NEW YORK (AP) — An estimated 24.6 million television viewers watched President Donald Trump’s second inauguration, the smallest audience for the quadrennial ceremony since Barack Obama’s second inauguration in 2013.

The Nielsen Company said Tuesday that viewership was down from Joe Biden’s 2021 inauguration, which reached 33.8 million, and Trump’s first move into the White House, seen by 30.6 million in 2017.

Inauguration viewership has varied widely over the past half-century, from a high of 41.8 million when Ronald Reagan came into office in 1981 to a low of 15.5 million for the start of George W. Bush’s second term in 2004.

The length of Trump’s inauguration coverage may have hurt him in bragging rights. The 24.6 million figure represents the average number of people tuning in to coverage on one of 15 networks between 10:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Eastern. In past years, the coverage didn’t go on for so long, which meant the averages were likely higher because people tune away as the day goes on.

Nielsen had no immediate estimate, for example, of how many people watched Trump up until 4 p.m. Eastern, the cutoff point for most inauguration coverage in the past.

There’s no doubt where most viewers gravitated on Monday: Fox News Channel had 10.3 million viewers between 11:30 a.m. and 1 p.m., when Trump was sworn in and gave his inaugural speech. In that same period, ABC had 4.7 million viewers, NBC had 4.4 million, CBS had 4.1 million, CNN had 1.7 million and MSNBC had 848,000, Nielsen said.

Four years ago, 13.4 million people watched Biden’s inauguration on CNN and MSNBC, compared to only 2.4 million on Fox News.

David Bauder writes about media for the AP. Follow him at http://x.com/dbauder and https://bsky.app/profile/dbauder.bsky.social

The Manchester Fire Department responded to a report of a serious motor vehicle collision at the intersection of West Center and Cooper Streets on Tuesday afternoon, according to a post on social media.

Fire officials said two people were ejected and located under one of the cars. According to fire officials, they were quickly rescued without having to lift the vehicle.

Four people in total were transported to local hospitals by fire department paramedics, fire officials said. Three of the victims were suffering from potentially life-threatening injuries, according to fire officials. Their statuses were unknown.

No further information was available at this time.

Peeler’s crimes horrified the state.

He was convicted of shooting to death 8-year old Leroy “B.J.” Brown and his mother Karen Clarke in January 1999 on orders from his older brother Russell Peeler, his partner in their Bridgeport drug gang. Prosecutors said the brothers wanted to eliminate B.J. as a witness against Russell, who was about to be tried for killing Clarke’s boyfriend, a rival Bridgeport drug dealer Rudolf Snead.

B.J. told police he and another boy were sitting in Snead’s car and he saw Russell Peeler shoot and wound Snead in a 1997 drive-by attack. Snead survived but was slain later.

Adrian Peeler was eventually sentenced to a total of 60 years in prison for his crimes, 25 years on state charges for conspiring to murder Clarke and her son and 35 on federal drug trafficking charges.

Russell Peeler was convicted of ordering the murders of Clarke and B.J. He was sentenced to death in state Superior Court. His death sentence was later commuted to life in prison without the possibility of release after the death sentence was abolished in Connecticut.

Adrian Peeler also faced a death sentence at one point for shooting B.J and his mother. But his jury convicted him of murder conspiracy and he was sentenced to a total of 25 years.

Local law enforcement officials were trying to obtain information about the commutation Tuesday. Normally, the White House or U.S. justice department notify local and federal prosecutors of such decisions in advance, giving them a chance to bring challenges.

No advance notifications were given in Adrian Peeler’s case nor in those of 13 other Connecticut criminals whose sentences Biden also commuted on Friday, the local officials said.

Adrian Peeler’s two sentences were ordered to be served concurrently. He completed the state murder conspiracy sentence in December 2021 and was transferred to federal custody. A month earlier, now retired U.S. District Judge Janet B. Arterton reduced Peeler’s federal sentence to 15 years from 35 years because of a sentencing reform law.

If not for the commutation, Adrian Peeler would not have been released until October 2033. Because of Biden’s order he is now scheduled for release on July 16.

The Peeler case sparked a number of state law enforcement reforms, including programs designed to protect witnesses in criminal cases.

Adrian Peeler and the other 13 Connecticut criminals were among 2,490 prison inmates whose sentences were commuted Friday by Biden. In a statement released Friday,. Biden said the commutations were made to correct unfair sentencing disparities.

“Today’s clemency action provides relief for individuals who received lengthy sentences based on discredited distinctions between crack and powder cocaine, as well as outdated sentencing enhancements for drug crimes,” Biden said in a statement. “This action is an important step toward righting historic wrongs, correcting sentencing disparities, and providing deserving individuals the opportunity to return to their families and communities after spending far too much time behind bars.”

No one from the prior administration could be reached to discuss the commutations late Tuesday.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Many Republican senators say they do not agree with President Donald Trump’s decision to pardon and commute sentences for more than 1,500 people who assaulted police officers, broke into the building or committed other crimes related to the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol four years ago.

“We’re not looking backwards, we’re looking forward,” said Senate Majority Leader John Thune, repeating his frequent response to questions about Trump’s promises of retribution from his first term.

Thune did not say whether he supported or opposed the pardons, which rattled many on Capitol Hill who lived through the attack and fled the mob of Trump’s supporters as they violently broke into the building and halted the certification of President Joe Biden’s victory.

Republican Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota said he would have preferred “a more surgical approach” to the pardons, looking at them case by case. “It’s not ideal in my mind,” Cramer said. “But I do think I understand the spirit of it, and I’m comfortable with it … hopefully we move forward now.”

Sen. Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., agreed.

“It’s a hard one, because we work with them up here,” Tuberville said of the Capitol Police who were beaten by the rioters and guard lawmakers every day. “At the end of the day, we’ve got to get Jan. 6 behind us.”

Moving beyond the attack on the Capitol — and downplaying its violence — have become a central approach for congressional Republicans who have enthusiastically re-embraced Trump after his 2020 defeat and his attempts to overturn Biden’s win. And the muted GOP response to his sweeping pardons of both non-violent and violent Jan. 6 rioters was another display of their longtime strategy of praising Trump when they agree and ignoring him when they don’t.

“We’re looking forward and beyond on other policy issues,” said West Virginia Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, a member of Republican leadership.

The pardons, part of a flurry of executive orders on Trump’s first day in office, immediately upended what had become the largest prosecution in Justice Department history and freed criminals who brutally beat police and members of far-right extremist groups determined to stop Biden from assuming office. More than 100 police officers were injured. Some were never able to fully return to work.

Many prominent Republicans, including Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, Vice President JD Vance and Attorney General nominee Pam Bondi, had suggested that Trump would review the cases individually. But, as he had long promised, Trump’s actions were much more sweeping.

In defending Trump’s move, Republicans have also been able to point to Biden’s own flurry of preemptive pardons, including of his own family and House members who investigated the Jan. 6 attack, as he left office.

“How come everybody’s asking me about January 6th? Aren’t you going to ask me about the Biden pardons?” asked Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa.

“What we should be focusing on is the Biden pardons,” Kansas Sen. Roger Marshall said angrily as reporters asked him about the clemency for Jan. 6 rioters.

Many Democrats said they disagreed with Biden’s actions, as well. Connecticut Sen. Richard Blumenthal said that he opposed the preemptive pardons, and was frustrated that they gave Trump “an argument — even though it’s a false argument — to pardon the Jan. 6 insurrectionists as well.”

A few Republicans said they agreed with Trump.

New Ohio Sen. Bernie Moreno said that he appreciates Capitol Police officers, but “nobody’s been treated worse” than the rioters. Wyoming Sen. Cynthia Lummis said she is “so glad those people are out of jail.”

More than 200 people convicted of Jan. 6 crimes were released from federal Bureau of Prisons custody by Tuesday morning, officials told The Associated Press.

A few Republican senators said they opposed the pardons, even as they appeared resigned to the idea. North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis said he has an “honest disagreement” with the president over pardoning violent offenders. South Dakota Sen. Mike Rounds said he couldn’t defend them.

Maine Sen. Susan Collins said she had received a message from a police officer who sent her a video of his assault. “I don’t disagree with him at all,” she said. “People who committed violent crimes on January 6th, 2021, should not be pardoned.”

The pardons by both Trump and Biden “erodes public confidence,” she said.

Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she was disappointed in the pardons, and pointed to a police officer who was guarding Republicans as they entered their weekly luncheon.

“I do fear the message that is sent to these great men and women that stood by us,” Murkowski said.

Associated Press writers Stephen Groves, Lisa Mascaro and Ellen Knickmeyer contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department has reassigned key senior officials across multiple divisions as part of a leadership shakeup ahead of the expected confirmation of President Donald Trump’s pick for attorney general, Pam Bondi, multiple people familiar with the matter said Tuesday.

Another affected official is George Toscas, a veteran deputy assistant attorney general in the department’s national security division who, in addition to helping oversee major terrorism and espionage investigations, has also been a key supervisor in politically charged probes over the last decade including into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information and Trump’s hoarding of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate.

A Justice Department spokesman did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

The reasons for the moves were not immediately known. Though it is common for a new administration to appoint its own political hires at the top of the Justice Department, it is not standard for career lawyers to be reassigned. They serve the department across administrations and typically retain their positions even when control of the department changes hands.

The moves could foreshadow additional changes given Trump’s keen interest in the Justice Department, which investigated him in his first term through a special counsel and then indicted him twice last year in separate cases that never reached trial and were withdrawn after Trump’s November election win. A key veteran prosecutor in the classified documents case, Jay Bratt, retired earlier this month.

Trump’s fury over the investigations has raised alarms that he could seek to use the law enforcement powers of the department to pursue retaliation against his adversaries.

On his first day in office Monday, he pardoned, commuted the prison sentences or vowed to dismiss the cases of all of the 1,500-plus people charged with crimes in the Jan. 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot, including people convicted of assaulting police officers. The reassignments were first reported by the Washington Post.

Officers responded to a disturbance at Urban Air, located at 220 Hale Road, just after 4:30 p.m. on Saturday, according to the Manchester Police Department.

A parent of a 14-year-old called 911 and reported that her son was assaulted during an altercation and alleged that one of the individuals involved had a firearm, police said.

The parent told officers approximately six individuals were involved in the disturbance and fled the scene on foot, according to police.

Multiple officers were dispatched to locate the suspects. Based on witness descriptions, officers reportedly observed the suspects entering a vehicle.

Police immediately stopped the vehicle, which was being driven by an adult with juvenile passengers. According to police, some of the occupants were uncooperative and refused to get out of the car.

During the investigation, officers reportedly found a bag with a facsimile firearm in the vehicle. Police said the gun appeared to be painted black, including the original orange tip, to make it look real.

Additionally, officers reportedly discovered a discarded bag near the incident that contained a large knife and clothing that matched the description of one of the juveniles, according to police.

Two juveniles, ages 14 and 15 years old, were arrested and charged with carrying a facsimile firearm, second-degree breach of peace, second-degree threatening, reckless endangerment, third-degree assault and tampering with evidence.

Police said the juveniles were taken to juvenile detention on an order to detain.

The incident remains under investigation, according to police.

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump’s administration is directing that all federal diversity, equity and inclusion staff be put on paid leave, and that agencies develop plans to lay them off, according to a memo Tuesday from the Office of Personnel Management.

The memo follows an executive order Trump signed on his first day ordering a sweeping dismantling of the federal government’s diversity and inclusion programs that could touch on everything from anti-bias training to funding for minority farmers and homeowners.

The memo direct agencies to place DEI office staffers on paid leave by 5 p.m. Wednesday and take down all public DEI-focused webpages by the same deadline. Several federal departments had removed the webpages even before the memorandum.

By Thursday, federal agencies are directed to compile a list of federal DEI offices and workers as of Election Day. By next Friday they are expected to develop a list to execute a “reduction-in-force action” against those federal workers.

THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. AP’s earlier story follows below.

NEW YORK (AP) — President Donald Trump has ordered a sweeping dismantling of the federal government’s diversity and inclusion programs that could include everything from anti-bias training to funding for minority farmers and homeowners.

That step is the first salvo in an aggressive campaign to upend DEI efforts nationwide, including leveraging the Justice Department and other agencies to investigate private companies pursuing training and hiring practices that conservative critics consider discriminatory against non-minority groups such as white men.

The executive order picks up where Trump’s first administration left off: One of Trump’s final acts during his first term was an executive order banning federal agency contractors and recipients of federal funding from conducting anti-bias training that addressed concepts like systemic racism. Biden promptly rescinded that order on his first day in office and issued a pair of executive orders — now rescinded — outlining a plan to promote DEI throughout the federal government.

While many changes may take months or even years to implement, Trump’s new anti-DEI agenda is more aggressive than his first and comes amid far more amenable terrain in the corporate world. Prominent companies companies from Walmart to Facebook have already scaled back or ended some of their diversity practices in response to Trump’s election and conservative-backed lawsuits against them.

Here’s a look at some of the policies and programs that Trump will aim to dismantle:

Diversity offices, training and accountability

Trump’s order will immediately gut Biden’s wide-ranging effort to embed diversity and inclusion practices in the federal workforce, the nation’s largest at about 2.4 million people.

Biden had mandated all agencies to develop a diversity plan, issue yearly progress reports and contribute data for a government-wide dashboard to track demographic trends in hiring and promotions. The administration also set up Chief Diversity Officers Council to oversee implementation of the DEI plan. The government’s released its first DEI progress report in 2022 that included demographic data for federal workforce, which is about 60% white and 55% male overall, and more than 75% white and more than 60% male at the senior executive level.

Trump’s executive order will toss out equity plans developed by federal agencies and terminate any roles or offices dedicated to promoting diversity. That will likely include eliminating initiatives such DEI-related training or diversity goals in performance reviews.

Federal grant and benefits programs

Trump’s order paves the way for an aggressive but bureaucratically complicated overhaul of billions of dollars in federal spending that conservative activists claim unfairly carve out preference for racial minorities and women.

The order does not specify which programs it will target but mandates a government-wide review to ensure that contracts and grants are compliant with the Trump’s administration anti-DEI stance. It also proposes that the federal government settle ongoing lawsuits against federal programs that benefit historically underserved communities, including some that date back decades.

Trump’s executive order is “seismic shift and a complete change in the focus and direction of the federal government,” said Dan Lennington, deputy council for the conservative Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty, which has pursued several lawsuits against federal programs. The institute recently released an influential report listing dozens of programs the Trump administration should consider dismantling, such credits for minority farmers or emergency relief assistance for majority-Black neighborhoods.

He acknowledged that unwinding some entrenched programs may be difficult. For example, the Treasury Department implements housing and other assistance programs through block grants to states that have their own methods for implementing diversity criteria.

Pay equity and hiring practices

It’s not clear whether the Trump administration will target every initiative that stemmed from Biden’s DEI executive order.

For example, the Biden administration banned federal agencies from asking about an applicant’s salary history when setting compensation, a practice many civil rights activists say perpetuates pay disparities for women and people of color.

It took three years for the Biden administration to issue the final regulations, and Trump would have to embark on a similar rule-making process, including a notice and comment period, to rescind it, said Chiraag Bains, former deputy director of the White House Domestic Policy Council under Biden and now a nonresident senior fellow with Brookings Metro.

Noreen Farrell, executive director of gender rights group Equal Rights Advocates, said that she was hopeful that the Trump administration “will not go out of its way to undo the rule,” which she said has proved popular in some state and cities that have enacted similar policies.

And Biden’s DEI plan encompassed some initiatives with bipartisan support, said Bains. For example, he tasked the Chief Diversity Officers Executive Council with expanding federal employment opportunities for those with criminal record. That initiatives stems from the Fair Chance Act, which Trump signed into law in 2019 and bans federal agencies and contractors from asking about applicants criminal history before a conditional job offer is made.

Bains said that’s what Biden’s DEI policies were about: ensuring that the federal government was structured to include historically marginalized communities, not institute “reverse discrimination against white men.”

Despite the sweeping language of Trump’s order, Farrell said “the reality of implementing such massive structural changes is far more complex.”

“Federal agencies have deeply embedded policies and procedures that can’t simply be switched off overnight,” she added.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Officers enforcing immigration laws will now be able to arrest migrants at sensitive locations like schools and churches after the Trump administration threw out policies limiting where those arrests could happen.

“This action empowers the brave men and women in CBP and ICE to enforce our immigration laws and catch criminal aliens — including murderers and rapists — who have illegally come into our country. Criminals will no longer be able to hide in America’s schools and churches to avoid arrest,” the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement Tuesday.

The ICE guidance dates back to 2011. Customs and Border Protection issued similar guidance in 2013.

Trump has made cracking down on immigration a top priority, just as he did during his first term in the White House from 2017 to 2021. On Monday he signed a slew of executive actions that included cutting off access to an app that facilitated the entry of hundreds of thousands of migrants; suspending the refugee system; and promoting greater cooperation between ICE and local and state governments.

He has often portrayed his efforts as unleashing the ability of ICE agents and others in immigration enforcement from Biden-era guidelines that he said restricted their efforts to find and remove people who no longer have the authority to remain in the country.

The announcement Tuesday had been expected as Trump works to deliver on his campaign promise to carry out mass deportations of anyone in the country illegally. But it was still jarring for advocates who have argued that raising the prospect of deportation at churches, schools or hospitals can prevent migrants from getting medical attention or allowing their children to attend school.

“This action could have devastating consequences for immigrant families and their children, including U.S. citizen children, deterring them from receiving medical attention, seeking out disaster relief, attending school, and carrying out everyday activities,” the Center for Law and Social Policy said in a statement.

“Should ICE presence near such locations become more common, the likelihood also increases that children could witness a parent’s detention, arrest, or other encounters with ICE agents,” the organization said.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Senators vetting the nomination of Pete Hegseth for defense secretary received an affidavit Tuesday from a former sister-in-law alleging that the onetime Fox News host was abusive to his second wife, to the point where she feared for her safety. Hegseth denies the allegations.

The affidavit describes Hegseth’s treatment of his second wife, Samantha, and alleges repeat drunkenness and a domestic situation where Samantha Hegseth had a safe word to indicate if she was in danger at home. Danielle Hegseth said Samantha texted that safe word to her sometime in 2015 or 2016, which prompted her to call a third party for help.

“I have chosen to come forward publicly, at significant personal sacrifice, because I am deeply concerned by what Hegseth’s confirmation would mean for our military and our country,” she said.

An attorney for Pete Hegseth vehemently denied the allegations. Tim Parlatore said the affidavit was filled with “belated claims” by an ex-relative with “an axe to grind against the entire Hegseth family.”

“Sam has never alleged that there was any abuse, she signed court documents acknowledging that there was no abuse and recently reaffirmed the same during her FBI interview,” Parlatore said in a statement. “Belated claims by Danielle Dietrich, an anti-Trump far left Democrat who is divorced from Mr. Hegseth’s brother and never got along with the Hegseth family, do nothing to change that.”

The affidavit was filed in response to a request from Sen. Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, who said he was seeking her statement to gain “personal knowledge about Mr. Hegseth’s fitness to occupy this important position.”

In the affidavit, Danielle Hegseth says she believes Hegseth’s marriage to Samantha was abusive. She said Samantha in 2014 told her she once hid in her closet because she feared for her safety. She acknowledged she did “not personally witness physical or sexual abuse” by Pete Hegseth toward his wife.

“I believe what Samantha told me because what she told me is consistent with what I personally observed of Hegseth’s erratic and aggressive behavior over many years,” she said.

Neither Samantha Hegseth nor an attorney who represented her in divorce proceedings immediately responded to requests for comment. A lawyer for Danielle Hegseth noted that she wouldn’t be commenting further than the affidavit.

In a statement to NBC News, which first reported on the affidavit, Samantha Hegseth said there “was no physical abuse in my marriage. This is the only further statement I will make to you, I have let you know that I am not speaking and will not speak on my marriage to Pete. Please respect this decision.”

Samantha Hegseth and Pete Hegseth both signed a Minnesota court document in 2021 during their divorce saying neither claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.

Republican leaders said they doubted the new allegations would change the votes of support they are lining up for Hegseth. They marched ahead with the nomination Tuesday evening, taking a key procedural step needed to confirm him by week’s end.

“Looks like a desperate ploy by Democrats who are being driven by the far left because they know that we have the votes to confirm,” said Sen. John Barrasso, the No. 2 GOP leader.

Asked if the new allegations changes the votes for Hegseth, he said: “No.”

Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said he was aware of the reported allegations and compared the situation to the claims made against Brett Kavanaugh during his own confirmation hearing, before he was eventually confirmed as a Supreme Court justice.

“I don’t really have anything to offer,” Cornyn said. “I was involved in the Kavanaugh hearings, where people came out of the closet making all sorts of false allegations.”

Questions were raised before Hegseth’s hearing last week about the scope of the FBI background check, which some said failed to include interviews with those who had raised allegations against him. Democrats pushed for a deeper FBI review that could be more broadly shared with senators.

During the hearing, Hegseth did not directly answer yes or no to questions about his drinking, instead saying the issue was part of an orchestrated smear campaign against him.

At the time, it was left to the Trump transition team to decide how much more information to pursue and share on Hegseth.

The information in the affidavit was not relayed to the leaders of the Armed Services Committee when FBI officials briefed them earlier this month on the results of Hegseth’s background check, according to a person familiar with the contents of the briefing who was granted anonymity to discuss it.

“As I have said for months, the reports of Mr. Hegseth’s history of alleged sexual assault, alcohol abuse, and public misconduct necessitate an exhaustive background investigation,” Reed said in a statement Tuesday. “I have been concerned that the background check process has been inadequate, and this affidavit confirms my fears.”

Hegseth was grilled by senators during his hearing about his behavior, including excessive drinking, extramarital affairs and allegations of sexual assault, which he has denied.

Hegseth has promised not to drink on the job and has denied a 2017 sex assault allegation but acknowledged paying the woman a settlement. He was going through a divorce at the time after having a child with a Fox News producer who became his current wife, according to court records and his social media posts.

In the affidavit, Danielle Hegseth also alleges that Pete Hegseth, while under the influence of alcohol and both were leaving a bar, repeatedly shouted “no means yes!”

“I took this to mean that, in his opinion, nonconsensual sex is ok,” Danielle Hegseth said in the affidavit.

AP reporters Eric Tucker and Lolita C. Baldor contributed from Washington.

NEW YORK (AP) — Democrats knew this was coming.

But in the hours since Trump’s inauguration, Democrats are struggling to confront the sheer volume of executive orders, pardons, personnel changes and controversial relationships taking shape in the new administration.

In less than two days, the Republican president has moved to end diversity and inclusion programs across the federal government, withdrawn the U.S. from the Paris climate accords, blocked a federal law banning TikTok, and sought to end the constitutional guarantee of birthright citizenship. He has also pardoned the rioters who stormed the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, and granted unprecedented access to some of the world’s richest men, raising questions about his commitment to the working-class voters who enabled his election.

Each of those actions enrages part of the Democratic base. Together, they make it difficult to formulate a response by an already fractured party.

“It is a fire hose right now. That’s what he does. He creates a ton of chaos so it’s hard to keep up with it,” said Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, who instructed her staff to track Trump’s executive orders, so her constituents could keep up. “Everything is overload.”

Democrats warn of Trump’s ‘plans to screw over America’

The Democratic National Committee, under the direction of retiring chair Jaime Harrison, has been running an active rapid response this week, issuing press releases and social media posts to push back against Trump’s actions. That stands in contrast to the party’s operation following Trump’s 2017 inauguration, which was largely dark as a far more active protest movement became the focal point of the Democratic resistance.

For now, the Democratic establishment is largely focused on the prominent role of billionaires in Trump’s nascent presidency, which follows Biden’s farewell warning about the rise of oligarchs.

The DNC shared talking points with its allies on Tuesday, encouraging them to focus on “Trump’s plans to screw over America.” Specifically, the talking points focus on the new president’s move to rescind a Biden order designed to limit the cost of prescription drugs.

The DNC guidance also seizes on ultra-wealthy tech executives like Elon Musk, CEO of Tesla and Space X, and Jeff Bezos, CEO of Amazon and Blue Origin, who were seated in front of some of Trump’s Cabinet picks during his inauguration. On Musk, the talking points accuse him of giving multiple Nazi salutes during Trump’s inauguration parade.

Right-wing extremists are celebrating Musk’s straight-arm gesture during a speech Monday, although his intention wasn’t totally clear and some hate watchdogs are saying not to read too much into it.

The seating for some of the world’s richest men at the inauguration — with big-state governors and major allies relegated to an overflow area — initially offered Democrats an issue to rally around. Beyond the tech leaders featured at the inauguration, the Republican president has tapped more than a dozen billionaires for prominent roles.

Democratic strategist Andrew Bates, who left his job as a White House spokesman on Friday, attacked Trump’s GOP for “partying with rightwing billionaires” on their first day in control of Washington and “plotting tax welfare for the super rich” on Day 2.

“Republicans have revealed their establishment-bought true colors and are selling out every American except their well-connected donors,” Bates said.

The party remains fractured

Crockett, who has become one of her party’s most visible messengers on Capitol Hill, is concerned that the focus on billionaires might not resonate with average voters, who likely didn’t recognize Bezos or other tech executives at the inauguration.

“I’m not sure average people know that’s not normal,” Crockett said of the seating arrangement. “The brilliance of Trump, if I had to give him accolades, is that he understands how much people don’t understand.”

Even under normal circumstances, a transition to a new presidential administration would bring a flurry of executive orders and personnel changes that would be difficult to track. But little is normal about the second incarnation of President Trump, a 78-year-old term-limited outsider at the height of his political power with little regard for political norms or legal consequences.

“Everyone’s reeling and trying to process the information coming at them,” said Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Our Revolution. “People are not confident that the Democratic Party knows what to do in this moment.”

Some prominent allies of the Democratic Party aren’t especially engaged either.

Billionaire businessman Mark Cuban, who was among Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris’ most visible surrogates last fall, downplayed the impact of Trump’s early moves when asked to weigh in.

“He hasn’t really done anything yet,” Cuban told The Associated Press. “I’ll pay attention to what he does. But my focus is figuring out healthcare rather than getting mad about what he does.”

“Just getting angry,” Cuban continued, “is not the way to go.”

Faiz Shakir, a candidate for DNC chair and a longtime ally of Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, said he was shocked by the prominent placement of the billionaires in the nationally televised event, which he said threatened to undermine Trump’s popularity with working-class voters.

“He has given people a window into how he’s going to govern,” Shakir said.

Still, he acknowledged that Democrats must confront “fatigue and exhaustion” within their own ranks that lingers two months after Trump’s victory: “There’s a creeping hopelessness that needs to be fought against.”

Crockett encouraged her party to adopt a much more organized campaign to educate the public about Trump’s three most egregious moves. What are they? She’s not sure yet.

“But in my opinion, we can’t fight it all,” she said.