Is it still a “conspiracy” if they say it was?

8 February 2021

2.6 MINS

Just when you thought that the events of last year couldn’t get any more far-fetched, Time magazine recently published any article outlining the strategy for the ‘Shadow Campaign’ to ‘save’ the 2020 election. Just before you dismiss me as some right-wing, tin-foil-hat-wearing conspiracist, just note the following opening paragraphs:

[An] odd thing happened amid Trump’s attempts to reverse the result: corporate America turned on him. Hundreds of major business leaders, many of whom had backed Trump’s candidacy and supported his policies, called on him to concede. 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.

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.

So, there was a ‘conspiracy’ after all?! It’s just that, according to Time, the collusion was warranted because Trump was such a tyrant and as such, the very foundations of democracy were at stake. As the article goes on to state:

That’s why 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.

The political spin in re-writing history here is enough to impress even Shane Warne. As James Delingpole writes:

Do you see what they just did there?

The Democrats (and their sympathisers) didn’t rig the election. They just fortified it by taking care to ensure the right guy won rather than the wrong guy won, regardless of what those pesky voters might misguidedly have wanted.

Could this have anything to do, you wonder, with President Trump’s upcoming impeachment trial?

To be completely fair, the article from Time understands how this ‘conspiracy’ might be perceived negatively by those who are not as progressive as they could be by arguing:

The handshake between business and labor was just one component of a vast, cross-partisan campaign to protect the election — an extraordinary shadow effort dedicated not to winning the vote but to ensuring it would be free and fair, credible and uncorrupted. For more than a year, a loosely organized coalition of operatives scrambled to shore up America’s institutions as they came under simultaneous attack from a remorseless pandemic and an autocratically inclined President. Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. 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.

So, are we truly supposed to believe that the ultimate goal of the polyamorous relationship between Big-Media, Big-Tech™ and Big Business™ was the protection of our democratic freedoms? Because, if so, then someone better quickly inform The New York Post, whose bombshell exposé article on Hunter Biden’s laptop was more censored than a communist-cultivated coronavirus.

[Image: Tim O’Brien, TIME Magazine, 23 April 2018]

SHARE >

We need your help. The continued existence of the Daily Declaration depends on the generosity of readers like you. Donate now. The Daily Declaration is committed to keeping our site free of advertising so we can stay independent and continue to stand for the truth.

Fake news and big-tech censorship make the work of the Canberra Declaration and our Christian news site the Daily Declaration more important than ever. Take a stand for family, faith, freedom, life, and truth. Support us as we shine a light in the darkness. Donate today.

DONATE

One Comment

  1. Warwick Marsh 8 February 2021 at 3:37 pm - Reply

    Marks incisive commentary always cuts to the quick! Great Article!!!!!

Leave A Comment

Recent Articles

  • 17 August 2022

    2.5 MINS

    A study by The Heritage Foundation Center for Education Policy has found that increasing minors’ access to cross-sex medical interventions does not necessarily decrease suicidality among youth, as is commonly claimed. In fact, the report states, “it likely leads to higher rates of suicide among [...]

    READ MORE
  • 16 August 2022

    6.3 MINS

    TO: The Australian Colleges and Associations of Medicine, Health, and Science, and All Australian Federal, State, and Territory Senators and Members of Parliament Dear Colleagues, It is with great pleasure that I introduce you and your respective organisations to the Australian Medical Professionals Society. This [...]

    READ MORE
  • 15 August 2022

    6.1 MINS

    Editor's Note: This article on the sudden deaths of multiple doctors in Canada by Steve Kirsch, Executive Director of the Vaccine Safety Research Foundation, rings further alarm bells about the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. ___ This is a list of just the doctors [...]

    READ MORE
  • 12 August 2022

    2.8 MINS

    Editor's Note: Writing in News Weekly, former President of the National Civic Council Peter Westmore points out the erroneous claims made by the Minister for the Environment which will infect national policy, further eroding our agricultural and fishing industries. ___ Unveiling the “State of the [...]

    READ MORE
  • 12 August 2022

    3.7 MINS

    Secular attempts to force inclusivity upon everyone are anything but inclusive. Why is this so? Let us examine the underlying assumptions of this totalitarian worldview. Inclusivity has become a hot topic of conversation since the Manly Sea Eagles Pride Jersey Saga. The Manly NRL club [...]

    READ MORE
  • 11 August 2022

    3 MINS

    Is it unfair for "trans-women" to be excluded from lesbian-only events? Or do lesbians' rights come first? Equality Tasmania insists it’s only fair that men who identify as women have access to lesbians. The lobby group put out a statement yesterday in response to a [...]

    READ MORE
  • 10 August 2022

    2.2 MINS

    Nation First takes a look at the founder of the World Economic Forum. Klaus Schwab is the brains behind the World Economic Forum (WEF), being both the organisation’s founder and chairman since its inception in 1971. Schwab was born and raised in Ravensburg, Germany. And, [...]

    READ MORE