Heightened levels of calls for drastic actions against former President Barack Obama have surged on social media, recent reports suggest, following controversial allegations from the Trump administration.

Allegations that Obama orchestrated a coup against his successor, Donald Trump, have resulted in a dramatic rise in online threats, according to a liberal watchdog group, as Newsmax reports.

The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism (GPAHE) identified a sharp increase in violent rhetoric following accusations from Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. She alleged that Obama, alongside his former national security team, attempted to undermine Trump's presidency after the 2016 election.

Threat increase observed

Since the recent criminal referrals of Obama-era officials to the Department of Justice, there has been a substantial rise in discussions calling for Obama's imprisonment or execution. On the Truth Social platform alone, these mentions soared by 1,100%, while similar rhetoric saw a 430% spike on Gab. Previously absent from Telegram, such sentiments have appeared there as well, escalating from zero to 12 comments.

The White House stood firm against the surge in hostile commentary. "President Trump and the entire administration strongly condemn all forms of violence," Davis Ingle, a spokesperson, told Newsweek. Ingle reiterated that the administration supports legal accountability for all those engaging in unlawful activities.

In a report issued by GPAHE, the organization argues that inflammatory language from leaders such as Trump and Gabbard exacerbate these trends. They contend that the Trump administration's rhetoric sparks dangerous reactions among extremists, leading to the normalization of harmful discourse.

Controversial allegations emerge

The basis of Gabbard's accusations involves claims that Obama and his team fabricated evidence pointing to Russian influence favoring Trump in the 2016 election. According to Gabbard, this alleged deception aimed to tarnish Trump's administration.

"I am not an attorney, but as I have said previously, when you look at the intent behind creating a fake, manufactured intelligence document that directly contradicts multiple assessments created by the intelligence community," Gabbard stated. She suggested that actions taken represented not only a coup but a treasonous conspiracy.

Critics remain skeptical of the legitimacy of these claims, with GPAHE focusing on the content's divisive impact on public discourse. Heidi Beirich and Wendy Via, former leaders of the Southern Poverty Law Center, head the GPAHE, which continues to examine extremist rhetoric in online spaces.

Broader implications of harsh rhetoric

GPAHE emphasized the role of social media in amplifying hatred and division, pointing to escalations whenever public figures engage in aggressive online posts targeting specific individuals or groups. They argue that such actions can dismantle the democratic ideals and civil discourse necessary for societal stability.

This recent report raises questions about the responsibility of influential public figures in curtailing dangerous rhetoric. It emphasizes the need for accountability in framing public discussions around contentious issues.

As the narrative continues to unfold, it remains crucial to monitor the broader impact of such dialogues on society and ensure actions counter hate-fueled extremism.

Working to reduce online extremism

Measures to tackle the rise in extremist content are of increasing concern among policymakers and watchdog groups. Those promoting inclusionare calling for strategic steps to mitigate online expressions of violence.

In addressing these challenges, organizations like GPAHE are pushing for stronger enforcement of existing policies against hate speech and calls to violence across social media platforms.

The ongoing discourse underscores the need for ongoing vigilance and comprehensive strategies to curb the proliferation of harmful narratives online, maintaining democratic principles at their core.