Donald Trump Posts AI Video Of Barack Obama's Arrest: "No One Is Above Law"
US President Donald Trump on Monday stepped up his attack on Barack Obama by posting an AI-generated video of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arresting the former President in the Oval Office.
The video, posted on Truth Social, begins with Obama saying, "especially the President is above the law". It then features many US politicians stating, "no one is above the law." The clip then switches to an AI-generated video of Obama being handcuffed by two FBI agents in the same office he once occupied as the President. Trump can be seen sitting and smiling during the "arrest".
The fake video ends with Obama standing inside jail, wearing the prison's orange jumpsuit.
Trump did not issue a disclaimer for the video being fictional - a move reportedly slammed by critics, who called him "deeply irresponsible."
This comes weeks after Trump accused Obama of a "high-level election fraud".
Last week, US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard revealed that she has "striking" and "overwhelming" evidence of ex-Obama officials allegedly manufacturing the Trump-Russia collusion theory after the 2016 election to prevent Trump's presidency. She called for a trial of the former Obama administration.
"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, subverting the will of the American people and undermining our democratic republic," she wrote on X.
The Office of the DNI (ODNI), however, released a 114-page document detailing evidence that, before the November 2016 election, the Intelligence Community consistently assessed that Russia was "probably not trying to influence the election by using cyber means."
It also mentioned that on December 8, 2016, a draft of the President's daily brief stated that Russia "did not impact recent US election results" by conducting malicious cyber activities against US election infrastructure.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
26 minutes ago
- Mint
Demand for American degrees is sinking
SOME OF AMERICA'S most valuable companies were built by people who came to America as students. Elon Musk was born in South Africa and lived in Canada before studying physics at the University of Pennsylvania. Patrick and John Collison moved from Ireland to attend MIT and Harvard, respectively, before founding Stripe, a digital payments company. All told, more than half of America's billion-dollar start-ups were founded by at least one immigrant; a quarter have a founder who arrived as a student. That pipeline of talent is now under heavy pressure. On May 22nd the Trump administration abruptly stripped Harvard University of its ability to enroll foreign students. A judge blocked the move the following day. But the administration only tightened its squeeze: on May 27th it suspended all new visa interviews for foreign students hoping to study in America. Officials say the pause is temporary. The damage might not be. Attracting global talent has long been one of American academia's greatest strengths. The country draws more international students than any other; over the past two decades the share of foreign students has nearly doubled, reaching almost 6% in 2023 (see chart 1). Most pursue degrees in fields such as science, engineering and maths. Nearly a third come from India; a quarter from China. America's top private universities attract the lion's share of foreign talent (see chart 2). International students make up 14% of the intake at the country's 158 most selective research institutions—more than double the national average. At the dozen 'Ivy-plus" universities—including the Ivy League and peers such as Stanford and MIT—the share reaches 28%. Columbia and Harvard, two institutions that President Donald Trump has recently targeted in his broader assault on elite universities, rely heavily on international enrolment, at 40% and 28% respectively. Public universities, although less exposed in terms of headcount, face other risks. They tend to depend more on foreign tuition, which is often several times higher than the rates charged to local students, and lack the endowments that cushion private institutions. Prospective students are already looking elsewhere. Studyportals, an online directory for degree programmes around the world, says clicks on American courses are now at their lowest level since the covid-19 pandemic (see chart 3). Weekly page views halved between January 5th and the end of April. First-quarter traffic to American undergraduate and master's degrees was down by more than 20% year on year; traffic to PhD courses fell by a third. The biggest drop was from India, where interest fell by 40%. The data suggest that British universities would be the most likely beneficiaries. The financial stakes are high. In the 2023-24 academic year foreign students added $43.8bn to America's economy, according to the National Association of International Educators, a non-profit—mostly in Democratic-leaning areas (see map). They also supported jobs at universities and in other sectors, such as food services and health care. But the heaviest cost to America will be in talent. Around three-quarters of international PhD students say they intend to stay in America after graduating. Blocking the next generation of students may punish the Ivies. Over time, though, it is America's edge in science, business and innovation that will suffer.
Indian Express
29 minutes ago
- Indian Express
With Aug 1 deadline looming, India's faces a trade predicament: to accommodate Trump's hardball tactics while maintaining tariff advantage
With less than a couple of days left for the August 1 deadline that the Donald Trump administration set itself to thrash out deals with its trading partners, the American President said he is planning tariffs for 'the rest of the world' at 'somewhere in the 15 to 20 per cent range'. That would mean a significant increase on the 10 per cent 'baseline' tariff that currently applies to most trading partners. India's talks with the US for an interim deal are in a limbo of sorts, given the lack of a significant breakthrough so far. As things stand, three things are clear: the US is pushing for zero duty access to the Indian markets, like the deals it has got with Vietnam and Indonesia. That would, however, be a tough demand for India to accommodate. Secondly, from its perspective, New Delhi is pushing for a headline tariff number of around 15 per cent for its goods going into the US, like what was offered by the Americans to the EU and Japan, with the comparative tariff advantage starting to diminish if the tariff starts to go over figure and inch up closer towards the 20 per cent mark, or even higher. Also, going by the deals signed by the US so far, the tariff scenario for each country seems to be dependent on multiple external factors as well. This includes investment commitments and promises on directional shifts in trade in goods that America is keen to peddle. The Trump administration is learnt to be pushing for India to commit to specific purchases and investments, of the sort that it got the EU and Japan to sign up for. The commitment for purchases should not be a big issue for India, given that Trump is ostensibly focused on extracting a big figure that runs into billions of dollars, without even bothering to specify the time-frame for achieving these targets. The full texts of the deals for both Japan and the EU are not out, and are unlikely to be out anytime soon. India has comminated its openness to purchasing three big-ticket items from America: defence equipment, natural gas imports and nuclear reactors. Cobbling together a big number might not be a difficult task. Agri and dairy, two contentious issues, are likely off the table for now, which is positive for New Delhi. Also, with the UK deals, India has shown a willingness to be flexible on segments such as opening up public procurement. That gives some headroom for Indian negotiators for the final push. Indications are that a sixth round of talks between the two negotiating teams is expected to take discussions forward mid next month. What could be instructive is the limited takeaway from the Japan deal: how the Japanese negotiators managed to upstage their American counterparts by getting an immensely favourable deal on automobiles, even as they dangled the agri market access concessions and Tokyo's investment pledges as distraction the entire time. While India's trade deal with the US is likely to be less focused on sectors and more focused on the headline number unlike its UK deal, New Delhi is likely to push for market access in labour-intensive sectors, while trying to ensure a significant tariff differential compared to its Asian peers. Now, if the final headline tariff offered to India by Washington DC is between 10 per cent and 15 per cent, the tariff points offered to the UK and Japan, New Delhi should have reasons to be satisfied. The advantage starts to taper off once the tariff goes over 15 per cent and inches up closer to 20 per cent, as was offered by the US to Vietnam. A transshipment clause, of the kind slapped on Vietnam, could be a problem for India, given that a lot of Indian exports have inputs and intermediate goods in sectors such as pharma, engineering goods and electronics coming in from outside, including China. Also, clarity on the final American duty offer on China is a number that negotiators will be looking at, given the implicit assumption in New Delhi that the Trump administration will maintain a tariff differential. For Indian negotiators, other tariffs, over and above the baseline tariffs and the sectoral ones on steel and aluminum, is an added complication. Sectoral tariffs such as the 50 per cent on steel, aluminum and copper are already impacting India's exports to the US, and Trump's threat of steep tariffs on BRICS countries over them buying Russian oil is a looming concern. Will that be neutralised in the agreement is a question. Another question for New Delhi is: in the absence of any kind of interim deal, should it brace for an eventuality where there may not just be 26 per cent reciprocal tariffs, plus a 10 per cent additional BRICS tariff as well? That's perhaps the absolute worst case scenario, till an agreement is achieved. A tariff in the 15-20 per cent range would mean India still compares reasonably well with Indonesia (19 per cent), Vietnam (20-40 per cent) and has an advantage against China (30-34 per cent) and Bangladesh (35 per cent), without the additional BRICS tariff being factored in. Meanwhile, as the uncertainty continues, India's exporters are struggling to navigate the way forward because the buyers are not clear as to what the final tariff is going to be, and are consequently holding back on placing orders. The higher tariffs that the US has imposed on China means a number of Chinese manufacturers are now rerouting shipments to Europe at throwaway prices, which is impacting India's exports to the EU as well. India, like other countries, had frontloaded a lot of shipments ahead of the reciprocal tariff deadline for the ongoing Spring-Summer season, but a big question mark looms over the Fall-Winter season spanning October-March. Once the official level discussions wrap up by mid next month, there is a sense that a final call on the deal could come down to a conversation between the two leaders, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and President Trump. This is especially so since the American President is the trade negotiator-in-chief in this entire tariff rationalisation exercise. A firm commitment from India to purchasing American defence equipment, natural gas and nuclear reactors, alongside some kind of guidance on India cutting its purchases of fossil fuels from Russia could be part of the final offer from New Delhi. Trump needs to be convinced of a deal that he can hard sell as a victory to his base. The best case scenario for India would be to get a deal of some sort now, and then build on that in the future negotiations that could run into 2026. For Trump, another growing consideration could be the fact that higher tariffs are making it nearly certain that American households will pay higher prices for the everyday goods that are made overseas and imported into the US. Inflation is a looming reality. A Yale estimate from July 23 found that the tariffs will result in as much as $2,700 in 'lost annual income' per household, though the taxes collected would potentially help narrow the long-running federal deficit. The tariffs that have kicked in so far are bringing in some money into the US Treasury, with tariff revenue pegged at $27.2 billion in June and $22.8 billion in May, according to the Treasury Department's monthly statements, a sharp increase from earlier years. Anil Sasi is National Business Editor with the Indian Express and writes on business and finance issues. He has worked with The Hindu Business Line and Business Standard and is an alumnus of Delhi University. ... Read More
The Hindu
29 minutes ago
- The Hindu
Palantir, the AI giant that preaches U.S. dominance
Palantir, an American data analysis and artificial intelligence company, has emerged as Silicon Valley's latest tech darling: one that makes no secret of its macho, America-first ethos now ascendant in Trump-era tech culture. The company's reach spans the global economy, with banks, hospitals, the U.S. government, and the Israeli military among its ever-expanding client roster. "We want and need this country to be the strongest, most important country in the world," Alex Karp, Palantir's CEO, recently declared at a client conference in Palo Alto, California, where AFP was the only media outlet present. In armed conflicts, most notably in Ukraine, Palantir's tools help evaluate potential targets in real-time, using multiple sources, including biometric data and intercepted phone calls. "I'm super proud of... what we do to protect our soldiers... (using our AI) to kill our enemies and scare them, because they know they will be killed," the graying, curly-haired billionaire continued, wearing a tight white T-shirt. Washington has been filling Palantir's coffers. In the first quarter, the company received $373 million from the U.S. government: a 45% jump from the previous year, and it's not all military spending. This spring, federal immigration authorities (ICE) awarded the company a $30 million contract to develop a new platform for tracking deportations and visa overstays. The company then secured an investment of nearly $800 million from the US military, adding to the $480 million contract signed in May 2024 for its AI platform supporting the Pentagon's "Project Maven" target identification program. This marked Palantir's first billion-dollar contract, elevating it alongside government contracting stalwarts like Microsoft and Amazon's AWS. However, financial results "are not and will never be the ultimate measure of the value, broadly defined, of our business," Karp wrote in his letter to shareholders in early May, where he tossed in quotes from Saint Augustine, the Bible and Richard Nixon. "We have grander and more idiosyncratic aims." Palantir was founded in 2003 by Peter Thiel, Silicon Valley's preeminent conservative, Karp, and others with CIA backing. The company takes its name from the magical seeing stones in Tolkien's "Lord of the Rings." 'Young people would say we're like pure drugs: very expensive, highly sought after... that make you stronger and better,' Karp boasted on stage. Palantir's expanding footprint at the highest levels of government has raised eyebrows. Several members of the Trump administration's "DOGE" cost-cutting commission, originally headed by Elon Musk, came from the company. Recent reports from The New York Times, Wired, and CNN have detailed secret government projects to create, with Palantir's help, a central database combining data from different federal agencies. This development has created "a lot of concerns about how that information might be used," warned Elizabeth Laird from the Center for Democracy & Technology. Palantir maintains it isn't building "surveillance technology" or a "central database on Americans." Unlike most traditional Silicon Valley companies that have kept military projects discreet, Palantir now embraces its defence work openly. Sasha Spivak, director of strategy, said that when she joined Palantir ten years ago, the company kept its sense of purpose behind closed doors. "Today we're not ashamed, we're not afraid, and we're deeply proud of what we do and our clients," said Spivak. Some employee groups are pushing back. In early May, 13 former Palantir employees published a letter accusing tech giants of helping to "normalize authoritarianism under the cover of a 'revolution' led by oligarchs." They argue that by supporting the Trump administration and DOGE, Palantir has betrayed its stated values of ethics, transparency, and defending democracy. "When I joined the company... there were many smart, motivated people; that's pretty rare," said one of the letter's signatories, who wishes to remain anonymous, for fear of reprisal. After months of seeking management explanations about Palantir's collaboration with Israel and ICE, several of these employees resigned. "They said, 'We're a company that's very responsive to employees,' but people asking about Israel were quickly shut down and told, 'That's what we do; if you don't like it, you can leave,'" the former staffer recalled. Jeremy David, co-director of the Health division, plays down the controversies. "My daily life is more about nurses and doctors who often hate us at first and are very grateful at the end," he told AFP at the conference. On stage, Joe Bonanno, head of data analysis at Citibank, celebrated how one operation that previously required "nine days and sometimes 50 people" now "takes just a few minutes for one person." "Like I said, and like Alex said, I came to dominate, crush and annihilate. So if you're JPMorgan, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, sorry," he concluded with a broad smile. Some potential clients quietly admit they don't appreciate the war-like rhetoric, but they see no alternative to Palantir's capabilities.
