In an unprecedented move, the White House response to nationwide “No Kings” protests came not in the form of a written statement, but as a crude AI-generated video. The clip, which showed a cartoonish President Trump wearing a crown and dropping waste on demonstrators from a fighter jet, has ignited a firestorm of criticism and raised questions about the erosion of democratic norms.
The protests themselves were a massive display of civic engagement. With millions participating from coast to coast, the marches were a direct response to concerns over expanding executive power. Prominent political figures joined citizens in carrying signs that read “The Constitution Is Not Optional,” framing the event as a defense of democratic institutions against monarchical ambitions.
Amid ‘No Kings’ uprising, Trump shares AI video of himself flying fighter jet, dropping 💩on protesters pic.twitter.com/hqSzuugBkx
— The Shot Review (@GloryHoleshow) October 19, 2025
The president’s chosen method of reply, however, stunned observers and participants alike. By using artificial intelligence to create a video that literally shat on protesters, the administration moved beyond policy debate into the realm of personal insult and degradation. The use of the song “Danger Zone” added a layer of irony, as the artist, Kenny Loggins, had previously condemned the unauthorized use of his music in political contexts.
Following the video’s release, the president continued to downplay the significance of the protests. In media appearances, he labeled the turnout “very small” and the participants “whacked out,” despite visual evidence and organizer reports to the contrary. This dismissal was echoed by allies in Congress, who branded the peaceful assemblies as “Hate America” protests, further polarizing the political atmosphere.
The entire episode represents a significant shift in how political dissent is addressed by those in power. The “No Kings” coalition issued a statement lamenting that the administration was focused on creating mocking videos instead of addressing pressing issues like a government shutdown. The clash is no longer merely about policy differences, but about the fundamental respect afforded to citizens who peacefully petition their government.
