23 Jan. 2021

Dear President Trump,

Last year, I wrote ten letters to you. My flawless records indicate the dates of those letters: 10 Feb., 9 Apr., 1 May, 21 July, 14 Aug., 23 Sep., 26 Oct., 16 Nov., 3 Dec., and 31 Dec. I wondered through the year if any of my letters actually arrived at the White House. I understand the special screening all White House, Congressional, and other Washington, D.C. highly placed government officials' mail goes through and know that screening delays delivery at least one day, sometimes two. But when we out here on the great prairie write letters to you, we almost never know if they're read at all. It's almost the ultimate "trust me" exercise. I think if I was one of your Twitter followers and had some particularly pointed, germane, and maybe even sarcastic comment about something going on in the Deep State or the swamp, I might have heard from you, but letters are something else. My hope was only that they might get opened, read, and if what I had to say was of any interest, it might get passed up to a senior staff member who might read it, and if I had hit any kind of nerve, perhaps an excerpt of one might make it to your desk as an item of interest. But ... who knows? It could be I was standing out in my yard, throwing baseballs at the moon.

I sent my 31 Dec. letter in an Express Mail envelope, which had a noon next day guarantee. It set me back over $26, but I thought it was worth it to understand what happened to any of my mail to the White House. Any guarantee by the USPS is sort of laughable, but they usually do okay enough. But I knew immediately there wasn't going to be a noon next day delivery. I finally received a Proof of Delivery E-mail on 6 Jan. So, "next day" to the USPS is...7 days? I enclose a copy of the E-mail. It has a link to an on-line POD Acrobat document. I'd have copied it too, but the new Adobe Acrobat reader automatically downloads Google Chrome. I don't want Google taking over my computer, so I can't give you a copy of that document, but the E-mail should reveal the link to you. Question, Mr. President—did your office actually receive that letter? I ask because I did see that document, and it was signed by one Anthony Swann. If you have a Tony Swann who was on staff on Jan. 6, then all is well. But the only Anthony Swann I could find in D.C. is a black small-stage actor who appears in local dinner theater productions. I have pictures of him. He's the only Anthony Swann in D.C., according to my digging. I found nothing that connects anyone by that name to the White House. I thought it might be possible it's actually the same guy, and he'd been posing as something he's not. As always—I could just be wrong. I'd like to know.

There was one night in September, in your Middletown, PA rally, I think, that I heard an almost exact phrase uttered by you that I'd written in my August letter. I was hopeful that was a sign. Then there was a rally held in October, perhaps the one in Sanford, FL that I heard another phrase I thought I recognized. Is that possible? Was someone hearing me? Was Steve Miller creating all that, or did he find something of value in my correspondence? I have no idea. I do know Steve Miller is one of the very best speechwriter's I've ever studied. He's someone who can reach into a patriot's chest and grab his heart, and do it without breaking a single bead of sweat. He lives inside our minds. Or maybe that's just the way he is. I don't know. Is he the Lee Greenwood of political speechwriters? I'd love to know.

I was driving down I-10 two days ago, pondering your arrival in Florida. One thing I've told everyone is, "The Fat Lady ain't sung yet." I told them even if Joe Biden swore in, which he did without incident, that was not the Fat Lady singing. J. Lo. isn't fat. Neither is Lady Gaga. So, I'm still thinking it ain't over 'till it's over, and it won't be over until I hear that Fat Lady. I tell you I haven't heard her, and I've been listening. I was thinking those thoughts as I drove and then something hit me like a thunderbolt. I think I understand the path to undo events of this month. Well some of them, anyway. No one can undo Nancy Pelosi's election to the Speakership once again. But, I think I understand a path for you. Just shred this if I'm telling you something you already know. If you know it, and are on it, good. If I'm wrong, then I'm just one of many fruitcakes who are just bothering you, and you have every right to be irritated with me.

The recent announcements in Arizona cued me to think more about the entire process of the courts. One of your problems as a President when pressing forward with a lawsuit is that pesky standing thing. In most cases, in tort suits the complainant has to demonstrate direct harm. As a sitting President, it seems it was easy to deny you an opportunity to present evidence based on lack of standing. It's pretty hard for the single most powerful individual on the planet to demonstrate harm. But, that's as President. All that has changed, now.

My theory is you would have no problem proving your standing in any state court in Florida. Today, you're actually a private citizen again. You have no official office. There's no "Office of the Former President," just as there is no "Office of the President-Elect." In your case, that's a good thing. It means if you can do a bit of research and find only one provable instance of any vote flipping or other irregularity in any single precinct in the state, you'll have a chance to get heard in court. You can prove harm. You were denied one or more votes that was yours. Something of value was stolen from you. You don't have to prove "systematic" fraud. There's no statute that requires "systematic" fraud as any kind of legal threshold. They address fraud. Fraud is fraud. To hang an adjective on the front doesn't change the truth. Systematic fraud, unsystematic fraud, purple fraud...it's all fraud. And all you have to do is prove it once. A lower state court can take your complaint, enter your evidence into the record and boot it directly to the Florida Supreme Court, assuming the laws there are like or similar to those of most states. The Florida Supreme Court can do much the same thing, too. It can accept and review a case, but not rule on it. They, too can kick a case they believe needs more consideration right through the front doors of the U.S. Supreme Court. Hearing requests from sovereign states have about the highest priority of any suit at the U.S. Supreme Court, so they normally merit expedited review. If you are allowed to demonstrate any fraud in Florida and then introduce evidence of similar fraud in Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, and/or Arizona as evidence that the fraud detected is not unusual, just to bolster your complaint, you might be able to run all of your evidence into the U.S. Supreme Court whether they want it or not. They hear, they see, they can't deny, and they have to rule.

Unless I'm totally wrong on this, once clear and compelling evidence is entered into the public record the Supreme Court has the ability to rule the November election process in certain states and/or cities to be faulty and declare the whole election null and void. That would certainly create that "Constitutional Crisis" we hear about all the time. But, this time you'd be on the winning end. The Supreme Court would not declare Biden as an illegitimate president, but they could compel a completely new election by their decision. Then, there could be plenty of safeguards put in place to insure against another attempt to hijack the resultant election, assuming the Chinese don't buy everyone off again. The risk to the guilty goes up with every transgression.

Am I wrong, Mr. President?

I want to close by stating a few facts. In 1970, I swore the oath to "protect and defend." I've sworn that oath 7 times or possibly more, both as an officer and enlisted. I also swore it when I joined the federal civil service workforce in 1989. I finally decided to understand those oaths, and I studied them. Most people do the "Repeat after me..." thing and never pay attention to what the words say or mean. When I did, I realized it's a blood oath. Once it's sworn it's for life. Many of the people behind you understand. I realized late last year we were all misunderstanding the importance of the election. It truly was never about YOU. It was always about the continuance of First Law and that oath. More people need to understand that fact.

We are still with you. And, we are legion!

In Liberty,

Steve A. Stone