We have previously discussed the unhinged and unsupported claims of “My Pillow” CEO Mike Lindell. However, an interview on Newsmax shows just how out of control this debate has become as a host tried to stop Lindell from making unsupported claims. Eventually Anchor Bob Sellers walked off the set in what was a live meltdown on national television.
Anchor Bob Sellers quickly interrupted Lindell as he was getting into his claims that the voting machines in the election were rigged.
Within a few days of the election, most of us stated that there was not evidence of systemic fraud and became increasingly critical of the Trump team for failing to put forward evidence of such fraud with the use of these machines. As we covered the unfolding challenges, it was clear that irregularities cited in the use of the Dominion computers were attributed to human error and not the computers themselves. We have not seen compelling evidence to change that view.
I have been highly critical of Lindell and his statements since the election. Indeed, I would still like to see a commission to finally and conclusively put to rest all of these claims in the minds of many who still harbor doubts. There are clearly many like Lindell who hold such views and believe the evidence exists. Fine. I would be happy to review it just as we were happy to review such evidence in the post-election coverage. Why not let them present any such evidence in an open and transparent commission? Many will not accept any contrary conclusions on both sides but I believe the majority would do so. Otherwise, this conversation on Newsmax will be repeated endlessly for years. Moreover, a commission just might help us better prepare for the next election if we will be relying so heavily on mail-in voting in the future.
Newsmax was apparently seeking an interview on the free speech concerns raised by barring individuals or groups. As many on this blog know, I do not support censorship of such views or the banning of people like Lindell or his counterparts on the left. Sellers just showed how such statements can be addressed with counter statements. False statements can be rebutted by true statements. That is the beauty of free speech. As with the outrageous speech of some on the left, I believe that it is better to protect free speech for individuals like Lindell rather than slide down the slippery slope of censorship. We can all contest such statements through the use of free speech.
Lindell should have used the interview to defend his free speech, not make the case for tampered or rigged computers. That was the reason for the segment. The interview quickly went from bad to worst: