Self-evident Truth vs. THE BIG LIE

The only use of the word “truth” in our founding documents is in the second paragraph of Thomas Jefferson’s inspiring Declaration of Independence: “We hold these Truths to be self-evident...” Every citizen can discern the truth, and every citizen can spot a lie.

Now our republic faces the consequences of THE BIG LIE, insisting that recent elections somehow were corrupted by various kinds of fraud. The most obvious evidence of the fallacy of THE BIG LIE is that its chief proponent, the incumbent president, scored the greatest number of popular votes in the history of our republic. Except for his opponent.

Your edition of 8 January was driven by THE BIG LIE in several ways. It was comforting to read the “news” that, at Doug McLinko’s end of the National Mall, the atmosphere of the “rally” (your headline) was like a Sunday school picnic. The more significant truth about last Wednesday is the criminal behavior of Doug’s fellow travellers at the federal Capitol. Neither Doug nor those criminals would have been in Washington at all, absent THE BIG LIE.

In the same edition, you printed a “Guest viewpoint” by Eric Matthews purporting to rebut the very lucid review of Pennsylvania election laws and procedures, written by state senator Gene Yaw and printed in your edition of 1 January. Eric’s convoluted attempt to challenge the senator’s explanation, and thus to perpetuate Eric’s favorite parts of THE BIG LIE, was undermined by his pathetic personal attacks on the senator himself, who is an elected (and oft re-elected) legislator of Eric’s own political party.

I urge my fellow citizens to resist THE BIG LIE as follows: (1) don’t believe any part of it, (2) don’t repeat it as fact, and (3) don’t tolerate it in public discourse. Let us remember instead Mr. Jefferson’s “self-evident” truths. We all know the difference.

Franklin Innes


A response to Representative Keller

Representative Keller wrote an op-ed in The Daily on Wednesday explaining his reasons for opposing the electors in our state. If he truly thinks the election is illegal, why was his election legal? He may believe the governor, the secretary of state and the Pennsylvania Supreme Court have overstepped their bounds in decisions they made. These decisions may have affected 10,000 votes. Future president Biden won the state by 80,000. Mr. Keller throw out the 10,000 and Biden still wins easily in our state.

Many people have spoken about how these actions by Mr. Keller and many others are repulsive and even seditious.

Seth Kreimer, a constitutional law professor at the University of Pennsylvania “I do not believe I have ever before seen such brazenness.” “The rule of law means that no public official is entitled to ignore determinations by courts because they disagree with them.”

The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday had an editorial by Gerard Baker that was titled “An Awesome Spectacle of Dishonesty and Opportunism.” This editorial went on to say the action “may rank among the most cynically contrived, morally contemptible, soul-corrupting acts of political degeneracy ever attempted”.

Rep. Liz Cheney, republican representative from Wyoming this weekend, said the proposed action “would set an exceptionally dangerous precedent, threatening to steal states’ explicit constitutional responsibility for choosing the president and bestowing it instead on Congress”.

Sen. Toomey has refused to engage in this activity stating on Fox News Sunday that he opposed actions by the governor, the secretary of state and the Pa. Supreme Court, but that none of these actions made any difference with who won the presidency in our state.

Joe Scarborough of Morning Joe, a former conservative lawmaker from Florida, calls these actions seditious.

Fred Hunt

Standing Stone


I was disturbed to learn from his interview with WENY that Comissioner McLinko had a “great time” participating in President Trump’s inspired insurrection and the attempted overthrow of Congress and the results of a free and fair election. While he claims he didn’t enter the capital building, his presence alone at this rally in support of Trump’s false claims of a stolen election clearly brings into question his integrity as an elected official. Mr. McLinko was and is complicit perpetuating The Big Lie, resulting in the loss of a police officer’s life and four other’s and putting many other lives in danger, including Vice President Pence’s. McLinko needs to hang his head in shame. There is no excuse for his deplorable judgment and his support for a president who is willing to do anything for his personal benefit, even if it means destroying our democratic institutions and processes.

Kim Koval


How disappointed I am

I can’t express how disappointed I was with our state and federal representatives when I read the article in Sunday’s Daily Review on their response to the horrific events of Jan. 6 in our nation’s capital. The only one of them that has condemned what the leader of our country (I don’t even want to call him the president) has done is Mr. Toomey. Not one other of them even made mention of the person who incited all that violence. Of course Mr. Toomey has nothing to lose as he has already announced that he will not be seeking reelection. I believe our representatives have a moral and ethical obligation to call out wrongs when they are faced with them and what the president did was certainly wrong. I would doubt that there were a lot of Biden supporters in that crowd that stormed the Capital and endangered the lives of everyone inside, apparently including their own people, as several died including a Police Officer doing his job.

I believe it is time for the people we elect to represent us be honest with us even if it is at the expense of their future reelection. History will not be kind to those who have done less.

Also to Mr Campbell – I believe you should go back and watch the events of Jan. 6 again. That way when you explain the day to your grandchildren the story will be correct. I don’t believe you will find that the crowd that day was made up of “radical democrats” who were trying to suppress anyone. It was quite the opposite. It appeared as if the rioters were trying to suppress what was transpiring in the chambers of congress. We want future generations to get the correct information.

Margaret Dell