Disinfo: US Democrats persecute ideas they don't back and label Trump supporters as terrorists

Summary

One of the outcomes of the assault on the US Capitol is the imposition of a single speech and that anyone defending other ideas than those backed by the Democrats, who feel omnipotent now, could be targeted for persecution, censorship, silence. We are in face of some sort of purge. Journalists in some media are already living through this. We will have to wait very little to see how ‘dissidents’ will be denounced. Among the Democratic Party, there are even talks of reprogramming those who have been supporting Trump or that have a different idea than those preached by the Democratic Party.

The way that security forces see and talk about Donald Trump’s supporters is exactly the same that we see and talk about Al Qaeda and the Islamic State, said John Hudak of the Brookings Institution. Therefore, if you support Trump, you are a terrorist. It seems that whoever supported or voted for Trump, as we heard from the representative of this think tank, will be marked.

The system called terrorists those that took over the Capitol, though some videos show how practically they were given a red carpet to enter some areas of the building. A different matter is that they were hotheads, vandals and radicals, something to be denounced, but it should be noted that there were elements from both sides: white supremacists, but also Antifas.

Disproof

This is part of a pro-Kremlin disinformation campaign to discredit Joe Biden’s electoral victory, undermine the faith on the US electoral system and promote Donald Trump.

The affirmation about the imposition of a single speech and the targeting of anyone defending other ideas than those backed by the Democratic Party is not based on any evidence. The US rank 45th among 180 countries on the 2020 World Press Freedom Index.

The claim that if you support Trump you will be considered a terrorist is a deliberate distortion of the original interview that John Hudak of the Brookings Institution gave to Associated Press on January 15th, one week after the assault of the US Capitol. In the original clip, it is clear that Husak is talking about violent individuals among Donald Trump’s supporters who endorsed extremist views and are engaging in terrorist plots and are therefore a threat for US national security. Contrary to the claim, he doesn’t hint or affirm that all Trump’s supporters will be considered terrorists.

Apart from that, footage of riots at the US Capitol on 6, January, 2021 show, that police were easily overwhelmed and ceded their position without fighting. Most of the officials in charge of security resisted the assault, which led to the death of some of them. Therefore, there is no basis to say that “they were given a red carpet to enter some areas of the building”. Though claim that left-wing activists also took part in the assault were refuted by the FBI.

See other examples of these pro-Kremlin disinformation narratives in our database, such as claims that the US system is not democratic because the Deep State makes the big decisions; that the attack on the Capitol was a planned provocation; that the Democratic Party has become a fascist party; that there was electoral fraud in the US because the Deep State didn’t want Trump reelected; that the cybercracy, the Deep State and the Pentagon subdued Trump; or that the assault on the Capitol was the new 9/11.

publication/media

  • Reported in: Issue 230
  • DATE OF PUBLICATION: 20/01/2021
  • Outlet language(s) Spanish, Castilian
  • Country: US
  • Keywords: Democratic Party (US), Freedom of speech, Donald Trump, Terrorism
see more

Special forces detachment "Berkut" tried to protect Ukrainians 7 years ago

Seven years ago, armed clashes broke out in the centre of Kyiv when militant-nationalists from Western Ukraine were brought to Kyiv and the special forces, “Berkut”, tried to protect Ukrainians.

Disproof

This is a recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about the Euromaidan protests.

The Ukrainian revolution started from the gathering of students in Kyiv after former president Viktor Yanukovych refused to sign the EU Association Agreement. They were not 'militant-nationalists' who were 'brought to Kyiv'. The memories of participants are well-documented and it shows that there were people from all over the country who participated by their own will. Far-right groups had a very limited presence during the protests.

Navalny is used as an instrument by the Western special services

Foreign states are behind all the actions of the opposition leader Alexei Navalny; there is no place for such people who “betrayed the country” in the Russian authorities.

Today, Navalny is used as an instrument (interference) by the Western special services, the State Department. Everyone should have an understanding that everything he does is backed by foreign states. Our task is to prevent foreign interference, whoever pursues policy here, the country must be protected.

And if a person has betrayed the country, if he is on foreign funding, there is nothing for him to do in any government bodies. You cannot help him engage in politics, represent our citizens in different government bodies.

Disproof

Recurring pro-Kremlin disinformation narrative about Alexey Navalny.

Anti-corruption campaigner Alexei Navalny has long been the most prominent face of Russian opposition to President Vladimir Putin. His candidacy in the 2018 presidential election was banned by authorities over his conviction by a Russian court of embezzlement, which bars him from running for office. He has been arrested and imprisoned several times during his political career.

Navalny's arrest could be used by the West to impose new anti-Russian sanctions

The arrest of opposition leader Alexey Navalny after his return to Moscow from Germany, where he was hospitalised after he fell ill in Omsk, Siberia, has provoked a new wave of reactions in the West against Russia. Many analysts believe that this is part of a strategy to impose new sanctions against Moscow.

Disproof

A new twist of a previously used pro-Kremlin narrative that the poisoning of Alexei Navalny (and now his return to Russia) is a secret project to introduce sanctions on Russia.

Contrary to the claim, which is not backed by any evidence, Alexei Navalny is an independent Russian politician, not a pawn of any foreign government. His decision to return to Russia is related to his refusal to become an exile and to internal deliberations of his political movement, not to any order from abroad.