“The more I think about it,” Heather Cox Richardson said this week, “the more it seems the main story of the past decade has been Russian disinformation to undermine U.S. democracy.” This was a notable comment because Richardson follows all the major political stories from the perspective of a political historian, and she has been doing so for years.
I think we should talk about the story and why we are not talking about it more.
Last week, I wrote about the ideological and political connection between the Republicans and Putin’s Russia. If you missed it, start there because seeing the ideological connection between the Republicans and the Russians provides context for the Russian disinformation attack in 2016 and the response of Trump’s campaign.
2016: Russia Launches a Disinformation Attack on the United States
The following information comes mostly from the Senate Report on Russian Active Measures Campaigns and Interference in the 2016 election, the Mueller Report, the indictment of the Internet Research Agency.
The Internet Research Agency (IRA), based in St. Petersburg, was funded by Russian oligarch Yevgeniy Prigozhin and the Kremlin. In 2014, the IRA conducted an “information warfare campaign designed to spread disinformation and societal division in the United States” and to sway the outcome of the 2016 election.
Swaying the election was only one part of the IRA’s goal. The other part was to sow division and discord in American politics to undermine the American government. The IRA accomplished this by focusing on “hot button societal divisions” such as race, immigration, and Second Amendment rights.
In 2014 and 2016, to prepare for its disinformation operation, the IRA sent two highly ranked female employees, Anna Bogacheva and Aleksandra Krylova, to the U.S. They traveled widely on an intelligence gathering mission to understand the divisions and fractures in American culture.
This is important: The Russians do not try to create fractures and divisions. They look for them and find ways to amplify them and to drive deeper wedges between Americans.
The IRA disinformation campaign against the U.S. was operated from the “Translation Department” where hundreds of “specialists,” operated social media accounts, pretending to be American political activists. They created Facebook accounts and formed groups. Each “specialists” operated dozens of accounts.
The Army of Jesus Facebook page, for example, created and operated by specialists in the IRA, attracted 216,000 American followers. The Army of Jesus purported to be devoted to Christian themes and Bible passages. To cultivate an audience, the operators provided content consistent with its profile, like these examples:
- “There has never been a day when people did not need to walk with Jesus.” (Oct. 26, 2016)
- “I’ve got Jesus in my soul. It’s the only way I know. Watching every move I make, guiding every step I take!” Oct. 29, 2016:
- “Rise and shine-realize His blessing!” (Oct. 31, 2016:
- “Jesus will always be by your side. Just reach out to Him and you’ll see!” (Oct. 31, 2016)
After building trust, they deploy “payload content,” like this:
- “Hillary approves removal of God from the pledge of allegiance.” (Nov. 1, 2016)
Soon afterward, they resumed their confidence-building content, like this:
- “Never hold on anything [sic] tighter than you holding unto God!” (Nov. 1, 2016)
Side comment: One Twitter account during the Trump presidency, built a lot of trust among Democrats by constantly attacking Trump. The person attracted hundreds of thousands of followers. Then, in 2020, the person flipped and began attacking Democrats with the same venom (and with a large reach).
From the Senate Report: “No single group of Americans was targeted by the IRA more than African Americans.” One of the IRA’s Facebook pages, “Blacktivist” generated 11.2 million engagements. Specialists posing as African American activists posted messages like these:
- I won’t vote for Hillary Clinton
- I won’t vote at all
- Why should we vote?
- Our votes don’t matter
- A vote for Jill Stein is not a wasted vote.
Americans believed they were listening to and interacting with the opinions of other Americans.
As an example of how Russians created real world fights (or, to use the language from the reports, how the Russians “coopted unwitting Americans to engage in offline activities in furtherance of their objectives”) the IRA operated a page called “Heart of Texas,” an anti-Muslim page, that attracted 250,000 followers. Heart of Texas scheduled a “Stop the Islamization of Texas” rally for noon on May 21, 2016, in front of the Islamic Da-wah Center in Houston. They encouraged their readers to bring their guns.
The IRA also operated a Facebook page called “My United Muslim of America” which had 325,000 followers. “My United Muslim of America scheduled a pro-Muslim rights rally for the same day at the same time in the same place.
On May 21, 2016, about 50 people showed up, 40 to support Muslims and 10 who were anti-Muslim. Thus Russians acting covertly brought Americans face to face and set them up for fights. It is impossible to know how often this happened.
The IRA’s activity on social media increased after Election Day in 2016. Remember, influencing the election was only part of the plan. The other part was increasing polarization and turning Americans against each other and against their government.
(My guess is that each year, the Russian trolls get better at impersonating Americans. Meanwhile, American social media users, after being exposed to years of rage, start acting more like Russian trolls. All of this makes it harder to distinguish foreign trolls from fellow Americans who are trapped in a misinformation-outrage-cycle.)
In this series I explained how (and why) TV lawyers and legal commentators often reflect back the mood of the room. Since 2016 the “room” has been fillled with trouble-making Russian trolls. See the problem? The troll farms change the tone of the room, amplifying division and anger, which is then reflected back by TV commenters with a large reach. Ordinary Americans thus find themselves increasingly enraged.
People who are perpetually fearful do not think well. Psychologists explain what happens to the human brain when constantly stimulated by rage and fear. See, for example, this study.
2016: Attacks on computers (and attempted attacks on voting systems)
The hacking part of the 2016 Russian attack was carried out by the GRU (General Staff of the Russian Army).
March of 2016: The GRU hacked the email accounts of Clinton campaign volunteers and employees, including campaign chairman John Podesta and stole hoards of documents.
April 2016: The GRU successfully hacked into the computer networks of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee and the Democratic National Committee and stole hundreds of thousands of documents.
June 2016: The GRU began disseminating the stolen materials through a social media account belonging to a fictitious person (but operated by the GRU).
The operation was successful: Major newspapers published the stolen material during the 6 months leading up to the election. The headlines looked like this one from the Washington Post:
Here are the latest, most damaging things in the DNC’s leaked emails
Because major American newspapers were eager to jump into the fray and publish the stolen materials, Democratic voters were reading stolen documents. The emails particularly enraged Bernie Sanders supporters because the stolen material suggested that members of the Democratic Party preferred Clinton to Sanders. Really, nobody should have been reading stolen documents published out of context, particularly when the hacking targeted only one side.
In other words, the hacking operation was hugely successful. Democrats turned against Democrats. The GRU attempt to breach voting systems, however, failed.
“Concealed Wars”
(The information in this section is from my most recent book, A Firehose of Falsehood.)
The idea of a concealed war can be traced back to The Arthashastra, written in Sankrit during the Mauryan Empire. The concept is described like this: There are two kinds of wars, open wars and concealed wars. An open war is when two armies meet on the battlefield. Lines are drawn. Everybody knows there is a war.
A concealed war is what today we might call a disinformation campaign. The goal of a concealed war is to turn the people of the enemy country against their leaders, ideally so they attack and even assassinate their own leaders or crumble their own government. Among the advice given for how to conduct a concealed war is to plant spies to start rumors and demoralize the enemy.
In other words, this is an ancient tactic. Americans in 2016 were unprepared and vulnerable. When the Russians tried the same thing on Ukrainians, the Ukrainians, who knew their neighbors well, were much savvier.
Concealed wars are more efficient, and less risky, than open wars. With a concealed war, one country can vanquish the enemy and never suffer a single casualty or have to manufacture a single weapon. Even if the concealed attack is detected, a concealed attack will not invite the same level of rage, anger, and retaliation as, say, the attack of 9-11.
In fact, if media manipulators are savvy enough, the entire attack can soon be forgotten.
Mueller’s Investigation
Mueller was appointed in May, 2017 after American intelligence agencies uncovered evidence of the Russian disinformation and cyber-attack and after contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians were publicly known. Mueller was given the task of investigating:
This instruction was also included in the appointment documents:
As a result of the Mueller investigation, 34 individuals and 3 companies were indicted. These dribbled out over the course of the investigation and included members of Trump’s campaign and inner circle, including:
- Paul Manafort: Indicted for financial crimes related mostly to his lobbying efforts in Ukraine. Among other things, he failed to register as a foreign agent.
- Rick Gates: Financial crimes, failing to register as a foreign agent.
- Michael Flynn: False statements to investigators.
- Roger Stone: Lying to congress and witness tampering.
The slow dribble of indictments created a great deal of suspense: Who would be indicted? Would Trump be indicted?
When the Mueller Report was finally published, it laid out the contacts between the Trump campaign and the Russians, which were, as follows:
2015: Michael Cohen communicated with Russians about a potential real estate project, Trump Tower Moscow. Trump signed a letter of intent for the tower and in 2016, Cohen emailed and spoke about the project with Russian government secretary Dmitry Peskov.
Spring 2016: Campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos had contact with Joseph Mifsud, a London-based professor with Russian connections who traveled to Moscow in April 2016. When returning, Mifsfud told Papadopoulos that the Russians had “dirt” on Clinton in the form of thousands of emails. A week later, Papadopoulos suggested to the representative of a foreign government that the Russians would help the campaign by releasing emails.
April 2016: Papadopolous tried to arrange a meeting between Misfud, two Russian nationals, and the Trump campaign but no meeting ever took place.
June 9, 2016: A Russian lawyer met with Trump, Jr., Jared Kushner, and Paul Manafort, who anticipated receiving documents that would incriminate Clinton, but the Russians provided no such information. Days after that meeting, the DNC announced that the Russian government had infiltrated their computers.
July 2016: Campaign foreign policy advisor Carter Page traveled in his personal capacity to Moscow and gave a keynote address. (Page lived and worked in Russia between 2003 and 2007.)
Page’s trip to Moscow drew media attention. The Trump campaign then distanced itself from Page and in late September, 2016, and removed him from the campaign.
August 2: Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort met in New York city with his long-time business associate Konstantin Kilimnik who the FBI believes had ties to Russian intelligence. Kilimnik asked for the meeting to deliver a “peace plan” for Ukraine. Manafort later acknowledged to investigators that this plan was a way for Russia to gain control of eastern Ukraine. Manafort also talked to him about the campaign’s strategy for winning Democratic votes in Midwestern states, and shared polling data with Kilimnik.
Fall 2016: Within hours of the Hollywood Access tape surfacing, Wikileaks released thousands of John Podesta’s stolen emails as a distraction.
After the election: the Russian government tried to “make inroads” into the new administration.
Here was how the Mueller report characterized the Trump campaign’s relationship to the Russians:
The Trump campaign “showed interest” in the leaks and “welcomed their potential damage to candidate Clinton.”
The special counsel concluded that the “Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome” and the Trump Campaign “expected it would benefit” from Russian efforts, “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities.”
Mueller was looking for criminal activity. The crime here would be conspiracy. To prove a conspiracy, you have to prove each of these elements beyond a reasonable doubt:
- Two or more people agreed to commit a crime
- All conspirators had the specific intent to commit the crime
- At least one of the conspirators committed an overt act
If you go back and read the timeline carefully, you’ll see that there was not enough evidence to prove each element of a criminal conspiracy beyond a reasonable doubt. There is evidence that the Trump campaign was ideologically aligned with Russia, and that they welcomed Russian help, and they were happy to benefit from Russian crimes–but they did not conspire with the Russians to commit those crimes.
“Collusion”
Early in the investigation, Trump (and others) made the story all about Trump: Would he be indicted? Would he be exonerated?
Trump framed the question around the word “collusion” which was masterful. On May 11, 2017, in an interview with Lester Holt, Trump said there was “no collusion between me and my campaign and the Russians.”
His mantra became: “NO COLLUSION!”
Trump knew exactly what his campaign had done. He knew when they got information, what information they received, and he knew, for example, that they declined meetings and cut off Carter Page.
He knew that what he had actually done (benefit from Russian crimes instead of calling the FBI) would draw negative criticism.
He knew that. His lawyers are not that stupid. So he cleverly framed the issue as: Did Trump collude with the Russians?
When Trump framed the question as “was there collusion?” his opponents then got into the act by answering “Yes there was collusion!” and then sifting through newspaper reporting to find evidence that there was contact between the Trump campaign and the Russians.
Oh, the Suspense!
For two years, Trump and right-wing media outlets shouted, “No Collusion! It’s a witch hunt! It’s all a hoax.”
Mainstream media, left-leaning media like MSNBC, and influential left-wing social media commentators shouted, “Yes there WAS collusion!” Big name legal commentators assured the public that a sitting president can be indicted despite the OLC memo saying that a sitting president could not be indicted (the OLC reasoning is that a president should first be removed from office, and then indicted on the grounds that an indictment would interfere with his constitutionally mandated duties.) Much time was spent in left wing media circles about whether Mueller could (or should) disregard the OLC memo and indict Trump.
Left-wing news consumers eagerly awaited Trump being indicted, tried, and hauled off to jail. (If you spent time on Twitter in between 2017 and 2019, you know what I’m talking about.)
The right-wing news consumers anticipated the pleasure of Trump being cleared of the false charge of “collusion.”
The story was all about Trump. Trump was the star. The Russian attack faded into the background.
Mueller Publishes His Report
Mainstream headlines blared: “No Collusion!” like this one from The Washington Post:
Trump immediately Tweeted, “Game over!”
Trump supporters were jubilant. Trump critics were enraged.
The Disappearing Rabbit Trick
When Trump made himself the central character of the story, the story stopped being about the Russian attack on our democracy. Remember, election interference was only part of the plan. The other part was to sow discord and cause people to give up on democracy.
Notice the reciprocity: The Russians helped Trump get elected. Trump then helped the Russians by changing the subject and getting everyone speculating about whether Mueller would find “collusion.”
The Russian cyber attack was forgotten by Trump’s critics, who were enraged (and remain enraged) that Mueller did not criminally indict Trump. In fact, in some left-wing circles, if you mention Mueller you will find they are still seething with anger. (If you respond to this blog post with anger about the fact that Mueller didn’t indict Trump, you’re both proving my point and missing my point.)
The Russian cyber attack was eagerly forgotten by Trump’s supporters, many of whom are ideologically aligned with Russia and have no wish to make Putin look bad.
Trump framed the narrative as “no collusion!” because he knew the ending. Thus, the subject of Russia’s cyber and disinformation attack on the United States disappeared like a rabbit into a magician’s hat. The public got played by the masters of media manipulation.
What We Should Have Been talking About
We should have been talking about how Russian disinformation campaigns work. This is from the Senate Committee Report:
We should be preparing for the next cyber attack, which will come, and which will be more sophisticated as the Russians get better at impersonating Americans, driving divisions, and stoking anger.
We are the consumers of news and in this click-driven media environment, news outlets often dish up what the consumers want. They need to attract and retain viewers and audiences. Consumer demands help steer the national narrative.
People need to stop taking the bait.
Subscribe and I’ll tell you when a new blog post is ready:
Good to see you on BlueSky now.
Just a couple of things that come to mind. I am currently reading a lot on the historical roots of conservatism, free-market ideas, libertarianism, and the reaction to socialism and the New Deal; in particular Invisible Hands: the Businessmen’s Crusade Against the New Deal by Kim Phillips-Fein. In addition listing to a lot on the future envsaged by AI enthusiasts, who are often millionaire libertardarian tech-bros. Lastly a keen sense of the unfolding polycrisis – economic, climate, resource, trade, wars…
There is a support among the libertarian conservative side of fascist politics in the present day. In the sense alternatively that they can ride the tiger, and that they can profit off of the decline.
One small vignette crystallized a thought for me. Peter Diamandis was being interviewed by Tom Bilyeu on his YT podcast Impact Theory, and near the end, they briefly, and all too blithely, agreed that half the population would likely perish in the coming violent bottleneck. They both wanted to be in the surviving half because they see a version of Fully Automated Luxury Communism for the people beyond “The Event.” AI makes labor extraneous. That longevity and health innovation will mean no disease. And some how food will be abundant. Diamandis pointed to the fact that capitalism will no longer exist, but he has no idea what that means.
I do not think that rosy future will apply, and the politics of consigned half of humanity to the meat grinder of the near future polycrisis bottleneck is to me abhorrent morally. Though this Libertardian Tech Bro mentality does explain why billionaires are continuing to pursue sucking money upwards while immiserating the rest of us.
Sorry. Left out Republican, senators…..
Thank you for your very informative articles.
I regard to this one, does the July 4 visit to Russia, by 4/5 senators and a house rep fit in here?
Adam Silverman, who posts at https://balloon-juice.com/ , has said many times that the US & Russia have been at war since, at least, 2014.
Thank you as always for your disciplined and focused analysis. Hillary Clinton observed that the Russians couldn’t have accomplished all that you described without help from people in this country. Not sure I want to ponder that too hard.
Thank you.
Thanks, Teri, for another well-organized presentation of the facts. Facts are important AND it’s important to recognize that facts are rarely persuasive to those who believe otherwise. Another way we can defend democracy is to learn how to have productive conversations with others who disagree with us. We can have a lot of positive influence with people we personally know if we apply Smart Politics skills. Free webinar Mar 13, 5pm PT led by political psychiatrist, Dr. Karin Tamerius. Folks who register/attend this session get a private link to the recording.
https://www.eventbrite.com/e/smart-politics-101-essential-tools-for-persuasive-conversations-tickets-827715197437?aff=erelexpmlt
Karin has been leading similar webinars for the past several years. In 2021, she did one especially for the NCJW Greater Phila Section which that group posted publicly on YouTube. So, if you’re unable to register for the March 13 event, you can view this public YouTube recording.
https://youtu.be/xmsvBgkXrjk?si=V_gJKtr5Gp1pbWb4
Thank you Teri ~ We should definitely be talking more about this. Putin is winning the concealed war and we are helping because we don’t even know it.
According to some authors, the strategy of deception from The Art of War was studied and widely used by the KGB: “I will force the enemy to take our strength for weakness, and our weakness for strength, and thus will turn his strength into weakness”.
The State Within a State: The KGB and its Hold on Russia – Past, Present, and Future Paperback – December 1, 1999
by Yevgenia Albats
I was particularly annoyed when the word “corruption” was thrown around. It isn’t corrupt for people to have preferences.
I agree 100% that the main story of the decade is Russian disinformation. Our enemies have direct access to citizens and their campaigns have been amazingly successful.
A friend who was scarily misinformed when asked to show where she was getting her information brought in a bunch of Facebook memes.
We’re not doing enough to counter these attacks and they’re tearing us apart.
I wondered if Trump was manipulated by Russian govt instead of being seen as an “equal partner”..
Honestly I fear how democracy will survive the internet, specially modern day internet geared to engagement instead of informing, pushing or hot buttons. Mexico, my country, is also on election year and I couldnt help mmyself to getting enraged on tweeter, and gotta say, maybe is coincidence or just plain human inconsistency, but I noticed users that at times said things I agree and laters things I really dont or twisted the subject….
Media people are not going to admit that they have been hoodwinked, so they just ignore the whole thing.
Josh Marshall at TPM a few months ago made the comment that mainstream media people’s first motivation is to not be accused of “liberal bias”, which they will be if they write anything critical of Republicans. So they just ignore the whole thing, to the detriment of all of us and our democracy.
Linda Calhoun
PS: Please stop putting Christian in quotes, as in “not a real Christian”. They ARE CHRISTIANS. If you are not as rabid as they are, they think you are not a real Christian, as in “not committed enough”.
Religion makes you stupid, and gullible. Read some Robert Altemeyer, who spent his life’s work researching authoritarian personalities. Religion does not support skepticism.
I’ve been leery of religion since age 6 after an adult neighbor declared I would burn in hell for eternity after she learned I hadn’t been baptized or christened by the church. I was so upset and offended, even as a child, that I never felt inclined to join a religion.
I’ve done a bit of thinking about religion since Trump’s 2016 election campaign when it became such an open public issue in our politics for the first time I could recognize in my adult years. I’ve watched & listed to people on TV and around me who openly declare themselves religious, especially Christians, as they’ve been the most vocal. I wondered what is the purpose of it and why people seemed so passionate / weird / seemed willing to lose sense over it, and without any education on the matter, so be warned this is just an opinion not based upon formal knowledge.
I think religion is largely used as a form of social control, which is not necessarily a bad thing, depending on who is doing the controlling and what is their goal behind it. I believe religion survived since antiquity because religious philosophy thinkers, followed afterwards by leaders of organized religions, influenced &/or gained approval of powerful people. As religions gained momentum, they eventually formed a symbiotic relationship with powerful people so they could survive. Powerful leaders of lands who did not like a religion or its leadership would likely not allow them to practice.
I imagine that religious leaders showed deference to the powerful people who controlled land and wealth (elites). The religious leader’s deference of the elites in front their disciples & flock helped elevate
the elites’ standing onto to a higher plain of existence than ordinary people. Powerful people who are more “godlike” are to be respected as gods. This, I’m sure, was very appreciated by elites and they in turn protected useful religions and helped support and fund its leaders. Religious leaders went further and helped teach a social order which benefited both the elite and themselves. Religions helped further their popularity and gain believers by helping the common man with food when they hungered, society when they were alone, and with explanations when they were scared of the unknown.
When Democracy came along and started listening to common people and represented them more than Kings and Dictators ever did, and the safety network came along and adopted on a large scale the practice of helping common people without religious strings attached, it probably cut into some of religions means of gaining and or keeping followers and was seen as competition. When Democracy helped loosen controls and made paths up the socioeconomic hierarchy for common white men, the elites can’t have been happy. When non-white men started climbing the ladder and then women, well, I imagine a number religious leaders & elites became extreme and wanted to turn the tides back to the fundamental core of society and religion.
Religion is a foundation of most human society and foundations, by nature, are strong. We cannot change society without also changing religion, and many people dislike change. So challenging religion (or being perceived as challenging) is likely going to “trip a switch” in people and they’re going to be less likely to see sense. I think that is what we’re seeing today.
The Russians have been playing a long game, but it would be so much less effective were so many Americans not in the thrall of authoritarianism. Remember the words of Judge Learned Hand:
“I often wonder whether we do not rest our hopes too much upon constitutions, upon laws and upon courts. These are false hopes; believe me, these are false hopes. Liberty lies in the hearts of men and women; when it dies there, no constitution, no law, no court can even do much to help it. While it lies there it needs no constitution, no law, no court to save it.”
While I understand you were using it as an example of rage mongering to sow division, the words “under God” do not belong in the Pledge of Allegiance at all. They were only added during the McCarthy era and the hard right has been chipping away at the wall between church and state ever since.
That aside, yes, we should be talking about how to distinguish fact from fiction and help people recognize disinformation, especially on social media, like you do in your new book. We’ve seen the damage it can and continues to do.
You are right. Eisenhower added them; at least that’s my understanding. I learned the Pledge of Allegiance before that phrase was added, and I still recite it without the words “under God.”
On a completely different subject: Teri, have you any comforting words about the current behavior of the Supreme Court? I hope you can think of something, because I can’t, but I was hoping that you might have some crumb of comfort to offer.
I learned it after but always left out those two words that don’t belong.
Sometimes I wonder if Russia is behind the latest “immigration crisis,” too. I understand that the numbers of migrants from Mexico and other Central American countries has stayed pretty steady, while the number coming from much further away has exploded. How can these desperate people afford international flights to South America? How can they afford to pay the human traffickers who help them through Central America and across the US border?
Obviously, many people all around the world do want to come to the US, and for very legitimate reasons, but ever since Belarus trafficked thousands of Middle Eastern and African migrants to the Polish border in 2021 (https://www.npr.org/2021/11/08/1053608851/migrants-aided-by-belarus-try-to-push-across-polish-border ), apparently in an attempt to destabilize the EU (and only 4 months before Russia invaded Ukraine), I’ve wondered whether Russia might be trying something like that with us.
Of course the Russians, and their subsidiary American political party are behind it. Abbot and Desantis openly traffick migrants to NYC and Chicago to score political points and brag about it! Refugees/migrants from Africa and Asia are definitely not crossing the Atlantic Ocean on homemade dinghies. They’re being trafficked and the 2 main suspects are Russia and GOP b/c we know they’ve already done it. The other day when it looked like some new measures might be enacted to reduce the flow at our Southern border, Trump literally said don’t do it b/c it’d help Biden. They very obviously want the problem to NOT be solved b/c they’re getting such great mileage with it.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/02/29/putin-russia-wagner-militia-africa-immigration-europe/
Teri,
Thank you for another in your continuing series of highly informative blogs.
Is it possible to know the extent to which the rise of White “Christian” nationalism has been accelerated by Russian propaganda?
White “Christian” nationalists have anointed Donald J. Trump as their “Chosen One”, as their Moses who will lead them into the Promised Land wherein the separation of church and state is severely undermined or eliminated. Or as a contemporary Cyrus the Great who, although himself not of their community, will lead them out of bondage and into the New Jerusalem of religious liberty.
It seems that many regressive “Christians” also view Vladimir Putin—and Hungary’s Viktor Orban—in a similar “light.”
Is there a force operative in American politics more divisive, more pro-Russian and more anti-Ukrainian than White “Christian” nationalism? I find this pro-Russian influence increasingly obvious now that Mike Johnson, a prototypical WCN, is House Speaker.
The WCN influence, and a pro-Orban and pro-Putin orientation, are also increasingly evident at the Conservative Political Action Conferences.
Am I unduly concerned by the Republicans’ increasing empowerment of, and responsiveness to their WCN base?
I don’t have the tools to measure and analyze it, but it seems that Instragram “stories” sharing “lefty memes” and the like have been and continue to be hot vectors for Russian disinformation campaigns.
Currently the wedge being most actively exploited is the Israeli-Hamas War, of course, and the tactics are similar to the “Blacktivist” anti-Clinton efforts of 2016.
Hi Teri
I saw through all of that Russian nonsense, btw. And that was six or eight years ago. These Conservatives, TODAY, are the real deal. They genuinely preach human cruelty by governments, act against the U.S.’s “always” interests to the extent of blatantly committing treason ( Trump’s bathroom reading, Ron Johnson and Mike Lee’s trips to stay on Putin’s good side, and Rand Paul’s visit in late 2020 to make sure “lines of communication stayed open”), and overturn free and fair elections. These aren’t Russians doing this. Pardon my French, but it’s the literal traitors on the other side. The officials who know enough about how the world works and America’s place in it are all-in on these moral atrocities. I’ll try to calm down after this week’s therapy session. I promise.
Great and important post, Teri, thank you.
And very much related, the Guardian posted this article this weekend:
“The man who tricked Nazi Germany: lessons from the past on how to beat disinformation”
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2024/mar/02/the-man-who-tricked-nazi-germany-lessons-from-the-past-on-how-to-beat-disinformation
Which has essential lessons for everyone fighting back against Russian interference in elections around the world.
That was a fascinating article, and a great addition to Teri’s post, I thought. Thanks for sharing it.
I agree that this article, and Teri’s analysis, are important sources for all Americans to read and ponder. We’ve all been duped by advertising or misinformation at one time or another. (This discussion brought to mind my lessons with elementary and middle school students focused on the health ed skill of analyzing information. My students were incredulous when we analyzed consumer ads [before they were ended by the Tobacco settlement case], exposing them as manipulation of kids’ thoughts and desires to “be cool.” Q: “But, Ms. G., if [smoking, alcohol use, etc] is dangerous, why is it legal?” A: “To trick you into trying it and getting addicted, so the companies make lots of money from YOUR misery. Don’t fall for it!”) The same techniques are being used by the Russians and the GOP to co-opt our democracy. The WCNs have fallen for it hard, and most Americans aren’t even paying attention to the issue. All we can do is adopt the template of critical analysis exhibited here to realize how our emotions and beliefs are being manipulated for political gain. The 1st Amendment right to free speech is both a blessing and a curse, when used to dupe the unsuspecting and undiscerning voter. All we can do is spread the word and hope our fellow Americans will be as outraged and responsive as my former students. Thanks to Teri and HCR, et al for the teaching materials.
@MikeCa That’s a good point. Once in a while commenters on Washington Post comments section bring up ‘Bernie as victim’ comments. It’s possible they are Russian trolls driving the wedge deeper between progressives.
Hillary Clinton was a life long member of the Democratic Party and had been elected as the Senator from New York on the Democratic ticket. While Bernie Sanders caucuses with Democrats in the Senate, he had never been a member of the Democratic Party, even after running for the Democratic presidential nomination several times.
Why was anyone surprised that Democratic Party officials preferred a member of the Democratic Party over an independent like Sanders? I suspect it was a lot of Russian disinformation social media accounts that amplified the idea that Sanders supporters should be angry about this. If you just think about it, there is no reason to be angry. It was a large coordinated operation between the leaking of the hacked documents and the social media influence operation to exploit them.
This social media influence operation is still going on today.
Hillary Clinton was NOT a lifelong member of the Democratic Party. She was a Republican as a young woman.
A Goldwater Republican if I recall. But for decades she supported the party and was a team player. Over several decades she earned a lot of respect among party members.
It’s always frustrating when people ascribe party member support for elected officials such as HRC and Biden to some sort of underhanded conspiracy when the fact is that they are well liked by people who have worked with them in a professional capacity. Lay people who only see the narrative built by the campaigns and news media sometimes forget that these are real people with real relationships to other real people, and that trust can be earned, this isn’t just a soap opera that follows the convention of fiction, like pro wrestling, even when campaigns use those conventions as part of their narrative.