Disinfo: The “Deep State” decides who may or may not become president of the US


The “Deep State” decides who may or may not become president of the US.

The existence of a “Deep State” is by no means to be denied here. There are definitely forces at work in the U.S. that decide, without democratic legitimacy, who may or may not become president. (…) If things get out of hand on 20 January as well, we will see a mobilisation of the Deep State. Then, in the name of anti-fascism, fascism will take hold in the USA.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about global elites secretly ruling the world, and specifically a so-called ‘Deep State’ in the United States who rule above elected officials. This narrative aims to question the legitimacy of democracy and Western institutions.

The claim is a conspiracy theory and no evidence is presented to back it. No reputable political scientists or researchers confirm the existence of a “Deep State” in the United States.

The US presidential election process is based on democratic principles. There are no secret forces at work in the US that decide, without democratic legitimacy, who may or may not become president. The OSCE Observation Mission has stated that the 2020 Presidential election were “competitive and well managed”. Read more OSCE statements on the 2020 American elections here.

See other examples of these disinformation narratives, such as claims that the result of the US 2020 election doesn’t matter because the real ruler is the Deep State, which will kill any US president that confronts it and is moving the country towards war with Iran and Russia; that the “Deep State” fights with Trump; or that Covid-19 vaccines will lead to full spectrum dominance.


  • Reported in: Issue 227
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 11/01/2021
  • Language/target audience: German
  • Country: US
  • Keywords: US Presidential Election 2020, Protest, Deep state, Secret elites / global elites, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, Conspiracy theory


Cases in the EUvsDisinfo database focus on messages in the international information space that are identified as providing a partial, distorted, or false depiction of reality and spread key pro-Kremlin messages. This does not necessarily imply, however, that a given outlet is linked to the Kremlin or editorially pro-Kremlin, or that it has intentionally sought to disinform. EUvsDisinfo publications do not represent an official EU position, as the information and opinions expressed are based on media reporting and analysis of the East Stratcom Task Force.

see more

What we are witnessing (in the US) is a successful coup d’etat

It is another matter to think about the question of the reasons that made this coup d’etat possible. And what we are witnessing is a coup – brazen, large-scale and, alas, successful. So why did the system of checks and balances not work, successfully keeping the American state from such a seizure of power? After all, the case is not the only one. Such attempts have already taken place, but then the system coped.


An unfounded claim, describing the democratic process of electing Joe Biden for President as a “coup”. The claims in the article are part of a recurring disinformation narrative 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).

There were extensive investigations about possible fraud, which turned out to be unfounded. This unprecedented scrutiny led to the conclusion that the November 3rd elections were the most secure elections in the history of the United States.

Allegations of electoral fraud have been dismissed more than 60 times by different US courts and judges, both Republican and Democrats, due to lack of any significant evidences, including the Supreme Court in two occasions.

The SS reflects the modern ideology of the Latvian authorities

The 16 March [editor note: Remembrance Day of the Latvian Legionnaire], we call it SS Man’s Day, it also reflects quite well the modern ideology of the Latvian authorities. Since today’s government is imposing radical nationalist policies, it must of course be based on something similar in history.


Prominent pro-Kremlin narrative about the armed anti-Soviet resistance in Latvia, aimed at discrediting the independence struggle of the Baltic States and whitewashing the history of Soviet occupation and Stalin's crimes; a growing trend of historical revisionism. For background on earlier disinformation attempts see our article here.

The 16 March celebrates the Latvian Legion, part of the Waffen-SS, who fought against Soviet rule during the Soviet invasion and occupation during and after World War II. Pro-Kremlin media aim to portray the partisans as Nazi collaborators who actively participated in the extermination of the Jewish population and to depict the entire partisan movement as criminal, as a justification for the 1940 and the 1944 Soviet occupations. As the logic goes, if the resistance is proven to be criminal, the occupation would seem justified.

Latvia is persecuting Russian media

In early December 2020, Latvian authorities detained seven Russian-speaking journalists. The reporters worked with the Russian media company “Rossiya Sevodnya”.

Rossiya Sevodnya is a state enterprise of the Russian Federation. Dmitriy Kiselev, a person from the sanctions list, is not the owner of the company.

Latvian authorities are trying to criminalise all contacts with Russia. That is, to bring a criminal case against any person who has professional contacts with Russia at any time.


Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation message about the Baltic States. Read more about the Russian language media in Latvia here.

The activities of Sputnik and Baltnews are also in the focus of the State Security Department of Lithuania. The public report “National Threats Assessment 2018”, prepared by the State Security Department of the Republic of Lithuania and Second Investigation Department under the Ministry of National Defence, states: