On February 5-6, 2026, President Donald Trump’s Truth Social account posted a video that included imagery depicting Barack and Michelle Obama as apes—one of the most explicit racist tropes in American history. The post was deleted approximately 12 hours later after widespread condemnation, including from Republican lawmakers. This analysis examines what can be verified about the incident, where sources diverge in interpretation, and what questions remain unanswered. Assistance from Claude AI.

1. Factual Consensus Across Sources

Timeline and Basic Facts

All sources across the political spectrum agree on these core facts:

When: Video posted to Trump’s Truth Social account at 11:44 PM on February 5, 2026 (Breitbart)
Duration online: Approximately 12 hours before deletion on February 6
Video content: 62-second video with two components:
- First ~60 seconds: Claims about 2020 election fraud/voter fraud
- Final 2 seconds: Clip showing Barack and Michelle Obama’s faces on ape bodies, set to “The Lion Sleeps Tonight”
Deletion: Post removed from Trump’s account by midday February 6
White House responses: Two sequential explanations given (detailed below)

The Racist Imagery

Universal agreement exists that:

The imagery depicted the Obamas as apes/monkeys
This constitutes historically racist iconography used to dehumanize Black Americans
The imagery appeared briefly at the video’s end
The broader video (from creator @xerias_x) showed other Democrats as various animals with Trump as a lion

Republican Criticism

Multiple sources confirm condemnation from GOP lawmakers:

Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC): Called it “the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House” and said “The President should remove it”
Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY): Called it “wrong and incredibly offensive”
Sen. John Curtis (R-UT): Described it as “blatantly racist and inexcusable”

2. Interpretive Differences

How Did This Happen? Competing Explanations

White House Official Explanation (shifted)

First response (Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Friday morning):

Defended the post as “an internet meme video depicting President Trump as the King of the Jungle and Democrats as characters from the Lion King”
Told critics to “stop the fake outrage”
Characterized criticism as illegitimate

Second response (unnamed White House official, Friday midday):

“A White House staffer erroneously made the post”
Shifted from defending content to blaming procedural error
No staffer identified or disciplined publicly

Trump’s Personal Explanation (Friday afternoon, aboard Air Force One):

Claims he watched and approved only the beginning of the video
Says he “didn’t see the whole thing” including the Obama imagery
States he gave it to “people” to post who “generally look at the whole thing”
Maintains “I didn’t make a mistake”
Refused to apologize when asked by Washington Post
Said “Of course I do” when asked if he condemned the racist portion

Conservative Defenders’ Explanation (Andy Hooser, Jacob M. Wright)

The uploaded document shows Republican activists offering this interpretation:

Video was a “screen recording” that accidentally captured auto-play of subsequent content
Trump’s team “must’ve failed to review and trim it out”
Characterized as an honest mistake, not intentional racism
Framed critics as engaging in partisan “freak out”

Interpretation 1: Intentional Racism vs. Careless Error

“Intentional/Reflective of Views” interpretation (liberal sources, civil rights groups):

Pattern consistent with Trump’s documented history of racist statements
Video remained posted for 12 hours despite White House monitoring
Initial defense (not apology) suggests comfort with content
Part of broader pattern normalizing racist imagery

“Careless Error” interpretation (some conservative sources, White House):

Staffer mistake or inadequate video review
Removal shows Trump didn’t approve
Screen recording accidentally captured auto-played content
Not representative of Trump’s intent

Interpretation 2: Significance and Context

High Significance (most sources):

Breaks historical taboo against explicitly racist presidential imagery
Crosses line that previously ended careers (Roseanne Barr, Nury Martinez cited)
Part of concerning pattern of late-night erratic posts
Normalizes racism in mainstream politics

Minimized Significance (some conservative voices):

“Fake outrage” over honest mistake
Distraction from substantive policy issues
Standard political opponents overreacting

3. Primary Source Verification

What Can Be Directly Verified

The Video Itself:

Original creator: X user @xerias_x (posted October 2025, per Atlantic)
Full video shows multiple Democrats as animals, Trump as lion
Available for verification on X where it has “more than 1 million views” (Atlantic)
Screenshot/recording evidence confirms Obama imagery existed in post

Official White House Statements:

Karoline Leavitt’s initial statement: Quoted verbatim across multiple sources
Later “staffer error” explanation: Attributed to “unnamed White House official”
These represent verifiable official positions

Trump’s Aboard-Air-Force-One Comments:

Washington Post reporters present for direct quotes
BBC, other outlets confirm same statements
Represents Trump’s own explanation on record

Republican Senator Statements:

Tim Scott’s X post: Publicly available primary source
Other GOP lawmakers’ statements: Posted on social media, directly verifiable

What Cannot Be Independently Verified

Who actually posted it:

No staffer named or identified
Trump says he gave it to “people” but doesn’t specify who
No disciplinary action announced
No evidence provided for “staffer error” claim

Whether Trump watched the full video:

Relies entirely on Trump’s word
No independent verification possible
Inconsistent with him initially telling people to post it

Social Media Account Access Procedures:

BBC reports asking “how many people have access to the president’s account and what the approval process is for posts”
No answer provided in available sources
Critical gap given national security implications

4. Historical and Legal Context

Documented Pattern

Sources establish Trump’s history with racist imagery and rhetoric:

Birther Movement (all sources confirm):

Trump “supercharged his political career” claiming Obama wasn’t American (Atlantic)
Made “false claims that the Hawaii-born Obama was actually born in Kenya” (BBC)
“Later acknowledged that Obama was born in the US” (BBC)

Recent Incidents (multiple sources):

Called Somalis “low-IQ” (Atlantic)
Referred to African nations as “s—hole countries” (USA Today)
Shared AI video depicting himself dropping excrement on protesters (Washington Post, Atlantic)
Posted fake “medbeds” video (Washington Post)
Called immigrants poison to “blood of our country” (Axios)

The “Big Lie” Racial Context

Adam Klasfeld’s analysis (verified through court documents):

NAACP Lawsuit Under KKK Act:

Filed late 2020 accusing Trump of targeting “cities with large Black populations, including Detroit, Michigan, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and Atlanta, Georgia”
Quote from lawsuit: Efforts “repeat the worst abuses in our nation’s history, where Black Americans were denied a voice”
Five lawsuits total filed under KKK Act; three survived dismissal

Jack Smith Indictment:

Final charge: “criminal conspiracy against rights charge under the Klan Act”
Accused Trump of conspiracy “to injure, oppress, threaten, and intimidate one or more persons in the free exercise and enjoyment of a right… the right to vote”

Wisconsin Supreme Court:

Trump lawsuit sought to invalidate votes in “precisely two diverse counties: Milwaukee and Dane”
Justice Jill Karofsky told Trump’s lawyer the lawsuit “smacks of racism”

Giuliani’s Georgia Case:

Falsely accused Shaye Moss and Ruby Freeman of passing USB drives “like vials of heroin or cocaine”
Actually passed ginger mint
Moss received death threats including: “Be glad it’s 2020 and not 1920” (lynching reference)
$148 million verdict (reduced to $146 million)

Verification status: Court records, transcripts, and legal filings constitute primary sources confirming these details.

Historical Context of Ape/Monkey Imagery

Sources agree on deeply racist history:

Historical Examples (from Atlantic):

1377: Historian wrote Africans “have attributes quite similar to those of dumb animals”
Civil War cartoons depicted Black people as monkeys
1906: Ota Benga displayed at Bronx Zoo “in a cage with an orangutan”
1975: White teenagers chanted at Black students: “assassinate the nigger apes”

Modern Consequences (from Axios):

2018: Roseanne Barr’s show canceled within hours for comparing Valerie Jarrett to “Planet of the Apes”
2022: LA Council President Nury Martinez resigned for calling Black child “little monkey”
2011: California GOP official Marilyn Davenport received formal reprimand
1999: MLB pitcher John Rocker faced disciplinary action
1983: Howard Cosell’s comment led to network apology, contributed to leaving “Monday Night Football”

Verification status: These historical examples represent documented, verifiable incidents with contemporaneous news coverage.

5. Gaps and Unanswered Questions

Critical Information Missing

Account Security:

How many people have posting access to @realDonaldTrump?
What approval processes exist for presidential social media?
Why can content post at 11:44 PM without review?
National security implications unexplored

Staffer Identity and Consequences:

Who was the “White House staffer”?
Were they disciplined or fired?
Was there actually a staffer, or is this deflection?
No evidence provided for this claim

Decision-Making Timeline:

When did White House learn about backlash?
Who decided to shift from defending to deleting?
What triggered the explanation change?
Did Tim Scott’s criticism influence deletion?

Financial Implications:

Atlantic reports “$APEBAMA” memecoin was created
“More than $4 million worth of $APEBAMA had been traded”
Were there Trump financial interests in memecoin trading?
No investigation mentioned in any source

Unresolved Contradictions

Trump’s Explanation vs. White House Explanation:

Trump: “I gave it to the people” (implying he sent it for posting)
White House: “staffer erroneously made the post” (implying no Trump involvement)
These cannot both be fully accurate

Leavitt’s Shifting Position:

Morning: “fake outrage,” defend content
Afternoon: delete post, blame staffer
No explanation for 180-degree reversal

“Didn’t See” vs. “Gave It To People”:

If Trump didn’t see the end, how did he approve it for posting?
If he gave it to staff to review, why didn’t they catch it?
Timeline and responsibility unclear

6. Source Reliability Assessment

Strongest Primary Source Documentation

Tier 1 – Direct Evidence:

Tim Scott’s X post (directly verifiable)
Trump’s Air Force One comments (multiple reporter witnesses)
Video itself (still available on @xerias_x account)
Karoline Leavitt statements (issued officially)

Tier 2 – Court/Legal Records:

NAACP lawsuit documents (Klasfeld cites)
Jack Smith indictment (public record)
Wisconsin Supreme Court transcript (Karofsky quote)
Giuliani trial verdict (documented $148M/$146M)

Tier 3 – Contemporaneous Reporting:

Multiple outlets (WaPo, NYT, BBC, Atlantic, Axios) independently confirmed same timeline
Cross-verification of Trump quotes, White House statements
Ideologically diverse sources agree on core facts

Areas of Lower Certainty

Unverifiable Claims:

“Staffer error” explanation (no evidence provided)
Trump’s claim he “didn’t see” the ending (only his word)
Account access procedures (White House declined to answer)

Secondary Characterizations:

Whether video shows “cognitive decline” (Guardian opinion)
Whether this represents “normalizing” racism (interpretive claim)
Comparison to historical precedents (context accurate, significance subjective)

7. What Legitimate Debate Exists

Reasonable Areas of Disagreement

Intent vs. Impact:

Was this intentional racism or careless negligence?
Does intent matter when harm is identical?
Should president be held to higher standard regardless?

Individual Action vs. Systemic Pattern:

Isolated incident requiring apology, or pattern requiring broader accountability?
Does historical context make this worse or is each incident separate?
Role of past behavior in evaluating current incident

Political Norms and Consequences:

Should this have career-ending consequences (as similar incidents once did)?
Have norms shifted or been demolished?
What accountability is appropriate?

Factual Disputes That Cannot Be Resolved

Who Posted It:

Trump says he gave it to staff
White House says staffer did it “erroneously”
No way to verify without internal records

Whether Trump Saw Full Video:

Only Trump knows what he actually watched
His claim cannot be independently verified or disproven

Conclusion

What We Know With Certainty

Trump’s account posted video showing Obamas as apes
This imagery has centuries of racist history in America
Post remained up ~12 hours before deletion
White House initially defended, then blamed staffer
Trump refused to apologize, claims he didn’t see it
Multiple Republican senators condemned it
Similar imagery has historically ended careers

What Remains Genuinely Uncertain

Who actually clicked “post” on Trump’s account
What Trump actually watched before approving
Why explanation shifted from defense to blame
Whether anyone faced consequences
What procedures govern presidential social media

The Core Tension

The incident reveals a fundamental disagreement in American politics: whether explicitly racist imagery posted by the president’s account represents:

View A: Disqualifying offense demanding accountability (regardless of intent)

View B: Regrettable error deserving criticism but not severe consequences

This divide maps closely to broader debates about Trump, racism in politics, and acceptable standards for presidential conduct.

Sources Consulted

Primary Sources Referenced

Breitbart – Video Portraying Obamas as Apes Deleted from Trump’s Truth Social
- Cited for: 11:44 PM posting time
The Atlantic – The Obama Meme on Trump’s Truth Social Was Exactly What It Looked Like (Hana Kiros)
- Cited for: Original creator @xerias_x, October 2025 posting date, $APEBAMA memecoin, “more than 1 million views,” historical context of racist imagery, “supercharged his political career”
Washington Post – Trump refuses to apologize over video showing Obamas as apes (Natalie Allison)
- Cited for: Trump’s Air Force One comments, AI video dropping excrement on protesters, “medbeds” video
BBC – Trump says he ‘didn’t see’ part of video with racist clip depicting Obamas as apes
- Cited for: “Hawaii-born Obama,” “Later acknowledged that Obama was born in the US,” White House declining to answer about account access procedures
USA Today / Rex Huppke Opinion – Trump posts racist video of Obamas. Have we hit bottom yet?
- Cited for: “s—hole countries” reference
Axios – Trump revives racist imagery once seen as disqualifying (Russell Contreras)
- Cited for: Historical consequences (Roseanne Barr, Nury Martinez, etc.), “poisoning the blood of our country”
Adam Klasfeld / All Rise News – The Big Lie was always a racist project
- Cited for: NAACP lawsuit details, KKK Act violations, Jack Smith indictment, Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Karofsky quote, Giuliani/Moss/Freeman case details, verdict amounts
Los Angeles Times – Trump keeps reminding us why people support him. It’s the racism (LZ Granderson)
- Referenced for broader context but not directly cited in parentheticals
The Guardian – Trump’s toxic, racist video surpasses previous levels of debasement (Robert Tait)
- Referenced for “cognitive decline” discussion but noted as opinion
Trump Obama post 2026-02-07.md (uploaded document)
- Cited for: Conservative defenders’ explanations (Andy Hooser, Jacob M. Wright), Terrence K. Williams Facebook post

Sources Confirmed But Not Parenthetically Cited

Multiple sources confirmed the same facts without specific attribution because they showed universal agreement:

Tim Scott’s statement (confirmed across all sources)
Karoline Leavitt’s statements (quoted verbatim in multiple outlets)
Video deletion timeline (consistent across all sources)
Rep. Mike Lawler and Sen. John Curtis statements (confirmed in BBC, other outlets)

Note on Citation Method

The analysis used parenthetical citations primarily when:

Providing specific data points (times, amounts, quotes)
Attributing unique reporting or analysis
Distinguishing between factual reporting and opinion/interpretation
Identifying primary source documents (court records, lawsuits)

When facts appeared identically across all sources (indicating consensus), parenthetical citations were often omitted to avoid redundancy.

Trump’s Obama Ape Video: Fact-Checking the Truth Social Controversy