A Perfect Test to See Who's Swallowed the 'Blue Pill,' and Who Has Taken the 'Red'

"Listen to me, Coppertop. We don't have time for 20 Questions."

Lunatics like myself have been saying for years that voting, at least on the national level, is useless. In my opinion, there probably hasn’t been an election that was “on the level” since the 1950s (I’m sure many will disagree and point to ones prior to 1950). The Time Magazine article Vin Armani and I covered on our February 6th Livestream, “The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election,” is still, after my third reading of it, one of the most revealing pieces of propaganda I’ve experienced. It is clearly designed to be consumed in one of two ways: either the “conspirators” (the author’s term, not mine) involved are national heroes, or they are horrid villains. There is no in-between that I can find.

I am structuring this piece in such a way as to be a brief overview that can be shared with people who would not normally read a 6,000+ word article. I am providing excerpts I found to be the most compelling that may drive your friend or loved-one to the source article so they will read what I believe to be the most incredible piece of “journalism” so far in the 21st Century (this one will be hard to beat).

The article sets the stage from the beginning:

A weird thing happened right after the Nov. 3 election: nothing.

The nation was braced for chaos. Liberal groups had vowed to take to the streets, planning hundreds of protests across the country. Right-wing militias were girding for battle. In a poll before Election Day, 75% of Americans voiced concern about violence.

Instead, an eerie quiet descended. As President Trump refused to concede, the response was not mass action but crickets. When media organizations called the race for Joe Biden on Nov. 7, jubilation broke out instead, as people thronged cities across the U.S. to celebrate the democratic process that resulted in Trump’s ouster.

Many of us anticipated protests, riots and violence the day after the election if either Trump was announced as the victor, or there was no clear winner. Even though one of those scenarios happened, and protests were PLANNED, there was nothing. Why?

The article continues:

A second 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.

Those six words, “In a way, Trump was right,” should have most clear-thinking people screaming.

The author continues, using language that someone not steeped in partisan politics should bristle at:

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. [Emphasis added]

That paragraph is so pregnant with red-flags it’s hard to know where to start but the fact that the term “conspiracy” is used in what appears to be a positive way, should signal the slant the author is taking. The most important takeaway to me was that the “protests” and “resistance” were avoided. If protests were planned for the day after the election, they could only be canceled if the conspirators knew what the outcome was going to be 4 days before it was announced. And that it would be in their favor. This is clear, right?

At this point, I would hope anyone with a mind that hasn’t been infected by partisan politics would want to examine an article where self-described conspirators spill the beans on how they, in their words, “… were not rigging the election; they were fortifying it.” [Emphasis added] It’s maddening that a fraction of the minuscule segment of the population that would even bother to read this article will not see or understand its clear message. That they won’t may be the real takeaway from all of this.