What is one to say of yesterday’s events on Capitol Hill? Certainly, sides, already divided, are being drawn in more than the sand, and may soon be chiseled into the very hearts of men. It is difficult to see with anti-Trumpers such Dreher and French that the president incited his supporters to riot. Yes, some of his language is inflammatory, but then so is Biden’s and host of others – and he is free to hold his opinion that the voting on November 4th was rigged, as do millions of others. But I do not recall anything of his about storming the legislature, or to any act of violence.
Should a court – here, the Supreme variety – have examined the evidence of voter fraud? The forbidding of scrutineers, the shifting of ballot boxes, the strange algorithms in the mysterious voting machines, the ‘burst water main’ and mid-night shutdown, the statistically improbable results? There is a strong argument to be made in favour of this, for as the adage goes, it’s not enough for justice to be done, justice has to be seen to be done. But, as others have argued, the Justices – and the FBI and anyone else involved – if not compromised, and honestly seeking the truth, would have likely feared for their – and their family’s – physical safety, should they even remotely doubted or disputed the Democratic victory.
Perhaps Mr. Dreher may recall from his Catholic days the reference from Saint Thomas, Prima Secundae, question 96, article 2, reply to the second objection: That if the people are pushed far enough, with unjust, onerous laws, left with no apparent recourse to redress those laws, will by their very nature revolt. In his vivid image from the Book of Proverbs, ‘he who violently bloweth his nose, bringeth forth blood‘.