Disinfo: Russia never meddled in the internal affairs of the United States

Summary

Russia has never ever meddled in the internal affairs of the United States. Maybe somebody from the Russian territory bought advertisement on Facebook, but it is a common practice and cannot be called interference. RT also broadcast on the US territory. This is what the Americans call meddling. But there are double standards. RT on US territory is interference, while CNN on Russian territory isn’t in their view.

Disproof

Recurrent pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the alleged non-meddling of Russia in other countries' politics.

Russian meddling in US 2016 presidential election isn't the mere broadcasting of RT on US territory or purchase of advertising space on Facebook. Both trolling and media propaganda in Russia operate within one hybrid field where business interests and state propaganda meet.

Robert Mueller's investigation concluded that Russia did interfere in the 2016 election. Mueller’s report maintains that “the investigation did not establish that members of the Trump Campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities”. Nevertheless, it states that Russian interference activities did take place.

The 448-page Mueller report issued in March 2019 (see here) contains copious detail about how Russia interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, both by using social media to influence American voters with disinformation and by hacking into the Clinton campaign’s computers.

A previous (2017) report prepared by the US Intelligence Community analysed the motivation and scope of the Kremlin's intentions for the US election and the Kremlin's use of cyber tools and media campaigns to influence US public opinion. The report concluded that Moscow interfered in the US elections and that it had carried out this effort "in sweeping and systematic fashion".

As concluded earlier by the US intelligence community and by Mueller’s own inquiry “the investigation established that the Russian government perceived it would benefit from a Trump presidency and worked to secure that outcome, and that the Campaign expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts”.

Read here an overview of Russia's methods of electoral interference.

Real also similar stories: Washington constantly meddles in Russian politics with NGOs and critics (from the same RT-interview), No evidence of Russian meddling in 2016 US presidential election, Russia never meddles in the internal affairs of other countries.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 223
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 25/11/2020
  • Outlet language(s) French, Georgian, Russian, English
  • Countries and/or Regions discussed in the disinformation: US, Russia
  • Keywords: Dmitry Peskov, election meddling, Russia Today (RT), Robert Mueller, Trolls
see more

Disinfo: NATO uses “Russian threat” to justify its actions

NATO is increasing its military presence near the Russian border. The Alliance is using the “Russian threat” to justify this actions. The Baltic States are also using the “Russian threat”. They are concluding high-cost security agreements with the US and are deploying NATO military contingents in their territories.

Moscow has said many times that it has no plans to attack any country. NATO knows it.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative, portraying NATO as having a belligerent agenda against Russia and claiming that the “Russian threat” is a false idea.

NATO does not seek confrontation with Russia. The Alliance indicated this position in the Brussels Summit Declaration in 2018. However, this declaration concludes that “Russia’s aggressive actions, including the threat and use of force to attain political goals, challenge the Alliance and are undermining Euro-Atlantic security and the rules-based international order”.

Disinfo: Soros' NGOs have brought Ukraine to the complete loss of sovereignty

The work of the Soros Foundation and some other Western organisations can be equated with the activities of the special services of foreign states. This is part of a hybrid war of the collective West against the countries of the post-Soviet space. In Ukraine, Soros’s scheme is already in effect at all levels. In Armenia, Soros’s projects have not yet reached the final stage of implementation, at which one can state a complete loss of sovereignty. But Ukraine is a vivid example of how Soros NGOs have brought the country “to the brink”.

Disproof

Conspiracy theory based on recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives about George Soros.

Ukraine is a sovereign and independent state with a democratically-elected President and parliament. You can find here numerous disinformation cases on Ukraine being under foreign control.

Disinfo: Biden will have no legitimacy because frauds were massive in US presidential elections

Donald Trump did not accept the transition. He agreed to pay the transition funds but he did not give up contesting. And he is right to contest the election since massive fraud took place.

A president who claims to rule the country on the basis of massive fraud is a president who has no legitimacy. A lot of people in the United States will continue to challenge the legitimacy of a hypothetical Biden administration. If Donald Trump accepted this it is for a very clear reason that he announces in his press release: Emily Murphy who is in charge of this has suffered threats, multiple threats. So he [Trump] preferred that the threats stop. When you threaten someone in an administration, you behave in an unworthy manner. And it wasn’t just there that there were threats. There is a very murky situation right now in the United States and it’s part of this very murky situation.

Disproof

Disinformation about the US in the context of the US presidential election.

In its interim assessment on the conduct of the election, the OSCE finds that the contest was "competitive and well managed" (p. 1), noting that "evidence-deficient claims about election fraud" (ibid.) have been refuted by "election officials at all levels" (p. 3) and "national security agencies" (p. 11).