By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A video posted by former President Trump depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as apes drew widespread condemnation, including from Republican Senator Tim Scott, who called it “the most racist thing” he had seen from the White House. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt attempted to dismiss the video as an “internet meme” from a “King of the Jungle” depiction. However, the video’s content was demonstrably not an excerpt from Disney’s *The Lion King*, which features only one primate, Rafiki the mandrill. The imagery was widely considered racist, sparking bipartisan outrage.
Read the original article here
The recent deletion of a video that depicted the Obamas as apes by Donald Trump, coupled with his assertion that he did nothing wrong, has sparked considerable commentary and scrutiny. It’s a situation where actions seem to speak louder, or at least more confusingly, than words. The core of the discussion revolves around the apparent contradiction: if there was no wrongdoing, why the subsequent removal of the content? This question resonates deeply, suggesting a potential disconnect between Trump’s public statements and the decisions made regarding the video.
The defense offered for the video, initially characterized as “fake outrage” and later shifted to an “oops, a staffer posted it by mistake,” has not appeased many observers. The speed at which the White House attempted to reframe the narrative, suggesting a focus on issues “that actually matters to the American public,” contrasts sharply with the gravity of depicting a former Black president as an ape. This pivot, for many, highlighted an unwillingness to confront the evident racism inherent in such imagery.
The persistent theme that nothing is ever Trump’s fault is a recurring point in discussions surrounding his actions. The assertion of perfection, of never having sinned or done wrong, seems to be a cornerstone of his public persona. This is contrasted with a long list of alleged transgressions, from defying the Constitution to inciting insurrections and engaging in corruption, all of which, according to this perspective, he views as having done nothing wrong. This self-perception, coupled with the unwavering support of a significant portion of the electorate, is seen by some as a deeply troubling aspect of American politics.
The explanation that Trump “legitimately didn’t see the video” and that “a staffer posted it” is particularly scrutinized. For those who view this as a classic deflection, it represents the closest one might get to an apology from a narcissist. The inability to take accountability is seen as a defining characteristic, yet the awareness of impending negative consequences, or the potential for widespread condemnation, drives a desire to erase the event and pretend it never happened. This is framed not as an admission of error, but as a strategic maneuver to avoid being perceived as weak.
The deletion itself is viewed by many as the most telling action. If the video was deemed acceptable and not racist, the logical next step would be to stand by it, perhaps even amplify it. The fact that it was removed suggests an acknowledgment, however tacit, that it crossed a line. The subsequent claims of not posting it personally, while a press secretary defended it, further muddy the waters and are interpreted as a classic “buck-passing” maneuver, designed to avoid direct responsibility.
For some, the racist nature of the video is undeniable, and the attempt to dismiss it as anything less is disingenuous. The juxtaposition of the Obamas, described as intellectual heavyweights with integrity, grace, and a commitment to community, with Trump, characterized in starkly negative terms, is presented as a fundamental contrast. One represents hope and love, the other hate and entitlement. Even the mention of an ape winning a Nobel Prize serves to highlight the perceived absurdity and offensiveness of the comparison.
The potential political fallout of such a video, particularly with mid-term elections on the horizon, is also a point of discussion. Alienating a significant voting bloc through what is seen as overtly racist imagery is viewed as a tactical misstep, regardless of the intended message or the alleged accidental posting. The ease with which the video was removed and the subsequent denials and deflections are seen as a clear indicator of an attempt to distract from other, more serious matters, such as the Epstein files, which some believe are being ignored in favor of manufactured controversies.
The idea that the video represents the “true face” of MAGA is also put forth, suggesting that this is not an anomaly but a manifestation of underlying sentiments. The fervent support for Trump, even in the face of such controversial actions, is seen by critics as a form of ideological blindness, where loyalty trumps critical evaluation. The enduring question remains: if Trump did nothing wrong and the video was merely a staffer’s mistake, why the immediate deletion and the subsequent cascade of conflicting explanations? The answer, for many, lies not in an innocent mistake, but in a calculated attempt to manage a public relations crisis after an action that was, at its core, deeply problematic.