Letter to the Editor

Dear Editor:

In direct response to Armando Gaytan and his point of view regarding President Trump, the January 6th incursion of the Capitol Building, his persistence on no voter fraud.

First of all, former President Trump was just impeached as a private citizen for allegedly calling for the riot. When in fact the facts stated otherwise and Trump was acquitted. In fact, if Mr. Gaytan were fair and balanced, he would be calling for the impeachment of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Maxine Waters, Joe Biden, and Kamala Harris, and a host of his favored politicians for using inciteful rhetoric (words) to stir up the faithful to go and harass, challenge, fight, pressure, Republicans wherever they may be at the time. One such event of a Bernie Sanders supporter going to a GOP Softball Tournament with sole intent of shooting Republicans, which he did, then House Majority Whip U.S. Rep Steve Scalise, (R-Louisiana) was shot and critically injured.

Secondly, the January 6th incursion was wrong. Just as the summer riots in Washington D.C. and in various cities across the USA were wrong. As more facts come out about the Capitol incursion we learn that the Capitol Police and local law enforcement were notified days in advance that anti-Trump folks were to be expected. So then, who knew what and when? Were precautionary measures formulated and implemented? Furthermore, Speaker Nancy Pelosi needs to be interviewed under oath about her involvement or noninvolvement with the security measures of the U.S. House Chambers. If Speaker Nancy Pelosi had prior knowledge of potential terrorist type activity targeting the U.S. House and was found to be derelict in her sworn duty to protect and defend the Constitution, allowing if not arranging and directing such action, then that should be grounds for charges of treason, which is an act of war.

Thirdly, persistence of no voter fraud without the slightest bit of evidence? What part of signed affidavits by dozens of people who swore they directly witnessed irregularities in the delivery of ballots, the recovery of ballots, and the vote counting procedures is “without the slightest bit of evidence”?

Not the least of which, the U.S. Constitution clearly states the respective state legislatures have the sole authority to write and change election laws. Why then did the courts rule that states governors and election boards could rewrite election laws, thereby circumventing the U.S. Constitution? That’s a great question isn’t it, SCOTUS?

To Mr. Gaytan, I respectfully submit as first articulated by Bernard M. Baruch in 1946 and then attributed to Daniel Patrick Moynihan:

“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts”

Bill Hull

Ennis, Texas