What is the original source and transcript of Trump's January 2018 'shithole' remark?
Executive summary
Accounts from lawmakers and multiple news organizations say President Donald Trump used the word “shithole” during an Oval Office meeting on Jan. 11, 2018 — reportedly asking “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” and singling out Haiti, El Salvador and “African” countries — a description first reported by The Washington Post and widely repeated by outlets including AP, Al Jazeera and TIME [1] [2] [3] [4]. Some attendees quoted in reporting and later summaries say he repeated the sentiment and added a preference for immigrants from places like Norway; the White House initially issued equivocal denials while multiple senators at the meeting declined to directly refute the reporting [1] [5] [2].
1. The original reporting and who said what
The controversy began with reporting based on anonymous and named participants in an Oval Office immigration meeting: The Washington Post’s account (summarized by PolitiFact and others) quoted lawmakers including Sen. Dick Durbin describing the president’s language and attributing to him the question, “Why are we having all these people from shithole countries come here?” and statements about Haiti, El Salvador and African nations [1]. The AP likewise summarized accounts that Trump questioned accepting immigrants “from Haiti and ‘shithole countries’ in Africa rather than places like Norway” [2]. Those contemporaneous news reports served as the primary source for later coverage [1] [2].
2. Transcript versus reported quotes: no full verbatim transcript in reporting
Available sources do not publish a complete verbatim transcript of the Oval Office exchange. FactCheck.org and other outlets reconstructed quotes from senators’ and staffers’ accounts; Durbin and others reported specific lines such as “Those shitholes send us the people that they don’t want,” but these come via firsthand descriptions rather than a released tape or full transcript [6]. The Washington Post’s reporting — which set off the international reaction — relied on accounts of the conversation rather than a released transcript [1]. In short: no full official transcript is presented in the sources provided [6].
3. Denials, hedges and competing small details
Trump and his allies disputed aspects of the reporting. The president denied using the exact term in at least some public statements, and some Republicans who attended said they heard a closely related vulgarity (“shithouse”) or tried to avoid repeating the precise word; FactCheck.org reports sources saying some attendees told the White House they heard “shithouse” rather than “shithole,” creating a narrow factual dispute over the exact syllable [5] [6]. Other attendees and journalists quoted by AP, Al Jazeera and TIME treated the Washington Post account as accurate or as reflecting the substance of what was said [2] [3] [4].
4. What people quoted in reporting say about repetition and context
Sen. Durbin’s account, cited by FactCheck.org, says Trump “repeated” the sentiment and added that “Those shitholes send us the people that they don’t want,” and that he contrasted those countries with Norway as a preferred source of immigrants [6]. The AP similarly reports the president questioned why the U.S. would accept more immigrants from Haiti and “shithole countries” instead of people from Norway [2]. These repeated attributions form the core of the public controversy in the sources provided [6] [2].
5. International and domestic fallout documented in coverage
The phrase, as reported, sparked widespread international condemnation and became global headlines; governments, international organizations and advocacy groups criticized the remarks, and news outlets around the world wrestled with translation and how to render the insult in other languages [3] [7] [4]. Amnesty International and the African Union — cited in later coverage — framed the comments as racist and harmful to U.S. diplomacy [8] [3]. Domestic political response included strong rebukes from Democrats, some Republicans expressing alarm, and debate over how the reported language affected immigration negotiations [9] [1].
6. How to treat the “transcript” request given available reporting
If you are seeking an authoritative, word-for-word transcript: available sources do not provide one and instead rely on contemporaneous quotes from meeting participants and journalists’ reconstructions [6] [1]. If you are seeking the original sourcing: the Washington Post’s reporting (relayed and summarized by PolitiFact, AP and others) is the proximate origin of the widely circulated account; follow-up coverage from AP, Al Jazeera, TIME and FactCheck.org documents corroborating participant statements and responses [1] [2] [3] [4] [6].
Limitations: these findings rely solely on the news and fact‑checking items provided; none of the supplied documents contains a released Oval Office transcript or audio recording, and some attendees offered slightly different word choices when disputing the precise profanity used [6] [5].