Monday, July 20, 2026

The Deep State: Understanding Its Definition, Historical Roots, and Variations Across Nations — Foreign Affairs Forum

The Deep State: Understanding Its Definition, Historical Roots, and Variations Across Nations — Foreign Affairs Forum
Where news is not just a fact but reality
   
The Deep State: Understanding Its Definition, Historical Roots, and Variations Across Nations
Jul
21
==
Executive Summary
The term "Deep State" denotes a complex, often clandestine network of actors, institutions, and interests that operate autonomously from elected officials within a government framework. 

It encapsulates the notion of entrenched power brokers—including components of the military, intelligence agencies, and established bureaucracies—who exert substantial influence over state policies and decisions, typically beyond the purview of public oversight.

The conceptual roots of the Deep State can be traced through various political and societal contexts, historically characterized by opaque interactions between civilian governance and military entities. 

A notable example arises from Turkey in the 1990s, where the term surfaced to describe a covert alliance that intertwined military operatives, organized crime syndicates, and political elites to orchestrate state actions behind the scenes.

National representations of the Deep State are profoundly influenced by the specific political landscapes, cultural contexts, and historical trajectories of each country. 

In the United States, discourse surrounding the Deep State has intensified in recent years, particularly regarding governmental institutions perceived to counteract or subvert the directives of elected officials. 

This interpretation often points to entrenched bureaucratic mechanisms within the federal administration that some argue prioritize institutional stability over political innovation. 

Conversely, in other regions, the Deep State may manifest as a network of collusion and corruption that undermines democratic integrity, impacting electoral processes or hindering systemic reforms.

In conclusion, the Deep State is a multifaceted construct marked by its elusive characteristics and the diverse forms it assumes across various geopolitical contexts, shaped by both historical antecedents and contemporary power dynamics. 

A thorough understanding of its implications is essential for grasping the complexities of governance and accountability across different political systems globally.

Introduction 
Understanding the Deep State Concept
Deep state refers to unauthorized and often secret networks of power operating independently of a state’s political leadership in pursuit of their agendas and goals.

The term describes potential clandestine networks of government officials, intelligence agencies, military personnel, bureaucrats, and sometimes private sector actors who exercise influence beyond democratic oversight.

The deep state represents what scholars call a “state within a state” - a form of governance where unelected individuals or institutions wield significant power over policy-making, often operating in ways that bypass or undermine the formal democratic process. 

Unlike elected officials accountable to voters, deep state actors operate in secrecy and are generally immune to public scrutiny or electoral consequences.

Origins and Evolution of the Term
Turkish Roots
Derin Devlet
The deep state concept originated in Turkey, where the term derin devlet (literally “deep state”) first emerged in the 1990s to describe a clandestine network of military, intelligence, and bureaucratic elements operating independently of elected officials. 

The Turkish deep state was characterized by its alleged connections to organized crime, its use of extra-legal methods, and its commitment to protecting the country’s secular, nationalist foundations.

Turkish Prime Minister Bülent Ecevit was the first state official to publicly acknowledge the deep state phenomenon in 1974, referring to the Kontrgerilla (Counter-Guerrilla) organization and its questionable activities. 

The concept gained wider public attention following the 1996 Susurluk scandal, which exposed connections between government officials, military officers, and organized crime figures.

Academic Introduction to English
Peter Dale Scott, a professor emeritus at the University of California, Berkeley, introduced the term into English-language academic discourse. 

In his 2007 book The Road to 9/11: Wealth, Empire, and the Future of America, Scott first applied the deep state concept to American politics, describing how parallel forces operate alongside the regular “public state”. Scott’s work established the theoretical foundation for analyzing deep state phenomena beyond Turkey.

Norwegian scholar Ola Tunander is credited as the first to internationalize the concept in a 2009 essay, expanding its application from Turkey to other national contexts. 

This academic work provided the framework for comparative deep state analysis across different political systems.

Popular Political Usage
The term gained significant mainstream political traction through Mike Lofgren, a former Republican congressional aide who worked 28 years in Congress. 

In 2014, Lofgren published an influential essay titled “Anatomy of the Deep State,” followed by his 2016 book The Deep State: The Fall of the Constitution and the Rise of a Shadow Government.

Lofgren defined the American deep state as “a nexus of corporations, banks, and defense contractors that had gained so much financial and political control” - essentially the sources of Washington’s corruption. 

His work popularized the concept in American political discourse, though he later expressed concern about how the term was being misused.

The concept became particularly prominent during Donald Trump’s presidency (2017-2021), when it was frequently invoked by Trump and his supporters to describe alleged resistance within government agencies, particularly the FBI and CIA. 

This usage transformed the term from an analytical concept into a political weapon, often deployed to discredit career government officials and intelligence agencies.

Universal Characteristics vs. National Differences
Universal Elements
Deep state phenomena share several common characteristics across nations

The Unelected Power Structures
Deep states consist of individuals and institutions that wield influence without being subject to democratic elections or direct public accountability.

Institutional Autonomy
These networks operate with high degrees of independence from formal government oversight, often justified by national security or state continuity claims.

Covert Operations
Deep state actors typically work behind the scenes, using informal channels and secret methods to achieve their objectives.

Resistance to Democratic Control
A defining feature is the ability to maintain influence regardless of electoral outcomes or changes in elected leadership.

National Security Justification
Deep state activities are often rationalized by appealing to the protection of national interests against existential threats.

National Variations
Despite these commonalities, deep state manifestations differ significantly between countries based on their unique historical, political, and institutional contexts.

Deep State Differences
Russia, Europe, and the United States

Russian Deep State
The Siloviki System
Russia’s deep state is dominated by the siloviki - former and current members of the security services, military, and law enforcement agencies. 

This system emerged during Vladimir Putin’s rise to power, with 78% of Russia’s government, business, and social leadership currently linked to the Federal Security Service (FSB).

Key Characteristics of the Russian Deep State:
KGB/FSB Dominance
The FSB operates as essentially “a second government of Russia,” controlling other government institutions including the Defense Ministry, Investigative Committee, and Prosecutor-General’s Office. 

The agency has been transformed into what critics call “a semicriminal structure” that influences court decisions and operates beyond legal constraints.

Economic Integration
Russian deep state actors control vast economic resources through state-owned enterprises and “silovarch” networks - hybrid businessmen-security officials who combine corporate power with intelligence backing. 

The system functions through “Putin’s children” - a new generation of elites who have benefited from two decades of Putin’s patronage.

Organized Crime Connections
The Russian deep state maintains extensive ties to criminal organizations, with Putin himself having connections to significant gangs dating back to the 1990s in St. Petersburg. 

This creates a “mob enterprise” where state power is used for criminal enrichment.

Asset Consolidation
Facing economic pressures, the FSB is actively seizing assets from oligarchs and military officials to consolidate resources for Putin’s inner circle, using shell companies and forced auctions to redistribute wealth.

European Deep State
NATO’s Hidden Networks
Europe’s deep state history is fundamentally shaped by Operation Gladio - NATO’s secret “stay-behind” armies established after World War II. 

This network reveals how external powers (primarily the US and UK) created parallel structures within European governments.

Operation Gladio’s Legacy
Transnational Coordination: Unlike purely domestic deep states, European networks were internationally coordinated by the Pentagon and NATO through committees like the Allied Clandestine Committee. 

This created standardized deep state structures across Western European nations.

Cold War Anti-Communist Mission
European deep state networks were explicitly designed to prevent communist parties from gaining power, using methods ranging from electoral manipulation to false flag terrorism. 

The Italian branch carried out the notorious “strategy of tension” - bombing campaigns blamed on left-wing groups to discredit communists.

Integration with Right-Wing Extremists
Gladio networks recruited extensively from fascist and far-right organizations, particularly in countries like Italy and Germany. 

This created lasting connections between state security apparatus and extremist political movements.

Contemporary Questions
While Operation Gladio was officially terminated in 1990, scholars debate whether similar structures persist in modified forms, potentially adapted for different strategic objectives.

United States Deep State
The Military-Industrial-Intelligence Complex

The American deep state differs from its Russian and European counterparts in several key ways, reflecting the country’s unique political system and global role.

Structural Characteristics
Intelligence Community Autonomy
The US deep state centers on the 18-agency intelligence community, including the CIA, NSA, FBI, and military intelligence services. 

These agencies operate with substantial independence and classified budgets that limit oversight.

Corporate Integration
Unlike the Russian model’s direct state control, the American deep state involves extensive collaboration between government agencies and private contractors. 

This creates a “revolving door” between public service and private sector positions in defense, intelligence, and technology.

Bureaucratic Continuity
The American deep state includes career bureaucrats and civil servants who remain in position across different administrations, potentially creating policy continuity that transcends electoral changes. 

Critics argue this creates “unaccountable experts” who operate beyond constitutional oversight.

Constitutional Constraints
Unlike more authoritarian systems, the US deep state must navigate constitutional separation of powers and judicial review, though critics argue these constraints are increasingly ineffective.

Dual Shadow Government Structure
Some analysts identify two distinct shadow governments: the Continuity of Government (COG) system designed for emergencies, and the everyday “permanent bureaucracy” that influences policy implementation.

Comparative Analysis
Legitimacy and Control
Levels of Public Acknowledgment
Russia
The deep state operates relatively openly, with Putin’s FSB background and siloviki dominance being widely recognized.

Europe
Historical deep state activities are partially documented through parliamentary investigations and academic research, though much remains classified.

United States
Deep state allegations remain highly contested, with supporters viewing it as necessary expertise and critics seeing it as undemocratic power concentration.

Methods of Operation
Russia
Employs direct coercion, asset seizure, and criminal methods integrated with state power.

Europe
Historically used false flag terrorism, electoral manipulation, and paramilitary operations coordinated internationally.

United States
Relies more on policy influence, media management, and legal/regulatory mechanisms rather than direct violence.

Relationship to Democracy
Russia
The deep state openly suppresses democratic institutions while maintaining electoral facades.

Europe
Historical networks subverted democracy covertly while claiming to protect it from communist threats.

United States
The debate centers on whether deep state activities strengthen or undermine democratic governance through expertise versus accountability tensions.

Contemporary Relevance and Concerns
The deep state concept has evolved from its Turkish origins into a global framework for understanding unelected power structures. 

While manifestations differ significantly between nations, the core tension between democratic accountability and technocratic governance remains universal.

Modern deep state analysis reveals how globalization, technology, and security concerns create new opportunities for unelected influence while traditional democratic oversight struggles to adapt. 

Whether viewed as necessary expertise or dangerous subversion, deep state phenomena continue to shape political discourse and governance structures worldwide.

The term’s evolution from academic concept to political weapon demonstrates how analytical frameworks can be weaponized for partisan purposes, complicating efforts to understand these complex power structures objectively. 

This highlights the importance of rigorous, comparative analysis in studying deep state phenomena across different national contexts.

deep state roots, american way, russia, putin
3 Likes

Dr. Antonio Bhardwaj
Dr. Antonio Bhardwaj is a renowned polymath and veteran strategist whose career spans over forty years of high-stakes leadership in business, geopolitics, and academia.

Having served as the President of two SAP consulting partner firms and engaged in decades of scholarly research, Dr. Bhardwaj occupies a unique intellectual space where technical infrastructure intersects with the profound complexities of human nature.

At the heart of his current work is a mastery of Strategic Country Assessment.

Dr. Bhardwaj acts as a "physician to the state," employing a sophisticated diagnostic framework to evaluate the social, economic, and political health of nations. By synthesizing fiscal policy analysis with social psychology, he uncovers the root causes of budget deficits and national divisions, proposing systemic solutions that foster both economic stability and social unity.

This pursuit is further distinguished by his deep integration of computational epistemology.

Dr. Bhardwaj investigates the formal structures of knowledge—examining how machine intelligence represents truth and how these systems interact with human belief. This specialized perspective enables him to navigate the "Prometheus Protocol" of our era: the merging of machine intelligence with global infrastructure.

His academic authority is anchored by dual doctorates in Social Psychology and Theology, granting him a profound understanding of collective unconscious processes and societal moral frameworks.

Dr. Bhardwaj is currently advancing this mission at the frontier of technology, pursuing a PhD in Artificial Intelligence at an elite university.

His foundational background in mechanical engineering, international trade, and finance provides the structural rigor needed to analyze military theory, national policy, and Global Maritime Energy Chokepoints.

Furthermore, his expertise in the in-depth analysis of high-stakes IPOs offers a unique vantage point on strategic competition and the development of global supremacy.

As Editor-in-Chief of Washington Media and an advisor to the United Nations, his incisive commentary on the "deep state" and the historical trajectories of Russia and the Gulf regions has become essential reading for those navigating today’s multipolar world. Yet, his work transcends pure analysis; through his Selective Writings, he advocates for the vulnerable, systematically dismantling oppressive structures to create environments of dignity and freedom.

Despite his formidable professional achievements, Dr. Bhardwaj remains deeply connected to the peaceful rhythms of nature. An avid photographer of forests, waterfalls, and caverns, and a keen observer of butterflies, he draws constant inspiration from the interconnectedness of all life.

This holistic worldview is rooted in his personal journey as a dedicated single parent—a role that remains his most meaningful commitment to fostering a world defined by free choice and compassion.

Follow the journey of creative and analytical exploration:

IG: @foreignaffairsforum

Website
Posted by at No comments:

Deep state conspiracy theory in the United States - Wikipedia

Deep state conspiracy theory in the United States - Wikipedia


Deep state conspiracy theory in the United States

Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In the United States, a political conspiracy theory posits the existence of a deep state within the US federal government, primarily composed of members of the FBI and CIA.[1][2][3] Proponents argue that a clandestine network of conspirators within the leadership of the financial and industrial sectors exercise power alongside or within the elected government.[4]

There have been precursors to the idea of a deep state conspiracy since at least the 1950s.[5] The term deep state originated in the 1990s as a reference to high-level anti-democratic coalitions in Turkey, but began to be used to refer to the American government as well, including during the Obama administration.[6] Allegations of a deep state conspiracy reached mainstream recognition under the first presidency of Donald Trump, who falsely claimed the "deep state" was working against him and his administration's agenda.[1][7][8]

Origins of the concept

Although the term deep state is thought to have originated in Turkey in the 1990s,[9] belief in the concept of a deep state has been present in the United States since at least the 1950s. A 1955 article in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, quotes Americans sharing their belief in the existence of a "dual state": a hidden national security hierarchy and shadow government that monitors and controls elected politicians.[10][11]

President Dwight Eisenhower warned in his 1961 farewell address:

In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.[12]

Usage by Donald Trump and allies

U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland (pictured) has been targeted by numerous "deep state" conspiracy theorists and Donald Trump supporters for the 2022 FBI search of Mar-a-Lago.

During his first presidency, Donald Trump and his strategists alleged that the deep state was interfering with his agenda and that the United States Department of Justice was part of the deep state because it did not prosecute Huma Abedin or James Comey.[13][14][15] Some Trump allies and right-wing media outlets alleged that Obama was coordinating a deep state resistance to Trump.[13][16] Rebecca Gordon, an author and teacher at the University of San Francisco, writes that Trump has used the term deep state to refer to the U.S. government, in particular government Institutions that "frustrate" him, as well as block or fail to implement his government policy such as courts, the Justice Department, and the news media.[17]

Trump's supporters have used the term deep state to refer to allegations that intelligence officers and executive branch officials were influencing policy via leaks or other internal means.[18][19][20] Political commentator and former presidential adviser David Gergen has said that the term has been appropriated by Steve Bannon, Breitbart News, and other supporters of the Trump administration in order to delegitimize the critics of the Trump presidency.[19] The concept of a deep state is a central tenet of the QAnon pro-Trump conspiracy theory movement.[21][22][23][24][25]

Journalist Tim Sullivan, writing on the Associated Press website, described Trump's talk of a deep state as "repeating a longtime [John Birch Society] talking point."[26] Commentators and academics have warned that use of the term in the United States could undermine public confidence in institutions and be used to justify suppression of dissent.[1][13][27] Journalist Niall Stanage has described how critics of Trump's use of the term deep state maintain that it is a conspiracy theory with no basis in reality.[28][clarification needed] Fox News panelist Charles Krauthammer has ridiculed the idea of the deep state, arguing that the United States government is controlled by a bureaucracy, rather than a government-wide conspiracy.[29]

Analysis

Compared with developing governments such as Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey, governmental power structures in the United States are "almost entirely transparent".[30][31][32] According to UCLA School of Law professor Jon D. Michaels, the American 'deep state', which is really the 'American bureaucracy', includes federal agencies responsible for regulation, welfare, crime prevention, and defense, and the employees who operate them, fundamentally differs from Trump's use of the term in five important respects:[32]

  • Not Elitist – In the US, bureaucrats come from a diverse range of socio-economic backgrounds, especially when compared to those in the Middle East, and even Western Europe.
  • Not Shadowy – American agencies are generally "transparent and accessible", in comparison to those of the Middle East, Asia, and Europe.
  • Not Monolithic – the American deep state is "internally diverse and fragmented."
  • A Bulwark, Not a Battering Ram – actions of civil servants in the US are inherently defensive, not proactive.
  • Not an Extraconstitutional Force – the bureaucracy should be seen as part of the constitutional system of checks and balances in the US, which often serves as a final check on presidential or agency overreach.

Political scientist George Friedman writes that the so-called "deep state" is no secret and the civil service was created by law to limit the power of the president.[33]

Historian Alfred W. McCoy has said that the increase in the power of the United States Intelligence Community since the September 11 attacks "has built a fourth branch of the U.S. government" that is "in many ways autonomous from the executive, and increasingly so".[34]

Tufts University professor Michael J. Glennon stated that President Barack Obama did not succeed in resisting or changing what he calls the "double government" and points to Obama's failure to close Guantanamo Bay detention camp, a major campaign promise, as evidence of the existence of a deep state.[35]

According to Stephen Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard University, there is no deep state and that "to the extent that there is a bipartisan foreign-policy elite, it is hiding in plain sight".[36]

Journalist Marc Ambinder has suggested that a myth about the deep state is that it functions as one entity; in reality, he states "the deep state contains multitudes, and they are often at odds with one another".[37]

Linguist Geoffrey Nunberg has said that "deep state" is an "elastic label" in that "its story conforms to the intricate grammar of those conspiracy narratives", referencing the transition of conservative rhetoric regarding "big government" from "meddlesome bunglers" to "conniving ideologues".[38]

Public attitudes

According to journalist David S. Rohde, belief in the "deep state" is an increasingly partisan issue: while the term "deep state" is frequently used by American conservatives to refer to an administrative state which they believe has grown too large and powerful and which threatens individual liberty, American liberals are more apt to point to the "military–industrial complex", a cabal of military generals and defense industry corporations whom they believe enrich themselves by promoting endless wars and mass surveillance of Americans.[39]

According to an ABC News/Washington Post poll of Americans in April 2017, about half (48%) thought there was a "deep state", defined as "military, intelligence and government officials who try to secretly manipulate government", while about a third (35%) of all participants thought it was a false conspiracy theory, and the remainder (17%) had no opinion. Of those who believe a deep state exists, more than half (58%) said it was a major problem, a net of 28% of those surveyed.[40][41]

A March 2018 poll by Monmouth University found most respondents (63%) were unfamiliar with "deep state" but a majority believe that a deep state likely exists in the United States when described as "a group of unelected government and military officials who secretly manipulate or direct national policy". Three-fourths (74%) of the respondents say that they believe this type of group probably (47%) or definitely (27%) exists in the federal government.[42][43][44]

An October 2019 The Economist/YouGov poll found that, without giving a definition of "deep state" to respondents, 70% of Republicans, 38% of independents, and 13% of Democrats agreed that a deep state was "trying to overthrow Trump".[45]

A December 2020 National Public Radio/Ipsos poll found that 39% of Americans believed that there was a deep state working to undermine president Trump.[21]

In his 2015 book The State: Past, Present, Future,[46] academic Bob Jessop comments on the similarity of three constructs:

  1. The deep state, for which he cites former Republican congressional aide Mike Lofgren: "a hybrid association of elements of government and parts of top-level finance and industry that is effectively able to govern... without reference to the consent of the governed as expressed through the formal political process."[47]
  2. The dark state, or "networks of officials, private firms, media outlets, think tanks, foundations, NGOs, interest groups, and other forces that attend to the needs of capital, not of everyday life" while "concealed from public gaze" or "hidden in plain sight," citing political scientist Jason Lindsay's 2013 article.[verify][48]: 37–38 
  3. The 4th branch of U.S. government, which consists of "an ever more unchecked and unaccountable centre... working behind a veil of secrecy," citing Tom Engelhardt's 2014 book.[49]

Lofgren identifies the military–industrial complex as the private-sector component of the "deep state".[50]

See also

References

  1.  Horwitz, Robert B. (April 27, 2022). "Trump and the "deep state"". Taylor & Francis. doi:10.4324/9781003259923-5/trump-deep-state-robert-horwitz.
  2.  Berg, Winston (October 2, 2023). "Origins of the "Deep State" Trope". Critical Review. 35 (4): 281–318. doi:10.1080/08913811.2023.2305537. ISSN 0891-3811.
  3.  Langer, Armin (March 22, 2022). "Deep State, Child Sacrifices, and the "Pandemic": The Historical Background of Antisemitic Tropes within the QAnon Movement.". Antisemitism on Social Media. Routledge. pp. 18–34. ISBN 978-1-000-55429-8 – via Google Books.
  4.  Osnos, Evan (May 21, 2018). "Trump vs. the 'Deep State'". The New Yorker. Retrieved October 23, 2018.
  5.  "How the 'deep state' conspiracy theory went mainstream". Newsweek. August 2, 2017. Retrieved August 12, 2017.
  6.  Fallows, James (July 15, 2013). "The Impending Senate Vote on Confirming Nominees". The Atlantic Monthly. Retrieved October 21, 2018.
  7.  Barnes, Julian E.; Goldman, Adam; and Savage, Charlie (December 18, 2018) "Blaming the Deep State: Officials Accused of Wrongdoing Adopt Trump's Response" The New York Times
  8.  Rupar, Aaron (June 17, 2019) "Trump accidentally undercuts his own 'deep state' FBI conspiracy theory" Vox
  9.  "The Turkish Origins of the 'Deep State'", jstor.org, April 10, 2017.
  10.  Curtis, Adam (October 16, 2020). "Is QAnon a game gone wrong?". FT Film. Financial Times. Retrieved February 15, 2022.
  11.  Morgenthau, Hans J.; Kennan, George F. (April 1, 1955). "The Impact of the Loyalty-Security Measures on the State Department". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 11 (4): 134–140. Bibcode:1955BuAtS..11d.134M. doi:10.1080/00963402.1955.11453586. ISSN 0096-3402.
  12.  "President Dwight D. Eisenhower's Farewell Address (1961)". National Archives. Retrieved April 27, 2026.
  13.  Davis, Julie Hirschfeld (March 6, 2017). "Rumblings of a 'Deep State' Undermining Trump? It Was Once a Foreign Concept". The New York Times.
  14.  Rucker, Phillip; Costa, Robert; Parker, Ashley (March 5, 2017). "Inside Trump's fury: The president rages at leaks, setbacks and accusations". The Washington Post.
  15.  Lucey, Catherine; Superville, Darlene (January 2, 2018). "Trump accuses DOJ of being part of 'deep state'". Associated Press. Retrieved January 2, 2018.
  16.  Weigel, David (March 7, 2017). "Trump and Republicans see a 'deep state' foe: Barack Obama". The Washington Post.
  17.  Gordon, Rebecca. "What the American 'deep state' actually is, and why Trump gets it wrong". Business Insider. Retrieved April 4, 2022.
  18.  Tharoor, Ishaan (February 1, 2017). "Is Trump fighting the deep state or creating his own?". The Washington Post.
  19.  Abramson, Alana (March 8, 2017). "President Trump's Allies Keep Talking About the 'Deep State'. What's That?". Time. 'This is a dark conspiratorial view that is being pushed by [top Trump strategist] Steve Bannon, his allies at Breitbart and some others in the conservative movement that is trying to delegitimize the opposition to Trump in many quarters and pass the blame to others,' said David Gergen.
  20.  Crowley, Michael (September–October 2017). "The Deep State Is Real". Politico Magazine. Retrieved September 5, 2017.
  21.  Rose, Joel (December 30, 2020). "Even If It's 'Bonkers,' Poll Finds Many Believe QAnon And Other Conspiracy Theories". NPR. Retrieved May 28, 2024.
  22.  Choi, Matthew (January 8, 2021). "Twitter disables Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell accounts for spreading QAnon content". Politico. Retrieved May 28, 2024.
  23.  Bomey, Nathan; Guynn, Jessica (October 2, 2020). "How QAnon and other dark forces are radicalizing Americans as the COVID-19 pandemic rages and election looms". USA Today. Retrieved May 28, 2024.
  24.  Broderick, Ryan (January 23, 2020). "QAnon Supporters, Anti-Vaxxers Spread A Hoax Bill Gates Created Coronavirus". BuzzFeed News. Retrieved May 28, 2024.
  25.  Czopek, Madison (January 26, 2021). "Troops weren't sent to Europe to free trafficked children". @politifact. Retrieved May 28, 2024.
  26.  Sullivan, Tim (January 21, 2024). "In small-town Wisconsin, looking for the roots of the modern American conspiracy theory". AP News. Retrieved September 19, 2024.
  27.  Graham, David A. (February 20, 2017). "Why it's dangerous to talk about a deep state". The Atlantic Monthly.
  28.  Stanage, Niall (June 5, 2017). "The Memo: Is Trump a victim of the 'deep state'?". The Hill.
  29.  Hafford, Michael (March 9, 2017). "Deep State: Inside Donald Trump's Paranoid Conspiracy Theory". Rollingstone.com. Retrieved May 29, 2019.
  30.  "Michaels, Jon". www.law.ucla.edu. UCLA School of Law. August 15, 2017. Retrieved December 29, 2020.
  31.  Michaels, Jon D. (September–October 2017). "Trump and the 'Deep State'". Foreign Affairs.
  32.  Michaels, Jon D. (2017). "The American Deep State". Notre Dame L. Rev. 93: 1653.
  33.  Friedman, George (March 15, 2017). "The Deep State Is A Very Real Thing". HuffPost.
  34.  Scahill, Jeremy (July 22, 2017). "Donald Trump and the Coming Fall of the American Empire". The Intercept. Retrieved July 29, 2017.
  35.  Smith, Jordan Michael (October 18, 2014). "Vote all you want. The secret government won't change". The Boston Globe. Retrieved August 22, 2017.
  36.  Walt, Stephen M. (September 7, 2018). "The Battle for Crazytown". Foreign Policy. Retrieved October 20, 2018.
  37.  Ambinder, Marc (March 10, 2017). "Five myths about the deep state". The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved August 9, 2017.
  38.  Nunberg, Geoff. "Opinion: Why The Term 'Deep State' Speaks To Conspiracy Theorists". NPR. Retrieved August 24, 2018.
  39.  Rohde, David (2020). "Prologue: Whistleblowers". In Deep: The FBI, the CIA, and the Truth about America's "Deep State". New York: W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN 978-1-324-00355-7.
  40.  "Nearly half of Americans think there's a 'deep state' in US: Poll". ABC News. April 27, 2017. Retrieved March 23, 2018.
  41.  Langer Research Associates. "Lies, Damn Lies and the Deep State: Plenty of Americans See Them All" (PDF). ABC News.
  42.  Wright, Avid. "Americans skeptical of government, more politically engaged, poll finds". CNN. Retrieved March 23, 2018.
  43.  Morin, Rebecca. "Poll: Majority believe 'deep state' manipulates U.S. policies". Politico. Retrieved March 23, 2018.
  44.  "Public Troubled by 'Deep State'". Monmouth University Polling Institute. Retrieved March 23, 2018.
  45.  Frankovic, Kathy. "Americans who favor impeachment want President Trump removed, too | YouGov". today.yougov.com. Retrieved October 19, 2019.
  46.  Jessop, Bob (December 2015). The State: Past, Present, Future. John Wiley & Sons. p. 224.
  47.  Lofgren, Mike (February 21, 2014). "Essay: Anatomy of the Deep State". BillMoyers.com. Retrieved October 18, 2018.
  48.  Lindsey, Jason Royce (2013). The Concealment of the State. Bloomsbury. ISBN 978-1-4411-7245-7.
  49.  Engelhardt, Tom (2014). Shadow Government: Surveillance, Secret Wars, and a Global Security State in a Single Superpower World. Chicago: Haymarket Books. ISBN 978-1-60846-427-2.
  50.  "'Deep State' Truthout Interview". February 22, 2016. Retrieved August 9, 2017.

Further reading

Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)