Trump rolls on, despite much hate
The hate for the president of the United States rolls on! Before Donald Trump took office, the Democrat, President B. Obama, along with his personal police department, the FBI, were in the planning and strategy stages to remove an elected president! After all, how dare an outsider, a common citizen, think he could become the president of the United States without the approval of the news media/Democrat party/deep state.
So for 33 months we have had the news media/Democrat party trying to remove the president from office. In spite of this corruption, he has created the greatest economy in modern history, we have engaged in conversations with results with North Korea, we have leveled much of our trade imbalances with Asia and Europe, and made an honest effort to secure the boarders of the United States.
What is the objective of the news media/Democrat party? Is it a Marxist state like the old Soviet Union, China, Venezuela, Cuba, or maybe an old-fashioned dictatorship like North Korea or fascist Nazi Germany?
Steve Swartout, Fresno
Trump behavior is not the best
POTUS continues to show just how great he is as a leader. I mean, what other politician would try to get away with demeaning a 16-year-old girl? Greta, the climate protester, must weigh about one-fifth of POTUS — and has about five times the intellect. So I must use the term “great” in its other sense — the one that means overblown gasbag.
I must also use the word “great” to describe how childish he looks to the rest of the world. I mean trying to get the leader of the Ukraine to help dig up dirt on his rival by using as ransom funds already earmarked for that country. That's nothing but petulance. If he wants to battle Joe Biden on political differences, that's fine. But to see a POTUS engage in a slimefest — that greatly diminishes the dignity of the office.
Impeachment? I have lived under 14 presidents. I never in my wildest nightmares imagined that we would have a leader that so greatly shows his unfitness to lead. I am a realist, though, and realize we are not able to find 18 Republican senators with the guts to vote guilty.
Stephen Pendleton, Visalia
Nunes must act on climate change
I want to thank Rep. Devin Nunes for sending me a survey that asked for my thoughts about climate change.
But I’m not sure he understands that addressing climate change is actually good for our economy. The survey’s 2 nd question asked, “Is it vital that the U.S. cut its carbon emissions?” I wanted to simply answer, “Yes!” But the closest possible answer was, “It is vital to cut carbon emissions as soon as possible, regardless of economic impact.”
Actually, it is vital to cut emissions — not regardless, but because of the economic impact. According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, in the first half of this year, our country experienced six extreme weather events that cost over $1 billion each. Last year, extreme weather events cost our country $91 billion. In coming decades, our Valley’s farmers will cope with the damaging effects of climate change as the Sierra snowpack shrivels up, crop yields shrink, and farm workers suffer from hotter temperatures.
Unlike our human mothers, Mother Nature is unforgiving. She has already given us a taste of her medicine; more is on its way. Do the prudent thing, congressman, and act now.
Don Gaede, Fresno
No fault of sanctuary law
I wish to provide some perspective on the issue concerning the sanctuary-state law, discussed in the recent editorial, “President Trump is right: This undocumented criminal should be deported” (The Bee, Sept. 22). A statement was made that “Valley legislators should draft new legislation to create a waiver that would allow sheriffs to work with federal immigration authorities in the specific cases of violent undocumented inmates who remain a threat.”
However, I’d like to point out that this law, in fact, does this already. In section 2 of Senate Bill 54, battery and use of threat, which Guadalupe Lopez-Herrera engaged in and was previously charged for, are included in the list of offenses for which officers could contact immigration authorities. Therefore, it is not fair to say that it is the fault of the sanctuary-state law for the extent which Herrera’s case reached, or to use the case of Herrera as an example for why it should be changed.
It is stated that ICE knew about Herrera’s release, so it was their responsibility to pick him up. The fact that they weren’t quick enough shouldn’t allow the blame to be placed on the sanctuary-state law.
Karen L. Garcia, Fresno