Letters to the Editor: Why no election investigation?

Why no election investigation?

If the presidential election of 2020 had been won by fraud, this would be a fact of momentous importance.

United States citizens should have a right to know the truth and our country should take steps to prevent another such event. With the enormous investigative powers possessed by Congress, one might wonder why they are not investigating a matter of such incredible importance to the functioning of our democratic system.

Past congressional investigations into the Jan. 6 Capitol attack, the 9/11 terrorist attacks, and the Mueller report produced a lot of important information. The reason no such investigation has happened is because a sizeable number of House Republicans know there was no significant fraud in the 2020 elections.

Our representatives are much more knowledgeable about election processes than the man on the street. While very few of them openly state that Joe Biden was legitimately elected president, many Republican politicians choose to praise the emperor’s new clothes (support the Big Lie) openly or by silent assent, although they know that the emperor is naked and the sight is not pretty.

They know that if the House investigated alleged election fraud, it would show that the leader of their party is lying or deluded about this matter, which would severely harm the GOP. As it is, many citizens have lost faith in our electoral system (the exact result Putin was striving for in his social media propaganda assaults prior to the 2016 elections).

The United States now lacks the credibility to speak out against the many fraudulent election practices around the world. These problems can be attributed to the GOP’s choice to follow a leader down a pathway of lies, sacrificing the good of our country (except for a few like Romney, Christie and Cheney).

Robert Fawcett

Petoskey

What does 'From the River to the Sea' actually mean?

“From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” is a popular slogan with people who support the Palestinian cause. It sounds good — it rhymes and has the word “free” in it. But what, exactly, does it mean? Probably different things to different people.

The current conflict is essentially a land dispute over what is now modern-day Israel — from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. It became Israel on May 14, 1948, because of a United Nations mandate (Resolution 181) intended to give the Jews back their Biblical homeland. Land that had been known as Palestine for hundreds of years — hence the conflict.

The U.N. meant well and was prompted by Hitler’s Holocaust to create a Jewish state where they could be free and have the right of self-determination. It was popular with America and Europe, largely Christian nations. But the Palestinians and their Arab neighbors, mostly Muslims, were not pleased.

Imagine if the U.N. were to suddenly declare that Michigan was to be given back to the Ottawa, Ojibway, Chippewa, and Potawatomi tribes. Native Americans had centuries-old claims to the land before it was colonized by Europeans.

How would it feel to be told that “you can go to any other state, but you can’t stay here”? Would you leave? If you were forced to leave, would you like it? Would you resist? Would you be fighting for your religious beliefs or your land? When would you stop?

A lot has happened since 1948 to make things worse. There has been terrorism, wars, oppression, and land disputes. So how does it end? In Armageddon? Possibly, if we let political and religious overtones turn this into a wider war.

Most people who are pro-Palestine are not anti-semitic (religion), they are anti-Israel (government). Some want all the land back — “from the river to the sea.” But most would settle for “free.” Freedom from Israel’s right-wing government that is so extreme that its own citizens have been protesting the erosion of their rights.

Seems like the Palestinian and Israeli people want the same things — freedom, peace, and prosperity for all.

Randall Rousselo

Roscommon

Trump did damage, but we still have hope

"I could have been a contender ... " Marlon Brando's character laments in "On The Waterfront." "Instead of a bum, which I am." He took easy corrupt payoffs and sacrificed his future.

Americans should be wary of Donald Trump's easy wrong answers to the country's and world's problems. Stop and frisk sounds good until they come for you or your daughter. Hordes of cops rounding up legions for deportation? Nations end, and maybe Trump's police state is it for us.

As I reflect on the past several years of world history, I think Putin was emboldened to invade Ukraine because he believed Trump had sundered Western alliances beyond repair. The recent Hamas terror attack might never have occurred if Trump had not summarily moved our embassy to Jerusalem in 2018, dashing Palestinian hopes for a two-state solution.

By the end of the movie, Brando stands up for truth and honor. It's not so easy in these reality TV, TikTok times, but let's hope Americans can pull it off.

John Podulka

Wolverine

This article originally appeared on The Holland Sentinel: Letters to the Editor: Why no election investigation?