Trump shares AI video showing Obama getting arrested
The video shows that Obama in handcuffs being taken by FBI agents from Oval Office as Trump watches, smiling. The 45-second clip begins with a doctored voiceover of Obama saying, 'Especially the President is above the law,' followed by a montage of various US political figures—Democrats and Republicans—declaring, 'No one is above law.' The video then transitions to a fictional scene showing Obama being handcuffed by FBI agents in the same office he once occupied.
It ends with an AI-generated image of the former President standing in a jail cell, dressed in an orange prison jumpsuit, as the Village People's 'YMCA' plays in the background. No disclaimer was attached to the video clarifying it is fake or fictional, drawing sharp criticism from opponents who called the act 'deeply irresponsible'.
The video was posted after Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard said she had 'overwhelming' evidence that senior Obama administration officials fabricated the Trump-Russia collusion narrative following the 2016 election. Gabbard has publicly called for a criminal trial against members of the former administration, alleging they weaponised intelligence agencies to subvert Trump's presidency.
'Americans will finally learn the truth about how, in 2016, intelligence was politicised and weaponised by the most powerful people in the Obama administration to lay the groundwork for what was essentially a years-long coup against President Donald Trump,' Gabbard wrote on X (formerly Twitter), adding that this effort undermined American democracy.
She said she plans to forward the documents her office uncovered to the FBI and the Department of Justice for criminal referral. According to her, the records indicate that prior to the 2016 election, there was no actionable evidence of Russian collusion and that narratives around Trump were deliberately distorted for political purposes.
However, a 114-page declassified report from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) presents a different picture. The document states that, as of November 2016, the US intelligence community had consistently assessed that Russia was 'probably not trying to influence the election using cyber means.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
7 minutes ago
- First Post
Trump's approval ratings lowest for second term, close to first presidency bottom
Amid immigration crackdown that has triggered mass protests and backlash over 'Epstein files', US President Donald Trump's approval rating has fallen to the lowest point of 37% of his second term, which is barely above the all-time lowest point of his first term. read more Six months into his second term, US President Donald Trump appears to be in a race to the bottom as his approval rating currently stands at the lowest point of 37 per cent in his second term, according to a Gallup survey. This is just above the lowest point Trump hit in his first term —34 per cent— towards the end of his term. Notably, towards the end of term, he egged on his supporters on January 6, 2021, to attack the US Capitol to hijack the certification of the 2020 election and illegally overturn the result in his favour. The backlash at the time —which has eroded now— was such that Trump was a pariah even among those who are his yes-men how. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD The Gallup survey, whose findings were published on Thursday, is in line with other surveys in recent weeks that have shown that Trump's approval has taken a hit as he has gone about implementing his extremist agenda. More from World A Yahoo News/YouGov survey late last month found that the blowback was such that Trump's disapproval on immigration —his strongest area— rose to 52 per cent with just 44 per cent Americans approving it. Trump faces blowback on his top agenda Trump has seen a sharp blowback over items on the top of agenda, such as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' and immigration crackdown. Notably, Independents have driven low approval ratings of Trump as he has lost 17 percentage-point support among them, as per the Gallup survey. This is the lowest in either of Trump's terms. Compared to previous surveys, Trump has seen a 14 percentage-point fall in the approval of the federal budget and an 8 percentage-point fall in immigration. Trump scored the highest marks for his handling of the conflict with Iran (42 per cent) and foreign affairs (41 per cent). He earns the highest marks for his handling of the situation with Iran (42%) and foreign affairs (41%).
Time of India
7 minutes ago
- Time of India
'Meet me off stage, loser': Tom Homan loses cool after anti-ICE heckler interrupts him, 'get out…
Trump's Border Czar, Tom Homan, was delivering a fiery speech at the Turning Point USA Summit when a heckler interrupted him mid-sentence. The clash quickly turned explosive, with Homan shouting back in a viral moment that lit up social media. Show more Show less
Time of India
20 minutes ago
- Time of India
"I can't teach genocide in this environment," says Columbia University scholar as campus free speech crisis deepens
Columbia University (File Photo) After nearly five decades in the classroom, Marianne Hirsch, daughter of Holocaust survivors and a renowned genocide scholar at Columbia University, is questioning whether she can continue teaching. The catalyst? Columbia's recent adoption of a controversial definition of antisemitism, one that critics say could criminalize nuanced discussion of Israel and its history. 'A university that treats criticism of Israel as antisemitic and threatens sanctions for those who disobey is no longer a place of open inquiry,' Hirsch told The Associated Press. 'I just don't see how I can teach about genocide in that environment.' Her fear is not theoretical. The policy, endorsed as part of a $220 million settlement with the Trump administration, could subject her to disciplinary action simply for assigning Hannah Arendt's seminal work Eichmann in Jerusalem, which critiques Israel's handling of post-Holocaust justice. The definition that changed everything At the heart of the controversy lies the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of antisemitism. First drafted as a guide to monitor anti-Jewish bias in Europe, it has since been adopted, often under political pressure, as a disciplinary yardstick in American universities. It includes examples such as questioning Israel's legitimacy or comparing its policies to Nazism. Columbia, like Harvard and Yale, has moved to adopt the definition in full, not just for 'training and education' but for punitive use in adjudicating faculty and student conduct. Critics fear this transformation from guideline to legal cudgel will chill classroom discussions and compromise academic independence. 'We learn by making analogies,' Hirsch said as reported by Associated Press. 'Now the university is saying that's off-limits. How can you have a university course where ideas are not up for discussion or interpretation?' A spokesperson for Columbia declined to respond to questions regarding the policy's implications for academic freedom. From framework to weapon Kenneth Stern, the original architect of the IHRA definition, never intended for it to police thought. 'People who believe they're combating hate are seduced by simple solutions to complicated issues,' he said as reported by the Associated Press. 'But when used in this context, it's really actually harming our ability to think about antisemitism.' Stern, now director of the Bard Center for the Study of Hate, warned Columbia's leadership about this very possibility in a private meeting last year. At the time, the university appeared receptive. But things shifted dramatically after the Trump administration threatened to withhold $400 million in federal funds over concerns about antisemitism on campus. Shortly thereafter, Columbia folded. What had been a conversation turned into a mandate. In March, the university signaled it would adopt IHRA for training purposes. By July, the definition had become central to its disciplinary protocol. Stern called the shift 'appalling' and warned it would lead to increased legal challenges and further suppression of pro-Palestinian speech. 'You're going to have more outside groups looking at what professors are teaching, what's in the syllabus, filing complaints and applying public pressure to get people fired,' he said to Associated Press. 'That will undoubtedly harm the university.' An academic culture of surveillance The repercussions are already being felt. Columbia's disciplinary board has faced backlash for investigating students who expressed support for Palestinian rights, often following complaints filed by pro-Israel advocacy organizations. Now, faculty fear they will be next. As part of its agreement with the federal government, Columbia will also subject its Middle East studies department to new oversight, revise protest policies, and coordinate antisemitism trainings with groups like the Anti-Defamation League. Earlier this week, nearly 80 students were expelled or suspended for participating in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Kenneth Marcus, chair of the Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, defended the university's actions. 'There are undoubtedly some Columbia professors who will feel they cannot continue teaching under the new regime,' he said to Associated Press. 'To the extent that they self-terminate, it may be sad for them personally, but it may not be so bad for the students at Columbia University.' A scholar's last stand Hirsch remains undeterred in her commitment to teaching the aftershocks of genocide. But she believes that telling the full truth, including the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza, is becoming a punishable act in Columbia. She refers to Israel's campaign in Gaza as 'ongoing ethnic cleansing and genocide,' citing over 58,000 deaths, the majority of them women and children, according to Gaza's Health Ministry. 'With this capitulation to Trump, it may now be impossible to do that inside Colombia,' she said as reported by Associated Press. 'If that's the case, I'll continue my work outside the university's gates.' The future of free thought on campus As universities nationwide wrestle with how to balance anti-hate protections and academic liberty, Columbia's decision has emerged as a pivotal test case. Is the classroom still a space for dissenting ideas, or has it become a battleground where federal funding dictates intellectual boundaries? For Hirsch and many of her peers, the answer will determine not just how they teach, but whether they can teach at all. Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!
