In recent weeks, many media have labeled as "conspiranoicos" those who spoke of a plot to alter the US presidential elections.
Amazing article in Time bluntly acknowledging a "conspiracy"
Social media giants such as Twitter and Facebook even undertook censorship measures to punish those who claimed electoral fraud had been committed. After that campaign of disqualifications and censorship, and once Joe Biden has already installed in the White House, the surprise has jumped from the most unexpected place. Yesterday the progressive magazine Time, akin to Biden, published a scandalous article in which not only does it not deny the existence of the plot, but even boasts about it. The magazine linked the article on its Twitter account at 5:01 a.m., Spanish peninsular time:
The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the 2020 electionhttps://t.co/i55RGhvhjq
— TIME (@TIME) February 5, 2021
A "conspiracy" under the cynical pretext of "saving the elections"
The article is titled "The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election" (click here to read the original). The author of the article is Molly Ball, a journalist with a long experience, as well as a biographer of Democratic Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. Here's what a paragraph in the article says bluntly:
"This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s inner workings, never-before-seen documents and interviews with dozens of those involved from across the political spectrum. It is the story of an unprecedented, creative and determined campaign whose success also reveals how close the nation came to disaster. “Every attempt to interfere with the proper outcome of the election was defeated,” says Ian Bassin, co-founder of Protect Democracy, a nonpartisan rule-of-law advocacy group. “But it’s massively important for the country to understand that it didn’t happen accidentally. The system didn’t work magically. Democracy is not self-executing.”"
The theory that Time magazine develops could be summarized in one sentence: that the end justifies the means. The article presents this "conspiracy" as an attempt to save democracy, in a way that creates a dangerous equalization between one of the candidates and the democracy itself. With this, what Time shows is its distrust of democracy itself. In fact, Ball explains what happened like this:
"To the President, something felt amiss. “It was all very, very strange,” Trump said on Dec. 2. “Within days after the election, we witnessed an orchestrated effort to anoint the winner, even while many key states were still being counted.” In a way, Trump was right."
«An informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans»
Again, it is Time magazine itself that recognizes the "conspiracy" by citing it by its own name:
"There was a conspiracy unfolding behind the scenes, one that both curtailed the protests and coordinated the resistance from CEOs. Both surprises were the result of an informal alliance between left-wing activists and business titans. The pact was formalized in a terse, little-noticed joint statement of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO published on Election Day. Both sides would come to see it as a sort of implicit bargain–inspired by the summer’s massive, sometimes destructive racial-justice protests–in which the forces of labor came together with the forces of capital to keep the peace and oppose Trump’s assault on democracy."
For those unaware, the AFL-CIO is the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations, the largest and most powerful union in the USA, which has been compared to the mafia. In May 2020 that union pledged to support Biden's candidacy, as supported Hillary Clinton's already in 2016. The US Chamber of Commerce is a powerful business lobby that clashed with Trump over his rejection of mass immigration, which the Chamber considers beneficial to its interests (as it provides cheap labor, at the cost of making American jobs precarious and increasing the unemployment between them).
Time's unsustainable justifications for this "conspiracy"
Time attributes to that secret alliance a “shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted”, stating that this coalition dedicated lasted “for more than a year”. This justification does not stand up: is the cause of democracy so ugly that it has to be defended with its back to the people and with secret pacts between powerful organizations?
Likewise, Time contradicts itself by stating what the true objective of that secret action was: "The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all, a failure of the central act of democratic self-governance that has been a hallmark of America since its founding." That is, according to Time, a powerful union that promised to help Biden did not really intend to defeat Trump with that secret operation. The thesis has little credibility, but also the methods used do not add up either. This is how Time details them:
"Their work touched every aspect of the election. They got states to change voting systems and laws and helped secure hundreds of millions in public and private funding. They fended off voter-suppression lawsuits, recruited armies of poll workers and got millions of people to vote by mail for the first time. They successfully pressured social media companies to take a harder line against disinformation and used data-driven strategies to fight viral smears."
A "success" of the conspiracy: the wave of censorship in social networks
Judging by what happened, since Time speaks of "success" in its pressure on social media, what that coalition achieved is that the technological giants applied unprecedented censorship in democratic elections, going so far as to suspend the president of USA accounts when he was still in office. What kind of campaign to save democracy is it that calls it a "success" to erode free speech?
The conspirators were "a well-funded cabal of powerful people"
Time also explains the reason why this scandalous article sees the light: "the participants want the secret history of the 2020 election told, even though it sounds like a paranoid fever dream–a well-funded cabal of powerful people, ranging across industries and ideologies, working together behind the scenes to influence perceptions, change rules and laws, steer media coverage and control the flow of information. They were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it. And they believe the public needs to understand the system’s fragility in order to ensure that democracy in America endures."
This last paragraph is truly astounding: that a "cabal" of "powerful people" is dedicated to steer media coverage and control the flow of information in order to influence perceptions is what Time understands by a healthy democracy? Now they will tell us that political pluralism, freedom of speech and freedom of information are threats to democracy? It is comical that the magazine denies it as soon as it is detailed, because what Time exposes is an obvious manipulation of the elections to favor a candidate.
In fact, Time says that Mike Podhorzer decided to "protect" the elections in 2019. Podhorzer is not only the political director of the AFL-CIO, but he is also one of the directors of America Votes, a powerful lobbyist related to the Democratic Party that it receives much of its funding from the Democracy Alliance, a group funded - among others - by George Soros.
Union leader linked to the Black Lives Matter riots
The name of that union leader reappears in the Time article linked to the political use of the riots caused by the far-leftist movement Black Lives Matter:
"The racial-justice uprising sparked by George Floyd’s killing in May was not primarily a political movement. The organizers who helped lead it wanted to harness its momentum for the election without allowing it to be co-opted by politicians. Many of those organizers were part of Podhorzer’s network, from the activists in battleground states who partnered with the Democracy Defense Coalition to organizations with leading roles in the Movement for Black Lives."
Those involved were preparing to repeat the riots if Biden lost
Likewise, Time highlights the threat posed to the electoral process by the wave of violence created by that movement: "The summer uprising had shown that people power could have a massive impact. Activists began preparing to reprise the demonstrations if Trump tried to steal the election." Curious: when Trump supporters denounced the attempt by the Democrats to "steal the election," progressive media accused them of being conspiranoids. But it turns out that another wave of violence was brewing on the outskirts of the Democratic Party if Biden lost.
In fact, Time recounts the nervousness of Biden's supporters in the first hours of the recount: "Election night began with many Democrats despairing. Trump was running ahead of pre-election polling, winning Florida, Ohio and Texas easily and keeping Michigan, Wisconsin and Pennsylvania". However, "Podhorzer was unperturbed", Time says, appealing to the data available to him. Or maybe he knew there was something going on to avoid surprises?
Despite this, the nervousness continued: "The liberal alliance gathered for an 11 p.m. Zoom call. Hundreds joined; many were freaking out." One of those involved, Angela Peoples, acknowledges Time bluntly: "We wanted to be mindful of when was the right time to call for moving masses of people into the street", in what the magazine acknowledges would have been "show of strength". In other words, the supposed defenders of democracy were preparing to mount riots if the electoral result was not to their liking, and Time tells it quite naturally.
What purpose do the conspirators have with that article?
One wonders what the promoters of this conspiracy intend with the publication of that article, revealing their maneuvers in an influential madia such as Time. It seems like a full-blown provocation towards Trump and his followers, waiting for them to call protests to perhaps have an excuse to launch a new witch hunt against them on social networks and also beyond the network. That article is like saying: "yes, we cheated, but now we have the power and you have to screw up".
In 2016 they protested against the electoral result and in 2020 they wanted to protect democracy?
Of course, what Time has published is the icing on the cake of the dangerous drift started by most of the American media in 2016. Let us remember that four years ago, faced with a legitimate Trump victory against all odds, the political and media left reacted furiously, talking about a Russian conspiracy on which not the slightest proof was found, asking for more control of social media, calling protests against the electoral result and even fantasizing about a possible assassination of Trump as CNN did.
It sounds like a sardonic mockery that the same people who encouraged all this now say that four years later they tried to protect democracy by carrying out a conspiracy in the shadows to manipulate the elections. With this conspiracy, the damage they have done to democracy in the US is very serious, and they will be the main responsible for its effects, starting with the loss of credibility of the democratic process itself, crudely manipulated by "a well-funded cabal of powerful people."
Photo: Erin Schaff/Getty Images.
Don't miss the news and content that interest you. Receive the free daily newsletter in your email:Click here to subscribe