On Saturday, April 6, there were only two letters to the editor, and both failed the test of close attention.
The first, “What would the Democrats do?” accuses Democrats of desiring unlimited entry of unscreened sick migrants “because they will eventually become Democrat voters,” a claim that is just plain uninformed. No American, who has either rational fears of illness or has family, wants sick, contagious neighbors for political reasons.
Then, the author attacks climate change by citing the findings of Principia Scientific, a private, England-based, right-wing, pseudo-scientific propaganda machine.
Finally, in a grand-slam attack, the author of that letter accuses Democrats in Virginia and New York, without any factual support, of favoring higher taxes, infanticide and the abolition of ICE. In addition, what seems to delight that letter writer is the success of our current president in denying the poor and/or hungry relief.
But what is most unsettling is the author’s crediting President Trump with North Korea being “willing to talk peace and join in rational discussions” when both the summit meetings with North Korea ended with no concessions on Kim Jung Un’s part, but with Trump’s reduction of the number of joint preparedness exercises we had with South Korea in past years. If anything, we are less safe than before the summit meetings.
The next letter to the editor, “Have evidence? Let’s see it” finished off my day.
The letter writer is furious with leading Democrats’ belief that President Trump is not innocent of collusion. Well, Robert Mueller, a Republican, helped convict a number of Trump’s campaign officials and advisers, and his personal attorney, all of whom admitted to previously-unrevealed meetings with Russian officials, Russian-connected handlers, and Russian oligarchs during the campaign and after Trump’s inauguration.
Trump’s campaign manager shared polling data with the Russians and has had lucrative and suspect financial connections with them.
Trump’s critics, further, mistrust his unwillingness to personally testify before Mueller’s team, his refusal to reveal his taxes, although every other president in recent history has done so, his seizure of the translator’s minutes of his private meeting with Putin in Helsinki, and his documented, habitual lying about everything. In too many ways, these facts cast doubt on his trustworthiness, despite his Attorney General’s public whitewash.
I am glad Congress is finally doing its constitutional duty of being a check-and-balance on an unpredictable president who admires and favors autocrats, and has access to the means of worldwide destruction.
Why would a sensible person not want Congress to explore every possible avenue to either clear the president of every suspected wrongdoing, or prevent any harm to our country?
In the end, wouldn’t a transparent inquiry and finding serve the American people best?