Text SIGN PTLTIQ to 50409 — Late Thursday night, President Donald J. Trump’s social media account posted a video recycling long-debunked claims about the 2020 presidential election. Near the end of the clip, former President Barack Obama and former First Lady Michelle Obama appeared with their faces superimposed on the bodies of apes—one of the oldest and most dangerous racist tropes in Western political history. The White House initially dismissed public reaction as “fake outrage.” Only after Republican senators, including Tim Scott, publicly condemned the imagery as racist was the video removed. The administration then claimed the post was the work of an unnamed staffer. Hours later, President Trump acknowledged that he approved the post and refused to apologize, stating, “I didn’t make a mistake.” This episode raises concerns that extend far beyond offensiveness. First, it reflects a profound failure of judgment and impulse control by the President of the United States. When a president distributes racist imagery and then offers shifting explanations that collapse under scrutiny, it undermines public trust in the presidency itself. Second, this conduct carries real national-security implications. The strength of the United States does not rest solely on military power or economic size. It also depends on alliances, shared democratic values, and credibility. Mutual defense agreements—particularly the North Atlantic Treaty Organization—are not self-executing. They rely on public confidence in American leadership and the belief that the United States acts responsibly on the world stage. History shows that when the United States invokes collective defense, allies respond not only because of treaty language, but because they trust American leadership to act with discipline and moral seriousness. A president who publicly traffics in racist dehumanization weakens that trust. It is reasonable to ask how such behavior is received by allied populations whose support would be essential in moments of crisis. Third, dismissing legitimate public reaction as “fake outrage” is not ordinary political spin. It is an attempt to delegitimize moral response itself. That tactic corrodes democratic culture by teaching citizens that cruelty should be ignored and accountability treated as hysteria. Finally, this incident underscores the need for serious congressional oversight of the processes and safeguards surrounding presidential decision-making. The combination of erratic late-night communications, contradictory public explanations within hours, and approval of inflammatory content with global consequences raises legitimate questions about whether existing controls are adequate to ensure stable, responsible leadership. Congress has both the authority and the obligation to hold hearings examining how presidential communications are reviewed, who exercises control over official accounts, and whether current safeguards are sufficient to protect the public interest and national security. Oversight of capacity and process is not partisan—it is a core constitutional responsibility. This was not an isolated lapse. It fits a broader pattern in which racial provocation is used to distract, divide, and destabilize at a moment of growing public disillusionment with the administration’s performance. That strategy may serve short-term political aims, but it does lasting damage to the country. Members of Congress have a constitutional obligation not only to legislate, but to provide oversight and to defend the norms that make democratic government possible. Silence in the face of conduct that degrades the presidency and endangers American credibility is itself a choice. At a minimum, Congress should publicly condemn the use of racist imagery by the President of the United States, reject false explanations that evade accountability, and affirm that basic decency, democratic norms, and national security are inseparable. The presidency is not a private social-media account. It is a public trust. That trust was violated, and the American people deserve better.

In the past few weeks, passing the legislation has been a unifying rally cry for Republicans, a welcome distraction from the party’s cratering public opinion polls.

The case was part of a broader Republican effort to increase the power of GOP-controlled states by changing how the U.S. population is counted.

The judge pointed to a letter from Bondi to Minnesota that tied federal immigration enforcement to demands for voter data as the smoking gun.

She made key contributions to US cold-war science despite facing huge barriers as a Black woman.

If Democrats win the majority, Trump’s authoritarian plan will be foiled — and he knows that.