“The system is rigged.” That is one of the phrases Donald Trump has repeated most often since the meteoric rise of his political career in 2016. Over the years, his accusations have increasingly targeted specific actors: the deep state, liberal elites, judges, journalists, the “radical left”… He creates a narrative of persecution, according to which the United States must be saved from ruin and betrayal, and he and his movement are the only ones who can do it.
This communication strategy is fundamental to legitimizing his leadership. As sociologist Robert Tucker wrote in the 1970s, the construction of “situational charisma” depends on the ability to offer a means of salvation in a moment of profound misfortune. That is why the criticisms and accusations do not stop, even though many institutions are already under his control. Enemies and bad practices must continue to be identified because they are what justify the necessity of his leadership.
The president and his administration then dedicate themselves to sowing distrust. This also serves to weaken and target political opponents who pose a threat to their consolidation of power, and to cast doubt on news and data that are unfavorable to them. If all institutions and their leaders are questioned, if there is no truth or facts but only versions and opinions, then any accusation against Trump is weakened.
The fall in trust in institutions is one of the factors typically associated with the erosion of democracy. But that does not seem to be a problem for Trump — in fact, he is fueling it. While the drop in credibility did not begin with him, it has accelerated in recent years. According to a 2025 Gallup study, on average, only 28% of citizens express confidence in nine key institutions, ranging from the presidency to the Supreme Court and the media. In 2022, the percentage fell below 30% for the first time and has not returned to that level since.
The following section reviews various actions taken by the president and his team to increase Americans’ distrust in institutions, the political system, and society in general. It also highlights some of the consequences of these actions.
Use of deepfakes
Since returning to the White House, Trump has posted at least 15 AI-generated videos or images on his Instagram account, depicting distorted versions of himself and others, including rivals, in a negative light. On his account on Truth Social, he also regularly shares content sent to him by supporters, such as the video of him piloting an F-16 and spraying excrement at the “No Kings” protests in October.
This isn’t just a tactic to grab attention on social media; it’s also a way to blur the line between truth and falsehood. Almost no one believes the video showing Democratic leaders in the Senate and Congress wearing mariachi hats while declaring that no one supports their party anymore, but the post serves to fuel and amplify doubt about what is real and what is not.
Praising anti-vaccine and conspiracy groups
In September, the president shocked the scientific community when he warned that pregnant women should not take acetaminophen or paracetamol because it could cause autism in their babies. His administration strongly promotes the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) movement, led by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy. Using social media content and conspiracy theories, they have strengthened anti-vaccine sentiment and, in states like Florida, have succeeded in removing mandates for certain injections. With an army of influencers and official accounts, they give advice as unscientific as avoiding medications or foods that are difficult to pronounce, further fueling distrust in the healthcare system.
Targeting experts
Thousands of independent officials who have worked for various federal institutions for years have been targeted by the president, who questions the work they do or the information they gather when it does not fully support him. Different sectors have been in the crosshairs, from scientific and economic fields to intelligence services. The same pattern has tended to repeat: public criticism to pressure resignations or policy changes, firings, or even threats using mortgage records to force departures. The goal is for institutions to bend to his will, or at least for their credibility to be seriously undermined.
The data war
The U.S. federal government shutdown was the longest in history. During this period, the collection of crucial data was halted, including labor market trends, flu and COVID-19 infections, agricultural import and export figures, and other information essential for calculating the size of the economy and inflation.
But beyond this specific situation, the Trump administration has been taking measures for months that threaten the collection of official data. First, it stopped publishing information on mental health and violence protection programs, as well as on climate and environmental conditions. In August, it went a step further by directly questioning data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. After firing its head, the president presented several XL-format charts in a statement from the Oval Office, supposedly showing that the figures had been underestimated to harm him while they had been inflated during Joe Biden’s presidency.
Bringing old cases back into the spotlight
A segment of the U.S. public is prone to conspiracy theories, which focus on the role of institutions in specific historical events, such as the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, his brother Robert Kennedy, or civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. Trump has reignited historical debates by declassifying secret files on these cases and others that are less political, such as the death of pilot Amelia Earhart, who disappeared in 1937 while attempting to cross the Atlantic. The documents related to Earhart have not yet been officially released.
Through these actions, Trump seeks to reinforce an image of transparency to his base in contrast to the alleged opacity of traditional institutions.
Fueling distrust and polarization
The consequences of Trump’s rhetoric and actions are already visible in opinion studies. During his second presidency, public confidence in independent institutions — normally removed from political disputes — has declined significantly. In addition, partisan bias has deepened due to the politicization of certain state institutions for specific political goals or those that face strong backlash, such as law enforcement and defense agencies.
To find out more:
Books:
Articles:
Videos:
Studies:
Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition
