The use of the term “conspiracy” traditionally has been linked to the political context, especially to the planned strategy that has as its final objective the seizure of the power, whether it is legitimate or illegitimate. In this sense, the conspiracy will imply the performance of a series of actions carried out by a group of individuals who agree on the final objective of undermining the forces or leadership of the person who exercises power. The conspirators never have an altruistic or disinterested end but rather have the intention of removing someone from authority and imposing their own at any cost.----------------In the case that concerns us, Time magazine in an article acknowledges that a conspiracy took place before the presidential elections to remove Donald Trump from power, pretending to justify everything that happened, saying that the purpose of the conspiracy was "to defend democracy."------------------------The article is titled: 'The secret history of the shadow campaign that saved the 2020 election', published in Time Magazine on February 4, 2021, written by Molly Ball; and I will only copy some of the paragraphs of this long article, so that those who have followed the events of those elections and know how to interpret the cynicism that emerges from what is written in it, draw their own conclusions.---------What is written in this paragraph of the article summarizes the essence of it: “This is the inside story of the conspiracy to save the 2020 election, based on access to the group’s [of conspirators] 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.” Adds Time: “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 magazine continues: “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.”-----------------------------------------------------------------“The conspirators”. Time continues: “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. They executed national public-awareness campaigns that helped Americans understand how the vote count would unfold over days or weeks, preventing Trump’s conspiracy theories and false claims of victory from getting more traction. After Election Day, they monitored every pressure point to ensure that Trump could not overturn the result. ‘The untold story of the election is the thousands of people of both parties who accomplished the triumph of American democracy at its very foundation’, says Norm Eisen, a prominent lawyer and former Obama Administration official who recruited Republicans and Democrats to the board of the Voter Protection Program.”----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
“Protecting the election would require an effort of an unprecedented scale. As 2020 progressed, it spread to Congress, Silicon Valley, and the nation's state powers. It drew energy from the summer racial justice protests, many of whose leaders were a key part of the liberal alliance. And finally it reached the other side of the aisle, to the world of Trump-skeptical Republicans horrified by his attacks on democracy”, also says Time magazine.----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------“Digital platforms and social networks were also involved in the plot” - explains Time - "so that they enforce their rules, both by removing content or accounts that spread disinformation and, in the first place, by monitoring it more aggressively. In November 2019, Mark Zuckerberg invited nine civil rights leaders to dinner at his home, where they warned him about the danger of the election-related falsehoods that were already spreading unchecked. “It took pushing, urging, conversations, brainstorming, all of that to get to a place where we ended up with more rigorous rules and enforcement,” says Vanita Gupta, president and CEO of the Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, who attended the dinner and also met with Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey and others. ----------------------------------------------------------"In the end, nearly half of the electorate cast their ballots by mail in 2020, virtually a revolution in the way people vote. Only a quarter of voters cast their ballots from the traditional way: in person on Election Day." "It was crucial for voters to understand that, despite what Trump said, mail-in ballots were not susceptible to fraud and that it would be normal for some states to not finish counting votes on election night,” adds the magazine. "It was all very, very strange," the former Republican president said on Dec. 2. "Within days of 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”, reads another paragraph in the article.-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------What was published by Time magazine confirms the denunciations of the former president after the elections; and this article, displaying great cynicism, proudly assumes that this conspiracy was perpetrated for the good of the nation, which can be summed up with the phrase: "The end justifies the means", which is immoral. The article presents this "conspiracy" as an attempt to save democracy, in a way that creates a dangerous comparison between one of the candidates and democracy itself. It was necessary to eliminate the candidate who said and did what the majority wanted and who has the support of that majority, to impose what is convenient for dark interests that seek to impose policies that threaten the integrity and stability of the United States.---------------------------------------------------------------------It can be said that this "conspiracy" was not made to defend democracy, but to stab it in the back, imposing on an individual that since he became president, everything he has done has been to the detriment of the nation and the great majority of citizens; that is, to “destroy democracy”; making it clear that he never had the support of the majority, when we see that after a little over a year of his inauguration, the polls give him an approval rating below 30%; and the conspirators are very concerned about the possible outcome of the elections next November this year.-------------------------------------------In 1941 the nation was treacherously attacked from abroad with the intention of intimidating it and bringing its people to their knees, a giant who was asleep and woke up to defeat his enemies. In 2020 the attack has occurred from within and the giant has previously been drugged. Will “we the people” be able to react and defeat our enemies?

You, like Kevyn, seem to have an obsessive fixation with Mr. Trump and what I have written is not about that man, but about disinformation and how dangerous it is to create a Ministry of Truth; but it seems that you are in the city and you do not see the buildings, since you do not say absolutely nothing about the basic cases of disinformation that I have mentioned.
You don't seem to see that it's a joke that Mr. Biden wants to fight disinformation, when he supplies it to both hands. It's as if his son Hunter wants to give us a lecture on morals, when we've had the opportunity to see everything that appears on his laptop.
I believe that the one who used Russia in his collusion was not Mr. Trump, but Hillary Clinton; which was irrefutably demonstrated, since this matter was thoroughly investigated, to harm him, by Attorney Muller; and his report established that there was no proof of such collusion. However, it has been proven that Mrs. Clinton slandered Mr. Trump, and had a false dossier fabricated to create misinformation and win the election.

I was able to see some statements by Putin on this matter and his response was very consistent. He denied that
Russia would have interfered in the US elections and said that we interfered in the elections of all the countries of the world. He also stated that he sympathized with anyone who wanted to improve relations with Russia and that Trump had said so in his campaign.
We all know about the scandal that occurred when it was discovered that the telephone conversations of the heads of state of numerous countries had been spied on and it was not the Russians, it was our government.
All countries try to bring their sardines closer to the candle and the Russians, just like us, do it.

It is sad to see the things written by staunch defenders of everything Biden does, being used by the extreme left as a puppet; they do not seem to understand that it is dangerous to go against the rules of the game established by the Constitution.
The creation of this body has characteristics of becoming repressive, since the truth is relative and depends on the criteria of the people; thus when the socialists govern, the information will lean towards the truth of the extreme left; and when the conservatives govern, the information will lean to the right.
Creating this body is to start a police state, which will determine what is correct and what is not.
There is a legal principle that establishes that you can do everything that the law does not prohibit; but in the states under socialist, communist or fascist authoritarianism, in short of Marxism, this principle of law is annulled; and it is established that only what is authorized can be done.
Until now, the correct thing is that if someone slanders another person, the offended party can sue the slanderer and justice determines what is correct, establishing due process.
Mr. Trump has filed a lawsuit against Mrs. Hillary Clinton, which is correct; but I don't think it would be correct that if he comes to power in 2024, he would put her in prison because he determines it.
We also see how those who participated in the demonstrations on January 6, 2021 have been taken to prison and the mobs that have gone to threaten the members of the Supreme Court in their homes, which is punishable by law, have not even been called attention.

It is sufficiently proven that Mr. Trump won the elections in 2016 cleanly, even though he was the subject of slanderous disinformation against him by creating a false file against him, to make it look like a false collusion with Russia. This is proven. It seems you haven't heard the results of the Durham investigation yet. Nor of the declarations of the creator of the file (Christopher Steele) before a British court.
I agree with you: “Russia, Iran and China have no first amendment rights to pollute our airways or social media with lies and propaganda. Sadly traitorous idiots in both nations read and either believe or support this nonsense at the expense of freedom and democracy. “
The three basic cases that I exposed as disinformation used are applicable to purely internal issues: Russiagate, Hunter Biden's laptop and the case of George Floyd. In these three cases, the idiotic traitors have read, believe and support all the lies that appear in the media, defending leftist ideas that threaten freedom and democracy.
Hunter Biden's influence peddling is notorious. Big Guy himself declared it in a video that we have all seen, where he boasted of having a prosecutor fired who was carrying out annoying investigations into the Burisma corporation, which paid
Hunter for being the son of the Big Guy.
In the case of George Floyd, everything recorded by the police cameras was hidden. When these videos were made public in London, it was possible to see that what was applied to that individual was not a strangulation but an immobilization, which was necessary to apply to him, because the character was uncontrollable due to all the fentanyl he had ingested, which caused his death by suffocation. It is clearly seen how they put him in the patrol car through one door and they have to take him out through the other door due to the state of alteration that he presented.
His famous complaint of "I can't breathe" predates restraint.
All patriotic Americans understand the threats posed to our security by countries such as: China, North Korea, Russia, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela and some extremist Islamic countries; but some who pass themselves off as patriots are in collusion with some of them and receive money for that reason; or for obscure reasons they benefit them in some way, as is the case of giving millions of dollars to Iran with which they have later financed terrorism or has helped them to manufacture the atomic weapon that they long for so much to use against the Great Satan” that is our country.
Much can be said about the links that benefit many politicians regarding influence peddling

Disinformation can take several forms: completely false matters are propagated, harmful facts are hidden for convenience or facts are disclosed in a partial and distorted way. Examples of the above are: 1) The Russiagate, created by Hillary Clinton, through a false file created to slander her political opponent in the elections. 2) The laptop forgotten by Hunter Biden containing information about influence peddling involving the "Big Guy" that was ignored by the media. 3) The distortion of the facts, showing them in a partial and sensational way, to exacerbate emotions, as happened in the case of the death of George Floyd, with the aim of using the card of racism.
Now Mr. Joseph Biden, following the orders of those who manage him, creates a repressive organ within the Department of Homeland Security in order to “control disinformation”, which may have the objective of “fighting it”, but which can also serve to “ promote it” and “protect it”.
The creation of this organ is unconstitutional because it violates the First Amendment and is contrary to the division of powers, since the Executive assumes faculties that correspond to the Legislative and Judicial powers, intending to establish what it considers "politically correct", which constitutes a form of censorship, which would lead us to a tyranny exercised by any party that holds power.
It is ridiculous that this Administration promotes the creation of this repressive organ to combat disinformation, when the party in power is responsible for the disinformation created by the media, which are mostly favorable to it, the basic examples being those that we have mentioned previously.
I think that the creation of this body occurs as a response to the alleged acquisition of Twitter by Mr. Elon Musk, who expressed his opposition to the censorship imposed by this medium, restricting freedom of expression, which would be null and void if he obtains dominance over Twitter.
It seems that this repressive body created by Mr. Biden is a copy of those created by the communists and fascists in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany at the time; that they served Orwel to describe the functions of the Ministry of Truth in his book "1984"; or perhaps by those existing in communist China (now fascist), in Cuba or North Korea.
It is to be hoped that an appeal of unconstitutionality will be imposed against the creation of this repressive body of freedom of expression by any person or organization.

The class struggle that Marxism proclaimed between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie was a failure. Now the Marxists in their struggle for power, following the maxim of "divide and rule", intend to divide society not into two groups but into many. This came out of the Sao Paulo Forum and went to the UN, where the Marxists have entrenched themselves, and there we have the 2030 Agenda.
Racism, homosexuality, indigenism and other evils are being imposed on society, following an identity policy.
The Marxists intend to impose Democratic Socialism, pretending that it is Social Democracy, using those means that are contrary to democracy; and we see advertising turned into political propaganda, where whites are discriminated against; but not only that, we also see the preponderance given to homosexuals in advertising.
As you say, 72% of the population is white and the majority is discriminated against and they even take away their right to protest by applying what they have come to call politically correct, which is nothing more than an attack on free expression; and those who do not accept discrimination are branded as racist, white supremacist or homophobic as the case may be.
I hope that at some point the water reaches its level and that all these creations of sick minds, conceived in a psychedelic state, sink into the sewer of the murky waters.

It seems that writing in a psychedelic state is a new trend.

When it comes to US history, you better than anyone else (who taught that subject), would agree that the history of the Democratic Party is pretty dark. So it can be said, that the leopard could care less about one more spot.

I recommend you read the Constitution. The false electors could be those who were presented by the Executive of the states in dispute, that changed the laws without approval of the Legislative.
I do not reprimand anyone, because apparently, if you know how to read, you do not interpret what is written.
I have made it clear that this matter should have been thoroughly investigated; and not as it has been, where many of us have serious doubts about what happened, which does not help
truly save democracy.

I think intimidation in the 2020 election was practiced on people widely.
The powerful groups allied themselves to eliminate an individual who did not respond to the pressure they could exert.
It is good to read the article "to save democracy" that was published in Times magazine.
Although VP Pence could not determine if one candidate or another was certified, he could question those certifications from the states, which had been received twice: one by the State Executive and the other by the Legislative, which would force the Supreme Court to act accordingly.
I do not sympathize with any man, but with what he proposes to do; and if what Biden was proposing was good, I would have supported it, but it has been shown that those who voted for him were wrong.
It should be a consolation to those who understand the mistake they made in voting for Biden, that he was not elected by the votes of the citizens, but by the maneuvers of those who count the votes, who are more important, than those who vote, according to what Comrade Stalin said.
I don't think Pence has saved democracy in any way, although I can say that, at least, he chose the easy way out of not asking trouble for himself.

Whoopi Goldberg made the following comment: "The Holocaust was about man's inhumanity to man, it was about ethnicity, not race."
Taking these words we can paraphrase what they say and apply it to slavery.
Slavery is not about race but about man's lack of humanity towards man.
Slaves of all races have existed and in many cases the enslavers, the slavers and the slaves were of the same race.
In essence, this woman's comment, if she had not mentioned the word race, would be entirely correct and she could not be blamed for having done so; but since she is a racist (because racism is practiced by people of any skin color), she could not help it and trying to demerit the Holocaust (because it appears as a rival to the slavery suffered by people of dark color, more than 150 years ago), made a serious mistake, which can provide ammunition for those who oppose the tendency to keep racism alive; and for this, those who support identity politics (which is a trend that promotes Marxism as a substitute for class struggle, of which racism is a part) suspends her from The View and makes her apologize.

I think that what LogicallyRight has written has nothing to do with a policy of appeasement and now you want us to learn from the Second World War, when on other occasions you have written the opposite, showing that you were not concerned about the Ribbentrop - Molotov pact, which could be copied today between China and Russia.
You have to remember when Mao told Nikita Khrushchev that we Americans were a "paper tiger" and Nikita replied that he (Mao) was right; but that it was necessary to take into consideration that this paper tiger had nuclear fangs.
Today in the case of Russia something similar happens; it's not a tiger, it's a bear with nuclear fangs.
On the other hand, the Commander in Chief that we have is not the best, because he depends on what his handlers determine. You just have to see what they did with the withdrawal from Afghanistan and nothing good can be expected from those who do such stupid things.

The Russians are good chess players, it seems that we Americans only know how to play checkers. We had a good chess player Bobby Fisher but no more.
Politics is a lot like chess and poor Biden and his advisers aren't even good checkers players.
We do not learn from the lessons of history; and I remember again what happened in the case of Cuba.
I remember a preacher who said: "Punishment lies in sin" and that was what happened to the Democratic administration of Kennedy in October 1962, with the Missile Crisis, for not having respected the commitment made with the anti-communist Cubans who landed at the Bay of Pigs in April 1961 to end the Castro regime.
If this administration was truly interested in the well-being of the US, it would seize the opportunity offered to correct old mistakes and I agree with you that Putin does not want to invade Ukraine, as well as that this country would be a good buffer between two potential enemies, that should be working to be friends and face the real danger facing the world which is Chinese fascism.
Putin's threats to put the missiles back in Cuba and Venezuela give rise to take action on these countries. We must put into execution the tactic used by the Soviet Union, which in order to withdraw the missiles that threatened us in Cuba, demanded that it be guaranteed that Cuba would not be invaded, leaving Castro a free hand to destabilize the American hemisphere by all possible means.
Now the situation is reversed and we are the ones threatening Russia with admitting Ukraine to NATO and we must make the same proposal that the Soviets did to withdraw their missiles. We will not admit Ukraine to NATO and Russia will not invade it, returning to the status quo that existed before the invasion of Crimea, in order to respect the integrity of Ukraine, country which will benefit from being able to negotiate, as you say, both with Russia and with the rest of Europe and the USA, without the need for excessive military spending.
Of course, we must offer Putin a proposal that he cannot refuse, like those that Don Corleone used to make; and for this, it is necessary to make a show of force and at the same time propose talks through diplomatic channels. Not as was done in the case of Afghanistan, where a show of force had to be made before the withdrawal and if the established government had no chance of maintaining power, not a single nail left there, if it served to wage war.
If what Putin wants is the security of Russia, we must guarantee it, without handing over Ukraine, because we cannot do what was done with Cuba either.
Through diplomacy, it is possible to obtain an improvement in relations with Russia, which would distance it from its relationship with China and the solution of the main problems that exist in America with countries such as Cuba, Venezuela and Nicaragua, taking care in the prosperity of our neighbors to the South, so that they do not need to be sending us illegal immigrants.
I agree with you that the Democrats are using the Machiavellian policy of creating incidents abroad to cover up their failures and bad actions in their politics at home, which will possibly lead to their defeat in the next elections.

By putting three question marks in the title of your post, it sounds like you have doubts that what you say is the greatest economic recovery in history. Of course the sarcasm is understood, when you say: "if a republican were President".
Good thing you don't name that President.
But I really don't understand what economic recovery there has been. It is true that to tell lies it is necessary for the liar to convince himself that his lie is true.