Dear Friends and Patriots,

You all know about rules of evidence, I assume. It's those rules that keep the court systems more or less working. Evidence has to meet certain minimum criteria to be entered in a court as actual evidence. On TV we hear about "hearsay evidence." But hearsay is not evidence, it's rumor. Evidence is tangible in most cases. It's sworn testimony. It's a deposition. It's a recognizably authentic document. It's an email string. It's a photograph. It's an authenticated voice or video recording. It's not rumor. It's not innuendo, and it's not supposition.

One problem we continue to have in our pursuits of truth is evidence. These days it's just true that evidence has to pass many examinations for authenticity because it's so easy to manufacture or alter. We can't just take people's word for things anymore. We can't trust pictures. We can't trust documents. We can't trust our own eyes and ears. We live in an age where there's truth in a once-humorous line, "I only can trust you and me, and sometimes I have doubts about you." Few things are trustworthy anymore, unless you read it in a book like the Bible.

Today it's safe to say nothing in the so-called Public Space is 100% worthy of trust. Everything is either a lie, a partial lie, or a potential lie. How do we tell the difference?

There are some very smart and dedicated people who are trying to help. They are people who didn't take Common Core math; people who still believe 2+2=4; people who still believe in "if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, then it's probably a duck." Those are people who don't believe in serendipity or coincidence. They believe most things in life happen for a reason. They believe the most important question to ask isn't "how?" or "when," but always, always "why?" Hows and whens are often necessary to get at whys, but they aren't nearly as important. "How" and "When" are objective standards when dealing with evidence. They are usually represented by data. "Why" is not. "Why" is something that has to be deduced or requires a cogent explanation from one who has reason to know. "Why" is the underlying motivation, the driving force for anything that occurs.

Watch the video at the link below. It's filled with citations of actual facts, though not the proof of those facts. The proof may or may not exist for any of them. Unless one can independently verify the proof of any representation of a fact, you have to take the word of another. You have to rely on and believe in the integrity of the speaker. Watch the video and think what you will.

Governments have two ways of dealing with so-called "conspiracy theories." They either deny them, or they ignore them. They don't discuss any particular fact of them, but state things like: "We reject all aspects of this conspiracy theory. It's not something we can spend time on. Instead, we need to focus on doing the will of the people," or words to that effect. What you'll hear in the video are things our government refuses to comment on in specifics and will tell you is little but extreme right-wing propaganda, meant only to sow discord. Is it?

There are a number of "whys" postulated in the video, though the ultimate "why?" isn't. You have to figure that out for yourself. I could tell you my thoughts, but you should know that already, so I'll just clam up and let you think about it.

Here's the video:

Julie Kelly Uncovers the Facts of the Whitmer Case, 6 January

In Liberty,

Steve