Trump using costly court delays because he is guilty of over 90 felonies

Trump’s delaying tactics- Echo opinion letter published in The Press Democrat in Santa Rosa California:

Dear EDITOR: If I were Donald Trump and I believed or felt like I was falsely accused of over 90 felonies, I would demand an immediate opportunity to prove my innocence. An innocent person would complain about delays, not cause them. An innocent person would present “perfect” evidence at a “beautiful” press conference with charts, graphs, photos and Sharpies.

Then, when acquitted, an innocent person could use the exoneration as a cudgel against the Democratic Party. Not that Trump is vindictive, 😮, but such a stunning reversal would humiliate the haters and guarantee his reelection. 

With the limelight so attractive, Trump might even boast and crow a bit while surrounded by only the best people. It would be huge! It would be epic! It would be historically huge and epic — a spectacle worthy of The Donald.

A guilty person, on the other hand, will do everything he can to delay his day of reckoning. A guilty person will blame the court, the officers, the witnesses, the families and the political party of all involved. Everyone except himself.

(Maine Writer postscript- So instead of seeking a quick verdict to potentially exonerate, he is now #BrokeDon begging his campaign contributors for cash to pay his mounting legal bills and making up funny money to convince the New York DA about how "rich" he is.  I suspect Trump's lawyers shared his financial shortfalls with the court is because they are not getting paid! Trump's lawyers are as corrupt as their client but they are not into committing perjury.)

Sad. Pathetic. Trump.
From Patrick Corcoran in Occidental, California

Will Nikki Haley direct a rewrite about American Civil War history if she God Forbid happens to become president?

An echo opinion letter published in The Press Democrat in Santa Rosa California: Haley’s Civil flop! A Civil War gaffe

Dear Editor: So, the GOP presidential candidate Nikki Haley was recently asked while campaigning in New Hampshire, “What was the main cause of the Civil War?” In order to avoid a hot button GOP word, slavery, she spoke about what governments can and can’t do. She never mentioned slavery at all, not even in the ensuing discussion.

Almost immediately, politicians, the press and others attacked her for her omission. By the next day, she tried to recover by saying “of course the Civil War was about slavery.” Then she accused the questioner of being a Democrat plant. And perhaps he was, asking a question with an obvious answer that presents difficulties for right-wing Republicans.  (So what if the questioner was a "plant"?  Haley cannot blame her stupidity and ignorance on a questioner. It was an easy answer and she failed to say the word the Republicans will not admit to...S-L-A-V-E-R-Y.)

Haley comes from South Carolina, a GOP-controlled state that restricts teaching about race in public schools. 

Haley’s original answer was likely given to avoid angering the MAGA crowd whose votes she wants, but it might also be the one they now teach in South Carolina.

By the way, if one were looking for the accepted answer to the question, (Civil War History 101!) just ask ChatGPT. The artificial intelligence reply, “The primary cause of the US Civil War (1861-1865) was the issue of slavery and its expansion into new territories.”

From Sherman Schapiro in Eureka California

Two echo opinions - Donald Trump is not qualified to lead

One letter is from the the Press Democrat in Southern California and the second was published in the Kansas newspaper the Topeka Capital-Journal. 

Press Democrat:  Trump’s failed strategies

EDITOR: Every American should Google the show, “Frontline: The Choice 2016.” It details the histories of then-candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

Two things stand out in the Trump history. His father taught him to “win at all cost.” (Fred Trump had no tolerance for “losers” in the family.) Second, an old family friend, Roy Cohn told him, “If you don’t win, lie and say you did, and people will believe you.”

When Trump won the election, he started acting out on this advice consistently. He always pretends he is a winner, even when he isn’t. He tells huge whoppers that people actually believe, such as the “birther lie,” the denial of global warming, the lie that Trump is the top expert in every field, etc.

He added a third behavior: attack and blame your opposition when they expose your lies. When he claims “fake news,” look closer and fact check. You’ll find it’s his words that are fake, and the opposite of what he says is actually true.

It’s scary to realize the free world is run by a sociopath whose whole goal is to manipulate others, and that many do believe him. 

From: Susan Joice in Guerneville California

President shouldn’t ignore law

Richard Nixon, who at times seemed to be grappling with sanity while he lived in the White House, told a reporter early in 1974 that if the president does something then it cannot be against the law. In other words, Nixon was above the law.

Now we have another Republican who thinks he too is above the law. And he, evidently, is not alone in that belief. Just weeks after taking the oath in 2017, Trump asked his special counsel if he could pardon himself. Pardon himself for what?

Some legal scholars weren’t too sure that Trump could not pardon himself. Really? And what law school did these opinions develop from? Sometimes it is like living in a parallel universe where reality is being challenged at every turn. Have the Republicans forgotten there is something called the Constitution as Trump increasingly governs with executive orders?

All of this might lead us to believe that the old song in which Judy Collins says to send in the clowns had actually become the norm as the rule of law is being ignored by the president.

From Michal Betz, Wichita Kansas

William Barr misrepresented the Mueller Report - without evidence that he ever really read it!

Echo opinion from California newspaper, The Press Democrat 

The verdict of history- History will always have the last word. William Barr will never overcome his egregious error when he misrepresented the Robert Mueller Report.

EDITOR -  It’s a case of the messenger shooting the sender and, in effect, the receivers, in the matter of Attorney General William Barr delivering Robert Mueller’s report to Congress.

Has William Barr even read the Mueller Report? 

Whether Barr read the report is inconclusive, but that he presented its findings and conclusions contrary to the way Mueller and his team had written and constructed them is now certain.

It’s clear to anyone following this critical matter that William Barr is carrying water for the stupid Donald Trump, the job he auditioned for with a 19-page memo supporting and pledging fealty to the premise that the chief executive cannot be charged with a crime while in office, i.e., is, like a king, above the law.

So history is repeating itself: once when the people of this country opposed the king of England in favor of sovereignty and to form a new type of government where none, including the king, were above the law, and when President Richard Nixon attempted to break that covenant that defines our constitutional government.

How this will all play out is anyone’s guess, but the message to the American people is as clear as the iconic cracked bell: This is an existential moment in our history, and its result could be everlasting.  

From Will Shonbrun in Boyes Hot Springs, California

Trump Tower meeting with Russians- echo opinion letter

Obviously, William Barr misrepresented the Mueller Report because this is what the Office of Special Counsel really said:

Opinion letter published in the Press Democrat, a Sonoma California newspaper:  

Dear Editor: April 20 editorial (“No conspiracy, but no exoneration of Trump either”) began and ended with the (false) claim that Robert Mueller and his team concluded that Donald Trump didn’t collude with the Russians. This is simply not true. 

Here is what the Mueller report "really" said about collusion:

“In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of ‘collusion.’ 

Collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. 

For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law.”

The Mueller report did cite that, on multiple occasions, the Trump campaign did meet with Russian officials, the Trump campaign sought and welcomed Russian assistance as evidenced by the Trump Tower meeting, and its chairman shared sensitive campaign polling data with an individual associated with Russian intelligence. Collusion did take place, and the report also cited numerous examples of obstruction of justice by Donald Trump. 

Richard Neffson in Rohnert Park

Stereo echos from California - Donald Trump is dangerous

Two opinion letters published in The Press Democrat a newspaper published in the North Bay area of California - stereo echos.

Opinion letter #1)  Russian meddling

EDITOR: I’d like to ask all the Donald Trump supporters out there how they would feel if an investigation revealed Russian interference promoting a Democratic candidate. The Republicans would have a field day.

Saying that the Democrats should just get on with more pressing issues is so hypocritical after 10 dead-end Benghazi investigations.

We have a man in the White House who is threatening our democracy, and his supporters are so enamored of his policies and the economy that they overlook the obvious. He would betray anyone who stands in the way of his greed and ego. Heaven help us.  Nancy King from Santa Rosa

Opinion letter #2) It’s not a ‘coup’

EDITOR: Donald Trump hasn’t read the Constitution (does he read anything?) so he doesn’t understand its provisions for removing a president who commits high crimes and misdemeanors. It is called impeachment, is not a “coup,” and the Constitution provides for it (“Trump end US interest in global arms treaty,” April 27).

He is actually afraid of exposing his conduct to the public. 

The last time this happened, Richard Nixon’s own party wouldn’t protect him. It could happen again when the true Republican patriots revolt.   Phil Bowman from Santa Rosa

Donald Trump - evidence of collusion with Russia: echo from California

Yes, there was collusion

Sonoma County California, The Press Democrat echo opinion letter

Dear Editor: Your April 20, editorial (“No conspiracy, but no exoneration of Trump either”) began and ended with the claim that Robert Mueller and his team concluded that Donald Trump didn’t collude with the Russians. This is simply not true. 

Here is what the Mueller report said about collusion:

“In evaluating whether evidence about collective action of multiple individuals constituted a crime, we applied the framework of conspiracy law, not the concept of ‘collusion.’ Collusion is not a specific offense or theory of liability found in the United States Code, nor is it a term of art in federal criminal law. For those reasons, the Office’s focus in analyzing questions of joint criminal liability was on conspiracy as defined in federal law.”

The Mueller report did cite that, on multiple occasions, the Trump campaign did meet with Russian officials, the Trump campaign sought and welcomed Russian assistance as evidenced by the Trump Tower meeting, and its chairman shared sensitive campaign polling data with an individual associated with Russian intelligence. Collusion did take place, and the report also cited numerous examples of obstruction of justice by President Donald Trump.

From Richard Neffson, Rohnert Park, CA