There are limits to presidential power
I recently read where Korean leader Kim Jong Un executed his top U.S. envoy and four other Korean dignitaries because Kim was displeased with the last Trump summit meeting.
It’s fairly easy to imagine how Trump would handle his adversaries and political opponents, let alone the free press, if Trump had no constraints. Does anyone doubt Trump would act any differently than Kim Jong Un, if Trump had unlimited power?
Thankfully, our Constitution provides checks and balances to presidential power and executive privilege. To be sure, it’s up to our Congress to insure our president is held accountable to his oath of office and that he performs his duties in compliance with the laws of the land.
I, for one, certainly appreciate the rights I enjoy as an American. And, with Trump as president, I’m even more grateful for the restraints our Constitution puts on the office of the Ppresident of the United States!
Michael J. Parks, Fresno
The real defense comes in court
As we are all aware, our president is being investigated for wrongdoings that could ultimately bring him before our Congress to account for and defend his conduct. As we are also all aware, he is strongly rejecting all accusations against him, even though some of his former high-level associates are facing prison terms for their deeds while under his administrative control.
This brings to the forefront the integrity of our great nation — a respect for law and the rights of individuals to a fair defense of their conduct.
If one is innocent of the charges brought against him, the best possible defense is to defend one’s actions in a judicial setting. If our president is innocent of the charges being brought against him, should he not be clamoring for a public hearing to prove his innocence, rather than embarrassing our nation via Tweets, vulgar language, character attacks and other conduct beneath the dignity of his high office?
Richard A. Johanson, Clovis
On disrespect, look in the mirror
A comment regarding P. S. Backhaus’ letter to the editor on June 7. He complains of being subjected to “demeaning and disrespectful “ articles and cartoons in The Bee. He then proceeds to call an elected member of the U. S. Congress, AOC, an anti-Semite (many Americans would consider this disrespectful) and an ally of brutal world leaders (again, quite disrespectful in the view of many Americans, especially those who respect the electoral process), who will see to it that we are all eating out of trash cans (again, in many readers eyes, disrespectful).
He goes on to demean Gov. Newsom for various wrongs and blames the governor for our state’s new title, “the State of Baby Killers.” In his letter’s last paragraph, he says, “shame on you for judging the decisions of other states. They have every right to make laws in their states.” Good point, true point, and by the way, so do voters in California. Which they did last November. Our governor was elected because his views aligned with a majority of voters in California.
Kevin Statham, Sanger
Earning the right to use the ‘n’ word
Regarding McElroy’s “grasp use of “n” word. Yes, blacks are allowed to use the “n” word at will. They’ve earned that right.
Whites are forbidden to use the “n” word. Whites haven’t earned that right.
Donna Hudson, Fresno