Nicolai Haugsted
Critics sound alarm over Trump’s growing use of conspiracy claims against his opponents.
Donald Trump has never been shy about accusing opponents of working against him.
During his second presidency, however, critics say that habit has acquired considerably higher stakes.
Scholars, former federal officials and legal experts are raising alarms over Trump’s increasingly frequent use of conspiracy claims against political opponents, journalists, scientists and other critics. Their concern is not simply about presidential rhetoric, but about what can happen when accusations from the country’s most powerful office are accompanied by government action.
Harvard professor Steven Levitsky, co-author of How Democracies Die, offered perhaps the starkest assessment.
“Conspiracies are page one of the repressive playbook,” Levitsky told The Guardian.
“They’re almost always used to justify repression.”
Levitsky pointed toward historical authoritarian leaders including Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Putin, arguing that conspiracy allegations have repeatedly been used to portray opponents as dangerous enemies rather than ordinary political adversaries.
Critics see a familiar Trump tactic
Princeton historian Julian Zelizer traces part of Trump’s political style back decades.
Trump had a close relationship with Roy Cohn, the controversial lawyer who became famous during the anti-communist investigations of the 1950s before later advising Trump during his New York business career.
“Trump, mentored by Roy Cohn, learned that baseless allegations about shady forces working against him could serve to mobilize and lead the public to see him as a victim rather than a wrongdoer,” Zelizer told The Guardian.
“Whenever faced with criticism, such as from the media or about his AI policies, his instinct is to throw out charges of a vast conspiracy that is out to get him.”
Zelizer argued that the consequences extend well beyond political messaging.
“Trump’s frequent use of conspiracies to attack critics has a damaging impact on all levels of society and democracy, from weakening confidence in elections to hurting our ability to deal with serious problems involving the AI industry,” he said.
Media battle provides a fresh example
Trump’s escalating fight with the press has supplied critics with one of their clearest recent examples.
CNN, Politico and MS NOW were barred from White House access in September after Trump accused the organizations of deliberately spreading false information.
Trump announced what he called an “assault on the FAKE NEWS” on Truth Social, describing unfavorable media coverage as coordinated and a threat to national security.
The three organizations sued.
U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly subsequently ordered the administration to temporarily restore their access, finding that the ban was likely unconstitutional. Reuters reported that Kelly said the record lacked factual support for the administration’s national-security justification.
The dispute remains active. CNN was removed from the traveling press pool again this week despite the temporary restoration of its White House credentials.
Former federal prosecutor Ty Cobb, who served in Trump’s White House during his first administration, sees a broader pattern.
“Trump denies, denigrates and demeans his foes by painting them as part of a conspiracy,” Cobb told The Guardian.
“He resorts to abject fabrications in response to any criticism or resistance.”
Elections return to the argument
Trump’s claims about American elections are another major source of concern for his critics.
During a nationally televised address in July, Trump described noncitizen voting as a “crisis of election security” while pressing for tighter voting requirements.
Available evidence does not support claims of widespread noncitizen voting.
FactCheck.org found that Trump offered no evidence of widespread fraud during the address and noted that the conservative Heritage Foundation’s own database contains fewer than 100 convictions involving noncitizens illegally voting or registering to vote since 1982.
PolitiFact similarly concluded that years of evidence show noncitizen voting to be statistically rare and without demonstrated impact on election outcomes.
Trump’s administration disputes the broader criticism of its election-security campaign. The White House says newly declassified intelligence demonstrates serious vulnerabilities to foreign interference and has accused Democrats and media organizations of downplaying those threats.
Critics argue that legitimate concerns about foreign interference are different from unsupported claims that noncitizen voting is occurring on a scale capable of compromising American elections.
Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney who teaches law at the University of Michigan, believes Trump’s rhetoric risks preparing voters to distrust November’s results.
“It seems that the Trump administration is grooming the electorate to believe that the fall election will abound with fraud,” McQuade told The Guardian.
“It is difficult to know if this effort is a pretext for seizing voting equipment, a strategy to intimidate some likely Democratic voters from showing up at the polls, or a campaign to undermine public confidence in the outcome, but all of it is harmful to democracy.”
‘Grand conspiracy’ investigation draws criticism
Trump’s Justice Department has also pursued an investigation into what the president and allies have characterized as a “grand conspiracy” involving government officials and investigations connected to Russia’s interference in the 2016 election.
Former CIA director John Brennan and former FBI director James Comey are among officials who have received subpoenas, according to The Guardian.
Leadership turnover has raised questions about the investigation. Former prosecutor Joe diGenova departed in September after five months, while veteran national-security prosecutor Maria Medetis Long had previously resigned after reportedly expressing concerns about its direction.
Former Justice Department inspector general Michael Bromwich sharply criticized the approach.
“The so-called Grand Conspiracy investigation turns prosecutorial practice on its head,” Bromwich told The Guardian.
“It starts with designated targets, the president’s perceived enemies, and then searches for facts and bends the law to support the theory.”
Science gets pulled into the fight
Politics and elections are hardly the only battlegrounds.
Trump has repeatedly called climate change a “scam” and has moved aggressively against environmental regulations during his second term.
His administration revoked a major federal scientific finding in February that had concluded greenhouse gases endanger public health, while also promoting coal production and restricting several offshore wind projects.
Scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports the conclusion that human activity is warming the planet.
Naomi Oreskes, a Harvard historian of science and professor of earth and planetary sciences, argued that Trump’s energy decisions carry both environmental and financial consequences.
“Trump’s decisions make no sense from either the perspective of environmental protection or the cost of energy,” Oreskes told The Guardian.
Public-health policy has produced another clash.
Trump claimed in August that the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccine could be “quite lethal,” without presenting scientific evidence supporting that assertion. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., meanwhile, spoke in September at an event organized by Children’s Health Defense, the organization he previously led and which has long promoted claims about vaccines rejected by mainstream scientific research.
