President Donald Trump shared a bizarre, demeaning, racist AI-generated parody video featuring House Minority Leader (D-N.Y.) Hakeem Jeffries and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) earlier this week. He then doubled down and shared another offensive clip on Tuesday night, just before the government entered a shutdown. And people online are flat-out concerned that we’re all becoming numb to the president’s antics.

Trump met with Jeffries and Schumer in a high-stakes private meeting at the White House on Monday, but the top Democrats, the president and GOP leaders who were all present at the meeting failed to reach an agreement on health care funding to prevent the government from shutting down.

Democrats have been pushing for an extension to the Affordable Care Act tax credits passed during the COVID-19 pandemic to subsidize health care. Those tax credits are set to expire at the end of the year, which would result in skyrocketing monthly insurance premiums for millions of Americans. The federal government entered a shutdown early Wednesday morning.

Schumer told reporters after the meeting with Trump that there were still “very large differences,” between them, but that they all had “candid, frank discussions” and that the president was “really listening to us.”

But hours after the crucial meeting at the White House, Trump posted on social media an AI-generated video depicting Jeffries wearing a sombrero and a mustache as mariachi music played in the background. A doctored audio of Schumer depicted the senator speaking about immigrants, Latinos, Black people and trans people in a demeaning, stereotypical and derogatory manner.

“Nobody likes Democrats anymore. We have no voters left because of all of our woke, trans bullshit. Not even Black people want to vote for us anymore — even Latinos hate us. So we need new voters,” the fake audio of Schumer said, before it referenced Republicans’ false claim that Democrats are trying to give free health care to undocumented immigrants. “And we give all these illegal aliens health care, we might be able to get them on our side so they can vote for us.”

“They can’t even speak English, so they won’t realize we’re just a bunch of woke pieces of shit. At least, for a while until they learn English and realize they hate us too,” the faux Schumer continued in the AI video.

Jeffries has since responded to the video, calling it “disgusting” in an appearance on Tuesday on MSNBC’s “The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell.”

He also sent a message to Trump from Capitol Hill demanding in front of cameras that the president confront him directly next time.

“Don’t cop out through a racist and fake AI video,” he said. “When I’m back in the Oval Office, say it to my face. Say it to my face.”

But Trump had since doubled down. On Tuesday night he shared yet another AI-generated video, which again featured Jeffries with a mustache and sombrero — but this time with the addition of Trump’s face superimposed on members of a mariachi band playing music behind the representative.

Some Trump critics on X, formerly Twitter, have since called out the fact that such behavior was beneath the office of the president — especially as the country was bracing for a government shutdown. And people pointed out that while Trump has a history of sharing AI-generated videos to attack his opponents, it doesn’t mean it should be normalized.

“This vulgar AI video is not from a disturbed 12-year-old, it’s from the president of the United States,” one X user wrote in response to Trump’s first AI-generated video of Jeffries and Schumer posted on Monday. “After his med bed video, the American people can no longer ignore the stunning mental decline of Trump just over the last few days.”

“How bad is America right now? This is the level of discourse coming from the President of the United States,” wrote another.

“He’s a national embarrassment,” added the Republicans against Trump account.

Conor M. Dowling, professor of political science at University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences, believes that there “has been some desensitization” to people seeing the president share such content on social media.

“Not only to the president sharing such content, but to such content in general,” he told HuffPost.

And as it relates to the video Trump posted of Schumer and Jeffries on Monday, Dowling said it appeared that Trump was intending to “communicate that the Democrats are interested in spending health care subsidies on ‘illegal aliens’ — an intentionally derogatory and, in this case, misleading phrase.”

“And so, while the video is offensive to some, what’s potentially just as worrying is that it’s also misinforming the public about what the debate between Democrats and Republicans is truly over,” he said.

Grant Reeher, professor of political science at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, said that he believes what’s been new in recent years about the type of content Trump shares on social media is the fact that it’s “coming out under the president’s name, directly.”

“In earlier times, such things as this video — which some will find insulting, others aggravating, and others funny — were done by other people who could not be associated with the president himself (or a House Speaker, or a Senate leader),” he told HuffPost. “That was out of belief that it was important for a president to remain ‘presidential.’ To conduct himself with a certain decorum of civility, restraint, and respect.”

“But that has never been this president’s M.O. — he blew that up a long time ago,” he continued. “Is this video worse than Trump making fun of a disabled person? Worse than encouraging security at a rally to beat up a heckler? At this point, that’s a tired discussion.”

“This guy is different, and doesn’t give a damn about the tradition of the presidency. And that’s what some like about him,” he added.

Overall, Dowling said that what he finds most concerning about the AI video debacle as someone who researches and teaches about government and politics is “the increased prevalence of AI-created videos that are, in many instances, also misleading or misinforming the public.”

“While it can be difficult to sort out genuine reporting from AI-generated content, it’s important for the public to be aware that a good portion of the AI-generated content is misleading, at best, and often meant to intentionally misinform,” he later warned. “Therefore, it’s important to be able to try to identify it and call it out.”

“This thrusts a lot of cognitive effort on the part of the public, which is perhaps unfair, but an unfortunate reality of the current social media landscape,” he continued.

Fox News host Laura Ingraham recently criticized Rep. Jasmine Crockett (Texas) with a common MAGA-esque line of attack that’s often used against women and people of color.

On Friday, Ingraham reposted a video interview that featured Crockett on X, formerly Twitter. The representative had delivered remarks at a press briefing addressing the GOP’s redistricting efforts that same day. “Another reminder that having a law degree doesn’t mean you’re smart,” Ingraham wrote about Crockett on X.

The Fox News host has leveled disparaging remarks about Crockett before. In April, Ingraham and Fox News contributor Raymond Arroyo both criticized the Texas Democrat, who’s Black, by spewing racial tropes and stereotypes.

During a segment of “The Ingraham Angle,” Arroyo called Crockett the “Madea of Capitol Hill,” while Ingraham scrutinized the way the congresswoman speaks. She charged that Crockett speaks in a “very different” way than how she did in the past.

“And now she’s going very … street,” Ingraham said at the time, as she swayed her head side-to-side.

Tabitha Bonilla, an associate professor of political science and human development and social policy at Northwestern University, previously told HuffPost in response to that segment of “The Ingraham Angle,” that the labels Arroyo and Ingraham used for Crockett felt “overtly racist.”

“Dog whistles tend to be subtle — you only understand them if you know what to listen for,” she said, emphasizing that their remarks weren’t “subtle references.”

President Donald Trump has a long history of questioning the intelligence of women and people of color. Among the criticisms he’s received for disparaging people of color over their intelligence — and for using phrases like “low IQ” — is the demeaning language he’s used toward Black female journalists. He infamously told CNN’s Abby Phillip during his first term as president that she asked “stupid” questions.

And as it relates to Ingraham’s recent attack on Crockett, Kari J. Winter, a professor of American studies at the University at Buffalo whose expertise includes gender, feminism, race and class, said that the Fox News host “carries water for a president who does not know the difference between an IQ test and a basic cognitive screening for dementia.”

“The way that both of them constantly disparage the intelligence of exceptionally bright, genuinely accomplished people like Jasmine Crockett reveals, I think, a deep insecurity about their own mental capacity,” she said. “Trump in particular demonstrates the wisdom of the adage my grandma told me as a child: ‘When you point a finger, three fingers are pointing back at you.’”

“I’m confident that Crockett easily shrugs off Ingraham’s insults, considering the source,” Winter said. “What is more concerning is the way that Ingraham, Trump and their ilk are aggressively growing a culture of cruelty, conjuring up the ugliest roots of American history.”

“Like a toxic red tide, Trump and right-wing media are deliberately propagating forms of hate and sadism that have deep roots in racism, xenophobia and misogyny,” she continued.

Winter emphasized that history is proof that a political leader can “feed an appetite for cruelty,” and that it can “grow and spread to the point where no one is safe.”

“An addiction to hate is arguably the most contagious and deadly of all human diseases. No one is safe when a society celebrates violence,” she said.

Crockett is often the target of right-wing, racist and anti-Black attacks online. She’s often ridiculed for the way she speaks and her use of African American Vernacular English (AAVE). Last month, comments she made about first lady Melania Trump’s immigration history during a hearing on Capitol Hill spurred racist attacks on social media, with some X users calling her “ghetto trash,” among other derogatory statements.

Ingraham’s recent tweet about Crockett’s intelligence spurred similar disturbing responses. Winter said that Ingraham and “other rage machines” are “masters of clickbait.”

“They are determined to mesmerize their audience with nonstop spectacles of insults, cruelties and jeers,” she said.

Fox News host Jesse Watters recently made a perplexing quip about Rep. Jasmine Crockett’s (D-Texas) personal life.

During a segment of “The Five” on Thursday night, panelist Emily Compagno complained that Crockett had criticized the Trump administration’s immigration policies and its dehumanizing rhetoric surrounding immigrants during a hearing on Capitol Hill the day prior.

Watters then jumped in and attempted to take a swipe at the Democratic representative, claiming that he “researched” her and learned about her dating life.

“She’s single, she’s 43, she’s never been married,” he said about his findings on Crockett, who’s 44.

“I’m trying to figure out what makes her tick. I think I can set her up with someone. I know a guy in D.C. — he’s white, hopefully that’s not a problem — but he will make her happy,” he scoffed. “And maybe then she will not hate everybody else besides herself so much.”

“And it would be my pleasure to do it,” he added.

Watters was slammed on X, formerly Twitter, for making the misogynistic quip about Crockett, suggesting that her, or any woman’s happiness, depends on marriage. Not to mention, Crockett’s personal dating life is, of course, none of his business.

Kari J. Winter, a professor of American studies at the University at Buffalo whose expertise includes gender, feminism, race and class, said that Watters targeting Crockett — who often faces racist and anti-Black attacks online — just proves one thing about a lot of her critics:

″[They] target her with racist, misogynistic hate speech not only because they embrace sexist white supremacist values, but also because they are desperate to avoid responding to her points and policies,” she said.

“Trump’s anti-immigrant actions are illegal and unconscionable. What can his sycophants say? They have nothing. Therefore, they are 100% focused on riling up rather than informing their audience,” Winter said. “They throw out every vile, outrageous insult they can think of in order to steal our attention away from the Trump administration’s alarming, illegal, democracy-undermining actions.”

Winter added that Crockett is “whip-smart, courageous and eloquent” and that the congresswoman “understands that a just legal system is the foundation of democracy.”

Monica Cwynar, a licensed clinical social worker with Thriveworks, who specializes in trauma and coping skills, said that as a Black therapist, she believes “personal attacks, especially against women of color like Congresswoman Crockett, detract from the real issues at hand and reflect entrenched sexism and racism in our public discourse.”

“Such remarks are not only unproductive but also deeply harmful, as they overshadow important policy discussions and contribute to a culture where personal denigration is prioritized over substantive critique,” she continued.

Cwynar said that comments like Watters’ work to diminish “the voices of women in politics” and reinforce “damaging stereotypes.”

And even if Watters made the remark about Crockett in jest, making those types of comments about a woman’s relationship status — especially in a public forum — “reinforces harmful societal norms” and “perpetuates a misogynistic narrative that suggests [a woman’s] worth is tied to having a man in their lives,” Cwynar said.

In general, negative remarks about women being single can “lead to emotional harm, instilling feelings of inadequacy and shame,” she later noted, adding that “society often imposes expectations that equate a woman’s success with marriage and motherhood, which can significantly diminish her sense of self-worth and autonomy.”

Speaking about Watters’ dig at Crockett on “The Five” specifically, Cwynar said that his commentary “undermines the diverse ways women can lead fulfilling lives.”

Winter believes this is all part of Watters’ plan.

“Jesse Watters is a merchant of outrage whose career as a commentator is based on grabbing our attention by spewing shocking, hateful speech,” she said. “I’m guessing that he searches for racist, sexist stereotypes so that he has an easy stockpile to trot out day after day.”

“Perhaps the only way for people to escape from the right-wing cesspool of hate is to turn our backs and walk away,” she added. “We need to choose to focus our attention on the people, issues and work that we truly care about.”