Well, it looks like there’s another scandal that has broken at the White House. This time it involves a meme being forwarded via the President’s Truth Social account depicting the Obamas as apes. The short clip comes from a much longer video posted by a meme creator known as Xerias_x. In it, Democrats are depicted as animals, with the president portrayed as a lion with the background music being “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”.
The clip of the Obamas was prominently displayed long enough to elicit feelings of outrage, despite the fact that the entire video is a dig at Democrats and not any specific individual. The claims of the White House Press Secretary are more a reaction than a well thought out strategy on how to handle this latest embarrassment. And that is exactly what this was meant to be, an embarrassment. We’ll get to that shortly, but first and foremost, President Trump does bear accountability for this short being posted. He was the one who greenlighted its posting but failed to either personally review or ask difficult questions about the video before he gave it the nod. This is where his expectation of loyalty from his people becomes his Achilles heel. It bit him in the rear during his first administration, and it seems to be doing so again. In the words of the Gipper, trust but verify.
Now, onto the reasons why I suspect that this was one more dig at the administration from an insider. This video was initially released in October of 2025. Someone had to go back to the archives to dig it up, review it, and then selectively identify the one or two snippets that could elicit outrage on a nationwide, if not global scale. They then had to get the president’s seal of approval to post it without him being none the wiser about what was being done to him. They succeeded beyond their wildest expectations.
This definitely fits the pattern of events designed to provide an ongoing string of embarrassments for the administration. The Polymarket betting scheme and Signal Chat incident were the first of what I believe will be a long sequence of black eyes, if the White House cannot identify the culprit(s) involved, since they will feel emboldened to continue with these shenanigans. Lastly, anyone who believes that the president needs to apologize for any of this, is making an argument akin to asking a domestic violence victim to apologize for the actions of their abuser. You should never have to apologize for the harms being done to you intentionally by others.
Polymarket
If the Yahoo finance article I recently read is to be believed, someone left a false trail of breadcrumbs pointing to a Trump loyalist as the likely culprit. The article further stated that the true identity of the owner of the account that deposited the funds could not be verified. To me, that means someone wanted to cover their tracks, yet still make it look like the President didn't have a handle on his people.
I'm going to continue coming back to the whole idea of normal throughout this screed. Why? Because most of us who live in the world of normal, would never attempt what we're seeing here.
Per federal law, gambling winnings need to be reported to the IRS as income. The organization where these funds were "liberated" from is required to furnish the liberating individual with a W-2G as a record of their winnings. Under normal circumstances this form alone would easily identify the transgressor. All of this money, and it was a significant amount, was left on the table. Whoever did this was concerned with secrecy, meaning that they were up to no good and knew it, every step of the way.
Signal Chat
Independent journalist Cam Higby, who infiltrated the anti ICE Signal chats in Minneapolis, made some interesting points about the Signal app which feed into the suspicion that Ambassador Waltz most likely did NOT accidentally add The Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg to his address book. Signal does not allow for screenshots (a security feature), so Higby had to take pictures of the conversations with another phone to archive them. The Newsweek article quoted below suggests a similar occurrence on the part of Mr. Goldberg.
“Newsweek has reproduced all the Signal group messages that were published by The Atlantic, either by being written out by Goldberg or included in the article as screenshots. It is unclear what proportion of the messages The Atlantic chose to make public, and some details were kept secret for security reasons.”
If that is the case, then Mr. Goldberg had to be “at the ready” with another device to capture the conversation(s) taking place. Now, the next question that needs to be asked is how he knew to be standing by in a high state of readiness (lying in wait) for something to happen. Again, we come back to the conclusion that someone most likely informed him of the impending conversation (or the potential for one to occur). That someone would have most likely been involved in adding his name to the group chat, unbeknownst to the rest of the participants.
Under normal circumstances, most of us usually have a handle on who we meet and add as contacts to our phones. We either reach out to these individuals, or they reach out to us as verification of the transaction. Mr. Goldberg made no such efforts to do so with Ambassador Waltz. Not only that, but while the conversation was playing out, and in its immediate aftermath, he made no effort to reach out to Mr. Waltz and inform him about what had occurred. Again, under normal circumstances, most of us would've done that. To me, this speaks volumes about Mr. Goldberg, and the conclusion that he was most likely a plant.
Heading into the midterm elections, the president as his party’s standard bearer, could be perceived to be more of a liability than an asset, given this string of embarrassments. We saw this scenario play itself out during the 2016 election cycle, when then-Speaker Ryan told Republican candidates to distance themselves from candidate Trump in what was sure to be a shellacking at the hands of Secretary Clinton.
The mechanics behind certain events tells us quite a few things. They’re indicators as to whether these events either happened on their own or were forced/contrived. Hence, the more you start digging into the aforementioned events and subjecting them to close scrutiny, the more it becomes obvious that something is rotten in the District of Columbia.
No comments:
Post a Comment