U-bend the rules, U-face the consequences.

But wait, it gets better. Or worse...depending on how you look at it. Anyway, photos of documents alleged to be records from the Trump administration which were flushed down White House toilets were published today on Axios.com.

You've got to admit, it would be incredibly appropriate if the 
thing that finally brought down Trump was the contents of his toilet.

Before Nixon, Presidents were
 free to flush all kinds of things.

The photos were apparently obtained by a former White House correspondent, Maggie Haberman, who claims that former White House sources corroborate their authenticity. She also says that staff has told her that they would routinely find the toilets clogged with such fragments of documents which, if true, would be a crime. According to the Presidential Records Act of 1978 establishes strict procedures and rules for White House records and makes destroying them without the express, written permission of the National Archives and Records Administration a crime.

Pictured: that other classy moment
in which he mocked a disabled reporter.

Predictably, Trump stans--are the kids still saying stans? Doesn't matter, I'll go with goons--predictably, Trump goons were quick to call Haberman's publishing of the photos a fabrication and a "desperate" move. Back in February, when word of the photos begin to circulate, Trump called Haberman a "maggot" because he's nothing if not classy. And in fairness, Haberman does have a book coming out in October, so who knows, maybe she is trying to promote it with this. 

But that doesn't mean Trump didn't flush documents. And the suggestion that Haberman is desperate doesn't exactly hold up in light of today's FBI raid of Trump's incredibly tacky resort. A raid in which they are looking for exactly this sort of thing: evidence of documents he's either stolen or destroyed. And not for nothing, but do you have a difficult time believing him to be the kind of person who would tear up and flush potentially incriminated evidence in flagrant violation of the law? Yeah, me neither. 

What? I'm not wrong, it is tacky. Tacky and the scene of a federal crime.