to fuel further debate about the role of the National Portrait Gallery and the extent to which it should remain neutral, particularly in light of Mr. Trump's history of criticizing institutions for what he perceives as bias against him or his policies.
. I get where the Smithsonian is trying to provide more concise info, but removing Trump's impeachment references feels a bit odd to me. It's like they're being super careful not to be seen as partisan, which might just come across as... biased in its own way? 
The thing is, history isn't always black and white, and presidential impeachments are kinda a big deal. I hope this isn't setting a precedent for future exhibits 
. Maybe they should've just stuck with the original plan? 
. They're trying to avoid controversy by watering down the truth about Trump's actions, which is pretty messed up. I mean, come on, impeachments happen, and if you're gonna display someone's portrait in a gallery dedicated to American presidents, you gotta include some context 
It's time to get real and have some tough conversations about our country's history, not sweep everything under the rug 
.
and btw what a joke that they're trying to say its biased when they're literally just whitewashing trumps history 
It's like they're sending a message that he's above criticism or something. The thing is, the National Portrait Gallery isn't meant to be some kind of campaign trail for politicians; it's supposed to showcase American history and culture. I'm just worried that this is gonna set a bad precedent...
. Can't they just keep it real and let us have an honest discussion about our past leaders?
Trump's impeachments were major news events, and I don't think it's necessary to gloss over them just because some people might be sensitive about it.
. Seriously though, isn't this a bit like trying to erase history? What's next, removing the Black Lives Matter exhibit from the museum? No, wait, that would be a great idea 
... what do you guys think?
I get that everyone's got their own opinions, but can't we just try to keep it factual and all that?
... why did they have to take out the impeachment refs? that was like a fact, not some opinion piece. now it's just gonna look like they're whitewashing history or something. i'm all for keeping exhibits concise and whatnot, but not if it means hiding the truth. can't we just keep an eye on who's making these changes and make sure they're not coming from a place of bias? 
like duh! cant just erase it because hes a repbulican or whatever. i get that accuracy and all but not at the expense of honesty
). Can't we trust the Smithsonian to show us who's been in power? 
. It's all about perspective and control, and I'm just not feeling it.
I mean, we gotta consider the impact on historical accuracy vs personal agendas 
Did you know that 71% of Americans (according to a Pew Research Center poll) believe it's essential for museums and cultural institutions to present a balanced view of history? 
Meanwhile, only 27% think they should focus on celebrating American exceptionalism 
. It feels like they're watering down history to fit a certain agenda. I mean, what's next? Removing all the negative stuff from Obama's exhibit too? 
Now it's all about sugarcoating everything. It's a shame, because I love the National Gallery... it should be for everyone, not just one party's version of facts