On the 20th, the WSJ published an editorial in which, after properly acknowledging the lies and fabrications of Donald Trump, made an extended analysis of what happened under his mandate and the actors and the circumstances that prevented his repeated attempts to push aside the law and at the very end of his presidency, to stop the power transfer to Biden.

The WSJ’s detailed analysis aims to dissipate Democrats’ and many Americans’ fears of an authoritarian Trump’s second mandate.

I am amazed by the fact that WSJ seems not to have noticed that their detailed descriptions of several events during Trump’s first mandate confirm that the fears of Trump’s declared authoritarian attitudes and purposes are very well founded.

Also, the WSJ’s reassurances that the same barriers and balances that mitigated or voided Trump’s violations of the rules four years ago still stand solidly fast are a somewhat questionable, if not dismissable, assumption.

To be fair to WSJ, today, WSJ has made a commendable analysis of the maneuvering that for months has been frantically going on behind the scenes in America on the Republican side to prepare itself to confront a deeply feared Trump defeat in the November elections.