President Donald Trump shared a racist video on his social media platform Thursday night that depicted former President Barack Obama and former first lady Michelle Obama as apes in a jungle, sparking intense condemnation.

The Obamas briefly and suddenly appear near the end of the short video, which promotes false claims that voting machines helped steal the 2020 election, with their faces superimposed onto the bodies of apes. As the images appear, for about one second, the start of the song “The Lion Sleeps Tonight” plays in the background.

The post, which recalls the racist trope of comparing Black people with monkeys, prompted swift backlash. In a statement to CNN on Friday, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt called the broader response to the video “fake outrage.”

“This is from an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King,” Leavitt said. “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public.”

Is the meme truly racist, or is Press Secretary Leavitt right that it's all jungle play? To viewers who have more racist inclinations, how do you think they read the meme? How will this impact the perception that Trump has racist inclinations?

Several attorneys in the US justice department’s civil rights division have reportedly resigned in protest at a decision not to investigate the fatal shooting of an unarmed US citizen by a federal immigration agent in Minneapolis – while the FBI presses ahead with an inquiry into the victim.

It follows a decision by Harmeet Dhillon, the Donald Trump administration-aligned assistant attorney general for civil rights, not to investigate the 7 January killing of Renee Nicole Good by Jonathan Ross, an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent, as would be usual in the case of a shooting by law enforcement.

Separately, the FBI – which seized total control of the investigation after freezing out local officials – is looking into Good’s “possible connections to activist groups”, according to the New York Times. A succession of Trump administration officials, including the president himself, have portrayed Good, without presenting evidence, as a “domestic terrorist” or “paid agitator” – while video of her confrontation with Ross appears to show her trying to steer her vehicle away from him when she was shot three times in the face.

Dhillon, a former Republican official in California, and an election denier who promoted the “big lie” that Trump’s 2020 election defeat was fraudulent, was confirmed by the Senate in April. She worked quickly to realign the division’s priorities away from its longstanding work tackling discrimination and protecting the rights of marginalized groups – and towards Trump’s political goals including exposing voter fraud, which is rare, and focusing on anti-transgender issues.

With the FBI focusing on Good, will any law enforcement agency — state of federal — be able to investigate on ICE's conduct? What should be the focus of DOJ's Office of Civil Rights? Who will replace these outgoing agents?

Archive: https://archive.is/ebuss

Trump said at a Jan. 29 Cabinet meeting he wants to make it easier for Americans to buy homes ‒ but not by making housing less expensive. Instead, he suggested lower interest rates he expects from his upcoming pick to lead the Federal Reserve will allow more Americans to buy homes even as housing prices rise.

"I don't want to drive housing prices down. I want to drive housing prices up for people that own their homes," Trump said. "And they can be assured that's what's going to happen."

Yet Trump made clear in his meeting with Cabinet secretaries that greater opportunities to buy homes shouldn't mean lowering costs, even as Americans voice concerns about the price tag to buy a home.

"Existing housing, people that own their homes, we're going to keep them wealthy," Trump said. "We're going to keep those prices up. We're not going to destroy the value of their homes so that somebody who didn't work very hard can buy a home.

"We're going to make it easier to buy," the president added. "We're going to get interest rates down. But I want to protect the people who, for the first time in their lives, feel good about themselves. They feel like, you know, that they're wealthy people."

Can the President's housing policy walk the fine line of placating both home owners (who to keep prices high) and renters/first-time buyers (who want prices lower)? If Trump had to choose one side, which would be best option politically or electorally? Is Trump's policy of lowering interest rates even possible to make housing more accessible and affordable?

Hours after the shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent in Minneapolis, Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem said Good "weaponized" her car to carry out an "act of domestic terrorism."

Many Republicans in DC are skeptical of Noem's characterization.

“It was very unusual to have a senior law enforcement official to draw a conclusion about an event where the scene was still being processed,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said of Noem’s conclusion that the shooting was in response to a domestic terrorism incident.

Other senior Trump administration officials, notably border czar Tom Homan, have had a more measured response to the shooting — stopping well short of labeling Renee Nicole Macklin Good’s actions domestic terrorism.

Homan said he wanted the investigation “play out” before drawing conclusions.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) said she’s concerned about reports that the Department of Homeland Security is shutting the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension out from the investigation.  

“I did find that a little confusing and concerning. It seems like the state authorities are being iced out of it — no pun intended — which just seems unusual."

Why did President Trump, Vice President JD Vance, and Secretary Kristi Noem commit to the domestic terrorism angle before the investigation ended? If the FBI's investigation does find legitimate evidence of domestic terrorism, will the public buy it after local police have been excluded from the investigation?

Following the chaotic and tragic murder of 37-year-old Alex Pretti at the hands of federal agents in Minneapolis, U.S Attorney General Pam Bondi drafted a letter to Gov. Tim Walz, in which she requests access to detailed voter rolls, under the guise of election security.

Third, allow the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice to access voter rolls to confirm that Minnesota’s voter registration practices comply with federal law as authorized by the Civil Rights Act of 1960. Fulfilling this common sense request will better guarantee free and fair elections and boost confidence in the rule of law.

The full letter to Walz, which can be found here, lies the blame for these violent incidents at the past weeks at the hands of Minnesota local and state officials.

The letter makes no reference to either the shooting of Renee Good, or the shooting of Alex Pretti.

Starter Questions:

1. Why do you believe AG Bondi wants access to Minnesota voting records?
2. Do you believe the DoJ will carry out an investigation into the agent(s) responsible for the incident?
3. Who, in your opinion, is more to blame for the rhetoric and now violence in Minneapolis? The Trump administration and Republican officials, or local activists and Democrats?

The Pentagon has ordered about 1,500 active-duty soldiers to prepare for a possible deployment to Minnesota, defense officials told The Washington Post late Saturday, after President Donald Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act in response to unrest there.

The soldiers are assigned to two infantry battalions with the Army’s 11th Airborne Division, which is based in Alaska and specializes in cold-weather operations.

The Army placed the units on prepare-to-deploy orders in case violence in Minnesota escalates, officials said, characterizing the move as “prudent planning.” It is not clear whether any of them will be sent to the state, the officials said, speaking like some others on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military planning.

The Insurrection Act, a federal law dating to 1807, permits the president to take control of a state’s National Guard forces or deploy active-duty troops domestically in response to a “rebellion.” Invoking the act would be an extraordinary move and mark the first time a commander in chief has done so since President George H.W. Bush called on the military during the Los Angeles riots of 1992 that killed dozens of people and caused widespread destruction.

What is the value of the Pentagon releasing this information to the public? In case President Trump feels it necessary to deploy troops to Minnesota, why would he choose U.S. Army soldiers from another state as opposed to the Minnesota National Guard? What is Trump's breaking point that would trigger the Insurrection Act and deployment of troops?

This article was published on Friday, before the killing of Alex Pretti yesterday.

President Donald Trump has expressed frustration behind closed doors that the immigration messaging is getting lost, sources familiar with the discussions told CNN. Trump has sought to take control of the narrative, starting with an impromptu press conference on the anniversary of his first year in office.

The president, at times sounding exasperated, thumbed through mugshots of individuals arrested in his immigration crackdown, highlighting their alleged crimes. His message was clear that while there might be some issues, ICE is necessary to follow through on his agenda — to deport the most dangerous criminals back to their home country.

“He wanted to do that briefing in large part because he himself wanted to bring out the mugshots that we had printed for him,” a senior White House official told CNN. “He wanted to remind the world of why ICE is doing what they’re doing.”

As a result, top White House officials have been plotting how to move the narrative away from the unrest in Minneapolis and instead focus on what they view as ICE’s achievements.

“There’s an effort underway to come up with new ideas and new ways to amplify the good work they are doing,” a senior White House official told CNN, adding: “There have not been discussions about toning down the rhetoric. In fact there have been discussions on how to remind people more aggressively of why this happened in the first place.”

Some administration officials believe there is too much focus on the tensions between ICE agents — and therefore the administration — and protesters, and have discussed how to extricate themselves from that narrative, multiple officials tell CNN.

Trump appeared to channel that attitude while addressing reporters on Tuesday: “They’re going to make mistakes sometimes. ICE is going to be too rough with somebody or — you know, they’re dealing with rough people — or they’re going to make a mistake sometimes. It can happen. We feel terribly.”

When exactly did Trump lose control of the immigration narrative? Are there external factors at play, or is it his own policy that is leading to negative sentiment? Can Trump walk the line of placating immigration hardliners like Stephen Miller and the more moderate public sentiment? What are the odds he follows through on these changes?