Fake video of Barack Obama arrest is scary and insane
Tribune News Service
On Sunday, our thoughtful and reserved president reposted on his Truth Social site a video generated by artificial intelligence that falsely showed former President Barack Obama being arrested and imprisoned. There are those among you who think this is high humour; those among you who find it as tiresome as it is offensive; and those among you blissfully unaware of the mental morass that is Truth Social. Whatever camp you fall into, the video crosses all demographics by being expected — just another crazy Trump stunt in a repetitive cycle of division and diversion so frequent it makes Groundhog Day seem fresh. Epstein who?
But there are three reasons why this particular video — not made by the president but amplified to thousands — is worth noting, and maybe even worth fearing. First, it is flat-out racist. In it, Obama is ripped out of a chair in the Oval Office and forced onto his knees, almost bowing, to a laughing Trump. That imagery isn't hard to interpret: America's most esteemed Black man — who recently warned we are on the brink of losing democracy — forced into submission before our leader.
The video comes as Trump claims that Tulsi Gabbard, director of national intelligence, has uncovered a "treasonous conspiracy in 2016" in which top Obama officials colluded with Russia to disrupt the election. Democrats say the claim is erroneous at best. If you are inclined to give Trump the benefit of the doubt, right before this scene of Obama being forced to kneel, a meme of Pepe the Frog — an iconic image of the far-right and white supremacy — flashes on the screen.
Not subtle. But also, not the first time racism has come straight from the White House. On Monday, the Rev. Amos Brown, pastor of San Francisco's Third Baptist Church and a student of Martin Luther King Jr., reminded me that not too long ago, then-President Woodrow Wilson screened the pro-KKK film "The Birth of a Nation" at the executive mansion. It was the first film screening ever held there, and its anti-Black viewpoint sparked controversy and protests. That was due in no small part to a truth that Hollywood knows well — fiction has great power to sway minds. Brown sees direct similarities in how Wilson amplified fictional anti-Blackness then, and how Trump is doing so now, both for political gain.
"Mr. Trump should realise that Obama hasn't done anything to him. But just the idea, the thought of a Black person being human, is a threat to him and his supporters," Brown told me. Brown said he's praying for the president to "stop this bigotry" and see the error of his ways. I'll pray the great gods give the reverend good luck on that. But, on the earthly plane, Brown said that "the more things change, the more they remain the same." Trump courted the Black vote and has his supporters among people of all colors and ethnicities, but he's also played on racist tropes for political success, from stoking fear around the Central Park Five, now known as the Exonerated Five, decades ago to stoking fear around Black immigrants eating cats and dogs in Ohio during the recent election. It's an old playbook, because it works. Reposting the image of Obama on his knees is scary because it's a harsh reminder that racism is no longer an undercurrent in our society, if it ever was. It's a motivator and a power to be openly wielded — just the way Wilson did back in 1915.
But the differences in media from back in the day to now are what should raise our second fear around this video. A fictional film is one thing. An AI-generated video that for many people seems to depict reality is a whole new level of, well, reality. The fear of deepfakes in politics is not new. It's a global problem, and in fairness, this isn't the first time (by far) Trump or other politicians have used deepfakes.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Khaleej Times
2 hours ago
- Khaleej Times
Opec+ makes another large oil output hike in market share push
Opec+ agreed on Sunday to raise oil production by 547,000 barrels per day for September, the latest in a series of accelerated output hikes to regain market share, as concerns mount over potential supply disruptions linked to Russia. The move marks a full and early reversal of Opec+'s largest tranche of output cuts plus a separate increase in output for the UAE amounting to about 2.5 million bpd, or about 2.4 per cent of world demand. Eight Opec+ members held a brief virtual meeting, amid increasing US pressure on India to halt Russian oil purchases — part of Washington's efforts to bring Moscow to the negotiating table for a peace deal with Ukraine. President Donald Trump said he wants this by August 8. In a statement following the meeting, Opec+ cited a healthy economy and low stocks as reasons behind its decision. Oil prices have remained elevated even as Opec+ has raised output, with Brent crude closing near $70 a barrel on Friday, up from a 2025 low of near $58 in April, supported in part by rising seasonal demand. 'Given fairly strong oil prices at around $70, it does give Opec+ some confidence about market fundamentals,' said Amrita Sen, co-founder of Energy Aspects, adding that the market structure was also indicating tight stocks. The eight countries are scheduled to meet again on September 7, when they may consider reinstating another layer of output cuts totalling around 1.65 million bpd, two Opec+ sources said following Sunday's meeting. Those cuts are currently in place until the end of next year. Opec+ in full includes 10 non-Opec oil producing countries, most notably Russia and Kazakhstan. The group, which pumps about half of the world's oil, had been curtailing production for several years to support oil prices. It reversed course this year in a bid to regain market share, spurred in part by calls from Trump for Opec to ramp up production. The eight began raising output in April with a modest hike of 138,000 bpd, followed by larger-than-planned hikes of 411,000 bpd in May, June and July, 548,000 bpd in August and now 547,000 bpd for September. 'So far the market has been able to absorb very well those additional barrels also due to stockpiliing activity in China,' said Giovanni Staunovo of UBS. 'All eyes will now shift on the Trump decision on Russia this Friday.' As well as the voluntary cut of about 1.65 million bpd from the eight members, Opec+ still has a 2-million-bpd cut across all members, which also expires at the end of 2026. 'Opec+ has passed the first test,' said Jorge Leon of Rystad Energy and a former Opec official, as it has fully reversed its largest cut without crashing prices. 'But the next task will be even harder: deciding if and when to unwind the remaining 1.66 million barrels, all while navigating geopolitical tension and preserving cohesion.'
The National
2 hours ago
- The National
With Gaza in the global spotlight, expect Israel to turn the heat on Hezbollah
Israel finds itself in need of diverting global attention away from its atrocities in Gaza. Enter Hezbollah. The Israeli government appears to see renewed war with the Lebanese group as a chance to further its interests, pretexting the latter's refusal to surrender its weapons to the Lebanese state as it previously pledged. The timing is driven by several factors. The administration of US President Donald Trump has grown weary of waiting for Beirut to fulfil its promise of exclusive state control over arms, and it might be ready to endorse any Israeli decision, regardless of its severity. Another factor is Iran's unwillingness to enter a direct war with Israel on Hezbollah's behalf. Indeed, Tehran is both preoccupied with the fallout from the recent US and Israeli strikes and worried about another wave of attacks in the near future. Still, it refuses to abandon its strategy of using armed regional proxies as bargaining chips in potential negotiations with Washington. Tensions between the US and Iran are thus escalating – manifested through American sanctions, Iranian threats and Israeli war preparations. Iran's proxies in Lebanon and Yemen are on high alert, and the wider Iranian 'Axis of Resistance' is watching events closely, from Iraq to Gaza. Israel has zero tolerance regarding Hezbollah's arsenal. It has convinced the Trump administration that if the Lebanese government fails to implement its disarmament pledge, Israel has no choice but to press ahead with its war on the group. Meanwhile, the international conference on the two-state solution – co-chaired by Saudi Arabia and France at the UN – might have angered Iran. The Islamic Republic's ideology rejects the two-state solution, with its doctrine calling for Israel's destruction. Moreover, the conference's show of global support for the Palestinian Authority as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people was also a collective cry against Hamas, a key player in Iran's axis. Just as Israel is indifferent to the civilian toll in Gaza, Iran appears unbothered by Palestinian suffering, particularly as long as Hamas remains faithful to the axis. Mr Trump was recently forced to acknowledge the human-made famine in Gaza, having previously denied this reality. While he didn't initially act against Israel, which is enacting a policy of starvation in the enclave, he spoke about it after parts of his Maga political base pressed him to intervene to end the humanitarian catastrophe. This was accompanied by a different kind of global political pressure as Mr Trump was challenged by European and non-European allies who participated in the two-state solution conference and endorsed its final communique charting a path towards a Palestinian state alongside Israel. There are concerns over possible vindictive responses from Mr Trump, particularly if he feels isolated on the international stage. There is unease over his administration sanctioning the PA's leadership, which the latter says is a form of punishment for seeking the establishment of a Palestinian state. It shouldn't surprise anyone if Israel seeks to crush everything that emerged from the UN conference. It views the PA as an obstacle to its ambitions of annexing the West Bank. It opposes the near-unanimous international view that Hamas should be dismantled, only because its policy is to fracture Palestinian unity and undermine the PA. The dilemma facing the US President over the current Israeli government's extremist policies is his growing global isolation on the Palestine issue. He may still choose to ignore increasing international momentum in favour of a Palestinian state, but it could come at a cost. Indeed, it was no small development for Saudi Arabia to insist to the international community that it won't normalise relations with Israel unless a Palestinian state is established. Riyadh's support for Palestinian statehood gained greater significance when it co-chaired the conference with France. The event brought surprising developments, including the UK's readiness to recognise the state of Palestine at next month's UN General Assembly unless Israel changes course from its current approach in Gaza. Yet a Palestinian state cannot come into being without American backing and Israeli compliance. The UN Security Council has already enshrined the two-state solution in resolutions 1397 and 1515, both supported by Washington. But the roadmap they laid out for Palestinian statehood by 2005 was never implemented and the Trump administration walked back American commitments to those resolutions. The events in New York could push Mr Trump further into the arms of Israeli extremism and its rejection of the two-state solution. Or he might find himself cornered and unable to punish the broad coalition of states that have challenged him. If so, his policy could shift under pressure. This would require a deft diplomatic effort to present Mr Trump with ways to align with the emerging consensus without feeling provoked. Countries have bilateral interests and won't risk undermining relations with Washington solely for the sake of the two-state solution. Having been increasingly scrutinised by the international community, Israel appears intent on shifting global focus away from Gaza. This is precisely because it intends to continue its policies there. And as long as European states fail to impose tangible punitive measures on Israel, and as long as Mr Trump supports its project of 'voluntary displacement', Israel will continue with its agenda. Israel's posture towards Lebanon and Iran, however, is another matter. There is little international sympathy for Iran's insistence that Hezbollah retain its arms in defiance of Lebanese sovereignty. Nor is there sympathy for Tehran's reckless endangerment of the Lebanese people's safety, security and agency. There is, likewise, little global sympathy for the Islamic Republic's stubborn adherence to its triad of strategic doctrines – nuclear capability, ballistic missiles and proxy warfare – without modifications. Thus, should it once again face US or Israeli military strikes, it is unlikely to find many sympathisers. Tehran is now trapped by American sanctions and the threat of more air strikes. Hezbollah, too, will find no one rushing to its rescue if it falls prey to Israel's attempts to shift global attention away from Gaza. Both entities will have only themselves to blame.
Arabian Post
4 hours ago
- Arabian Post
U.S. Investigation Targets Jack Smith Amid Trump's Legal Struggles
The U. S. Office of Special Counsel has initiated a formal investigation into Jack Smith, the prosecutor overseeing key legal cases against former U. S. President Donald Trump. This move marks a significant escalation in a series of actions targeting Smith, widely viewed as a central figure in the growing legal battle surrounding Trump. The investigation stems from allegations of misconduct during Smith's tenure as special counsel, and the timing of this inquiry has raised questions about its political motivations. Critics argue that the move is part of a broader effort to undermine legal proceedings against Trump, a claim echoed by several high-profile supporters of the former president. However, others view the investigation as a legitimate step in ensuring transparency and accountability in Smith's conduct, particularly as his role has attracted heightened scrutiny in the wake of several high-profile legal cases. Smith, appointed by U. S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, is responsible for prosecuting Trump in connection with various charges, including obstruction of justice, mishandling classified documents, and efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election results. His appointment followed the departure of previous special counsel Robert Mueller, who led the investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election. ADVERTISEMENT Despite Smith's established track record in handling high-stakes cases, questions regarding the impartiality of his actions have arisen from both the political left and right. Some claim that the investigation into Smith represents an effort by Trump and his allies to diminish his credibility and derail the ongoing cases. Others insist that Smith's conduct has been above reproach, and the scrutiny is politically motivated. Smith has faced mounting pressure since his appointment, with critics alleging overreach in his handling of sensitive information. His prosecution of Trump has been framed by some as part of a larger political vendetta. The latest investigation, according to insiders, focuses on whether Smith misused his authority during the prosecution of Trump, particularly in relation to the investigation into the former president's handling of classified documents. These claims are set against the backdrop of an increasingly polarised political climate, where legal actions against prominent figures are often seen through a partisan lens. In contrast, defenders of Smith argue that his efforts have been crucial in holding Trump accountable for alleged crimes committed during his time in office. They point to Smith's legal expertise and his reputation for fairness in the handling of politically sensitive cases. Critics, however, remain unconvinced, alleging that Smith's actions are more aligned with advancing a personal or political agenda than upholding the law impartially. The investigation into Smith's conduct is likely to have wide-ranging consequences for both the legal proceedings against Trump and the broader landscape of U. S. politics. Given the divisiveness of the case, it is expected that both sides will continue to use the investigation to fuel their respective narratives, with each viewing the inquiry as either a necessary check on power or a politically charged attack. The probe into Smith's actions comes amid escalating tensions surrounding the Trump legal battles. Legal experts speculate that the investigation could have a significant impact on Smith's ability to continue his work, depending on its outcome. If allegations are substantiated, Smith could face professional consequences, potentially including a loss of his position or restrictions on his ability to handle sensitive national security cases. On the other hand, if cleared, it could further solidify his standing as a key figure in the U. S. legal system, especially in politically sensitive matters.
