In response to Michael Kramer’s letter to the editor published in the Oct. 26 Roundup and titled “Hypocrisy on Pine Street,” I contend that the hypocritical one is that one who cannot support the Constitution at the same time questioning the 2020 presidential election results. Speech questioning elections is protected by the First Amendment of our Constitution.

Every system we have has been found to be fraudulent; finance, health care, the FBI, the U.S. Department of Justice, the CIA and of course the “experts.” Our opinions are assigned to us by the media that we choose to expose ourselves to. The “legacy media” and Mr. Kramer are projecting a “fantasy” narrative that we are to believe all 50 election systems worked perfectly without question in 2020 but not in 2016!

Our legal system is not designed to audit elections. Most legal cases take years to resolve. There were only a few weeks to litigate the numerous election inconsistencies. Most cases the courts heard were dismissed because of “standing” and jurisdictional issues and not the merits of election fraud. Having not litigated election fraud is not proof it did not exist.

Rigging an election is not just counting votes but any time our government does something to change the outcome of an election. The 2024 election is being rigged in plain sight right now.  The progressive far left “new norm” of rigging the election against their opponent is the unprecedented 94 indictments for imagined crimes against Trump.

Instead of debating policy differences between the two parties, as in a true democracy, President Joe Biden has weaponized the justice system to defeat any opponents. Putting one’s opponents in jail is what authoritarian dictatorships like the Nazis and the Chinese Communist Party do! I wonder if the Biden supporters consider the unintended consequences if they are successful in rigging the 2024 election? Ask yourself, ‘would these indictments have happened if Trump were not running for office in 2024?’ 

In the mainstream media there is virtually no debate on the risks and benefits of electronic-voting systems, the dog that is not barking. Our current electronic-voting system lacks transparency and thus is antidemocratic. Our elected officials turning the programming and maintenance of voting over to private, for-profit corporations, answerable only to their owners, officers and stockholders is, by design, not fully auditable. Voting machine corporations use closed source proprietary software so they cannot be audited. You can guarantee fraud in any system if the payoff is huge (stealing an election) and the chances of getting caught are small. In addition, there is abundant evidence that any computer system can be hacked by an outside source. The media are flooded with stories of our most secure computer systems being hacked. In much of Europe and Canada, governments tried electronic voting but since abandoned it because of security and reliability concerns, instead going with 100-percent paper ballots.

I couldn’t agree more with the statement, “81 MILLION VOTES MY ASS!” If this statement leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth or offends, I suggest moving to a “liberal utopian state” with “safe places,” like California, where you will be protected from being exposed to ideas and reasoning contrary to what you have been brainwashed to believe.

Gary Guenther, Pinedale