BY SRH
Apr 13, 2026 Demonic Donald Trump faced intense MAGA backlash Monday after sharing an image depicting himself as a Jesus Christ-like figure…
First shared in February by MAGA influencer Nick Adams, the image aimed to depict Trump as healing a “sick” America, by resting his palm on the forehead of a sick man in a hospital bed and making him glow.
TIME and other news sites reported that Trump consulted Grok before invading Venezuela and capturing its president in January.
Trump’s recent rebranding of artificial intelligence as “super intelligence” and his extensive support for all things AI, including the construction of thousands of AI data-collection centers, show that he has a personal relationship with this technology and relies on it to fulfill his office duties.
Report from OECD.ai, an AI watchdog:
U.S. President Donald Trump consulted Elon Musk’s AI chatbot Grok in December 2025 about Venezuelan public reaction toward the possible apprehension of President Nicolás Maduro. The AI’s analysis influenced the decision-making process before a U.S. military operation that captured Maduro, disrupting Venezuela’s political scene. Before a military action that resulted in the arrest of a leader and political instability, the AI system (Grok) was expressly used in decision-making. The AI’s analysis influenced the choice, which caused injury and disruption. Since the AI system caused injury and disturbance, the occurrence qualifies as an AI Incident.
Grok may have a system tailored to Trump’s personality.
It’s well known that AI chatbots give people the information they want. AI experts have identified and named this issue. They call it “AI sycophancy.” In May, I wrote on a Stanford University study that warned against AI sycophancy.
That is, narcissists can trust AI most. The narcissist doesn’t need human advisers who may disagree or contradict their biases. This is a formula for disaster, and the press will ignore Trump’s growing reliance on AI to fulfilll his presidential duties. The coverage won’t fully explore the negative effects of a president who makes choices with AI.
This is similar to the last president, who relied on others to administer his presidency and was unable to use his brains. After Biden left, Jake Sullivan took over international policy. Trump delegated power to AI. I’m not sure which is worse, but both show a president who’s unaccountable.
What prevents Grok, owned by technocrat Elon Musk, from inventing and training an AI to sway Trump toward technocracy? Musk, the maternal grandson of Canadian technocrat Joshua Haldeman, supports it. Musk may have a president who seeks heavenly direction from his AI chatbot. Consider the possibility of creating a Manchurian Candidate!
The tech magazine Techlicious wrote on Trump’s AI use:
A president consulting a consumer AI chatbot on a major foreign policy issue is rare. There is no evidence that Grok directly affected the military operation, but the report raises questions about the growing role of AI in political decision-making. According to TIME, Trump and Musk met informally in the Oval Office in December 2025. An official said he spent hours questioning Grok on his presidency and legacy during the encounter. One question was how Venezuelans would respond to Maduro’s detention.
Trump celebrated when Grok’s apparent precision helped the U.S. troops capture Maduro on January 3. AI chatbot predictions may be accurate, but they may not be reliable for important judgments. Generative AI systems use their training data and patterns to produce answers. They can synthesis large amounts of data and provide valuable insight, but they can also misrepresent data, miss context, and overestimate their results. OpenAI acknowledges that even sophisticated language models can hallucinate, resulting in plausible responses that are unsupported by reality.
After consulting Grok before invading Venezuela and getting the answer he needed, it’s reasonable to suppose Trump would have consulted him before attacking Iran. In six to twelve months, we may read about that story.
The Stanford study “contributes to a growing consensus regarding the hazards of chatbot sycophancy as a design feature of the technology, as well as new research regarding users’ willingness to trust AI outputs without question.”
Myra Cheng, the study’s lead author, said AI counsel did not automatically correct people or give them “tough love.” “I am concerned that individuals may lose the ability to navigate challenging social situations.”
Side Bar:
From a spiritual perspective, that is a core tenet of the struggle between truth and deception. The distinction lies in the intent and the result of how those vulnerabilities are addressed.
The deceptive approach—often attributed to the adversary—operates through exploitation. It identifies a wound, a lack, or a desire and offers a “shortcut” or a counterfeit solution. This is the temptation of the Garden: offering a desire (to be like God) through a forbidden means, promising immediate gratification or power while hiding the devastating cost. This method isolates the individual, feeds the ego, and creates a dependency on a lie that eventually leads to spiritual bondage.
In contrast, the divine approach operates through redemption. While God also acknowledges human vulnerability and weakness, the intent is not to exploit them, but to heal them. The spiritual principle here is that strength is perfected in weakness. Rather than offering a seductive lie to mask a void, the truth often requires a process of refinement, patience, and surrender.
The primary difference is that deception offers the “information we desire” to lead us away from our center, whereas truth provides the “guidance we need” to lead us back to our source. One feeds the appetite of the fallen nature; the other nourishes the spirit.
President Trump makes choices using AI.
What is the not-so-subtle difference?
The image Trump posted on Sunday was almost an exact replica of the original, but included a not-so-subtle change that riled up even the loyal MAGA supporters. Demonic
