LETTER: Trump, his supporters and the stolen election fallacy

First, kudos to the Review-Journal for this past Sunday’s Viewpoints section. Thank you for publishing letters from both sides (“Readers weigh in on Capitol rioting”).

However, my letter is specifically in response to Wilhelm Percival’s comments. Apparently, Mr. Percival does not have any evidence of wrongdoing in the presidential election. If he did, I’m sure he would have brought this to the attention of the authorities: district attorneys, attorneys general, state judges, federal judges and other election officials. But he didn’t, did he?

What he does have is allegations and accusations made by some unknown individuals who, themselves, did not bring their information to any authorities.

If the lawyers for the president had any real information, I’m sure they would have presented it to the judges in the 60-plus lawsuits they filed. But they didn’t. Why? Because lawyers are not allowed to make false claims that they know are not actual fact. They may not adhere to their rules of ethics when they face the cameras, but they darn well know that they must when they face a judge.

Mr. Percival refers to “dead voters” and “out-of-state voters.” Are these accusations based on his own observations? Or is he just repeating accusations from others? Certainly no one — and I do mean no one — was able to present any evidence in a court of law at least 60 times.

In this country, it is not up to the accused to have to prove he or she is innocent. It is up to the accuser to prove guilt. And, by the way, how many accused individuals are we talking about? Dozens? Hundreds? Thousands? Tens-of-thousands? That’s quite a conspiracy.

The president’s representatives had their chance to present any evidence of wrongdoing to more than 60 judges. They didn’t because they couldn’t. As Mr. Percival says, maybe we could move on.