By Craig Hastings
I told you last week that I joined the social media site, Parler. This is the only social media site I’ve bothered to be a part of since my failed six month Facebook stint back in 2010. Why Parler? Parler is a conservative site which features comments from Mark Levin, Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Candace Owen, many of the Republican Party loyal and members of the Donald Trump support camp. So you think I joined because this would be a safe place for me and my own conservative thoughts and writings? No one was going to challenge anything I had to say because we are all part of the Trump think tank? I will admit that I did think it would be much easier to have my say and mostly the members would agree and even prop me up a bit. It doesn’t work this way all of the time. Members don’t spend their time patting each other on the back for any of their criticisms of Democrats, Russians, Chinese, or Iranians.
The first week was easy. I mostly read what others had to say and make simple one and two line comments if even that. Like other sites you can simply tap the “thumbs up” icon or in Parler’s world it’s an up commit or down comment. What drew me to Parler mostly was members don’t comment on what they had for supper, when they got their hair cut, took the dog for a walk, or post pictures of their picnic in the park, day at the lake, or their best drunk event. No, Parler is a site where the members comment mostly on the day to day goings on in the political world. Too boring, to slow for your high speed desire to be recognized for how you are living your day to day life? Then Parler is not for you.
So I gave Parler a week of read and no comments to kinda get a feel for what happens next. Of course there has been much to do about the Supreme Court of The United States rejecting case after case of President Trump’s legal teams. These cases are those passed up to SCOTUS through various state’s appellate courts. I sat by quietly for as long as I could. It was either get into the fray or quit the site all together. Why? There are many very, very intelligent people that have commented on the SCOTUS’ opinions coming from their rejections to hear these Trump Campaign cases. You know the cases. The ones that argue that the election was stolen from Trump, at least four states committed high crimes of voter fraud, state constitutions were violated, etc. It’s not that I don’t think some of these alleged incidents are true but, they only argue half of what is expected from them.
So here’s generally what I said and what happened when I did. A couple of people with an IQ miles higher than mine could ever hope to be even if I lived a thousand years are furiously critical of the SCOTUS for rejecting both the Pennsylvania mail in ballot arguments and most recently the Texas suit that was joined by another twenty-eight states or so arguing four states electoral college votes should not be counted. My argument defending the Justices in their rejection to hear the suits was long and was actually cut short because of the maximum word allowance we are provided in one comment. I’m sure most of you that read me can easily believe this coming from me!
I mistakenly assumed that even if not everyone completely agreed with me that the return comments would be civil and mildly critical if critical at all. Nope. Holy cow! A couple of people got deep into my “stuff” for daring to challenge the best of the best of the conservantive movement. When the lead dogs bark a thousand pack dogs cry out ready to go so get out of the way or be run over I discovered! I attempted to calm the storm by telling these people that it’s not that I disagree with what I believe to be factual, this election was corrupt. There were without doubt mistakes both intentional and unintentional, deliberate acts of voter fraud, and in your face criminal acts causing half of the American people to believe the election was rigged, slighted to favor Joe Biden. At last national poling I believe some of the poles report over sixty percent of Americans believe the election was rigged even if not stolen. This would have to include some Democrats.
How dare I argue with the best of the best? Here’s my stance on this and I believe this to be where the Justices and I are in agreement. Everyone turn the burner down a notch. Remember the founding fathers by design set the Supreme Court up to be non-partisan, to act independent of all politics, for each Justice to independently think for themselves and opine accordingly. This is the very thing that they are doing and this is why I think so. The SCOTUS was not ever supposed to pick the president for the country. The sitting Justices today are trying their damndest not to pick the president. At least not without such crazy overwhelming evidence that they have no choice. So far I believe that sure, heck yes, the Trump Campaign lawyers have collected enough evidence to prove without a doubt that crimes were committed and deliberate unlawful acts were committed by a few states to change the voting tallies in favor of one candidate. Until these crimes and deliberate acts of fraud are pursued and prosecuted in those states the SCOTUS will not take these cases up. Prosecution isn’t enough either. Once prosecution of people responsible are complete and investigations into the numbers of what votes should have gone where are determined, then just maybe the SCOTUS will hear these cases. But, this is what I’ve been saying since the week after the election, there isn’t enough time to get this done before January 20 and the Democrats that planned this scheme knew this from the get go! It never mattered who did what and where because time was the key. My god our court systems work at a snail’s pace anyway. How was the crime of two centuries ever going to be solved in two months?!
There is only one question to be determined here that the SCOTUS needs to be proven beyond any question…were there enough votes fraudulently obtained by the Joe Biden Campaign that would change the outcome of the election? That’s it. Scientific evidence that the Dominion voting machines and specifically where and when the machines were corrupted, changed votes by a number that changes the outcome of the election is the path, I think the only path, for a Trump victory. Is there enough time?
(The views and opinions expressed in the submitted columns are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of The Journal.)