OK. Let's try one last time. Fuck knows why, I'm sure it's a complete waste of time, but here goes.
You said the article backs up your hunch that:
"I think the decision to finish Trump had been made between the big boys"
That implies a conspiracy to prevent Trump from winning the election. There was no such conspiracy, and the article doesn't claim there was one, either. The article describes a counter-conspiracy to ensure the election wasn't rigged, as a response to the Trump campaign's conspiracy to rig the election. That's not the same as ensuring Trump didn't win the election, because one possible outcome of a unrigged election was obviously that Trump might still have won it anyway.
And you said:
elections are a fight between two teams both of which are trying to rig the election and whoever rigs it best wins.
Which is horseshit, because there isn't a scrap of evidence to suggest that the Democrats tried to rig the election.