The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election

Matt5

Well-Known Member
Jun 12, 2019
874
327
Zürich
✟132,622.00
Country
Switzerland
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election | Time.Com

It's hard for me to read this and not laugh. The conspiracy behind the scenes was between the good guys. In this story the progressives are the good guys. They were trying to prevent Trump and his followers from overturning/stealing the election.

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.

They (the good guys, aka the progressives) got caught sleeping in 2016 and have now taken over.

Look at what was happening well before the election:

The billionaire takeover of civil society - spiked

If one accepts what ‘givers’, like Omidyar et al, say, it becomes apparent that rather than participating in traditional acts of charity, like founding a hospital for the needy, they [NGOs funded by billionaires] are attempting to engage in ‘social engineering’ – that is, using their resources to artificially change the structure of society to what they think it should be. If successful, this would amount to an extreme circumvention of democracy, utilising money not just to win elections, but to substitute paid or subsidised content for actual support, and thereby flip an entire political culture on to a different track by amplifying some voices and drowning out others. Moreover, just to keep things interesting, this is viewed in quite explicit investment terms – and investors tend to expect a return on their investment.

Here's some meddling by some billionaires:

REVEALED: Zuckerberg Group Funneled 99.4% Of Voter Engagement Budget To Democrat Districts

According to the group, a project of the Thomas More Society, “local governments, with the support of Zuckerberg and Center for Technology and Civic Life (CTCL), are usurping the role of state governments in deciding the funding priorities for election spending, and demonstrate that private funds cannot be used to gain an undue advantage in these cities and counties in presidential battleground states and selectively targeted U.S. Senate and House races.”

Kline spoke to National Pulse Editor-in-Chief Raheem Kassam on The National Pulse show, describing how, as a result of activist groups like CTCL, it has never been “more difficult to vote in a generation.”

And CTCL’s reach is expansive.

The following article includes a video on the 2020 election anomalies. Unfortunately, the video is 2 hours long. I haven't seen all of it. Mike goes through some of the specific problems of the election and talks to some experts.

Mike Lindell Releases Explosive Documentary on the 2020 Election - "ABSOLUTE PROOF" Film Includes Testimony and Interviews from Experts on Historic Fraud in 2020 Election

Anomalies don't necessarily mean proof. But they do strongly suggest further investigation.

But the courts ... .

Did the courts ever actually look at the evidence of election irregularities, or did they just throw out the lawsuits due to standing, too early or too late?

Here's one for third-graders:

Mail-in ballot requirements are in the Pennsylvania constitution. New mail-in ballot legislation did NOT amend the constitution. The Pennsylvania Supreme Court threw out a challenge to the new legislation. Even though a third-grader could figure out that the new mail-in ballot legislation was in clear violation of the state constitution, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court could not.

Nothing to see here. Move on.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: prodromos