Former President Donald Trump appears at Manhattan criminal court as jurors are expected to begin deliberations in his criminal hush money trial in New York, Wednesday, May 29, 2024. (Charly Triballeau/Pool Photo via AP)
Submit your letter to the editor via this form. Read more Letters to the Editor.
Trump’s trial takes
are all wrong
Re: “Trump guilty on 34 counts” (Page A1, May 31).
No, Donald, Judge Merchan is not corrupt. He is meticulous and honest. But you wouldn’t know how to recognize honesty.
No, Donald, the trial wasn’t rigged. It followed prescribed procedures for giving attention to actual facts and the real requirements of the law. But you wouldn’t know true facts since you spread thick and widespread lies to cover up your felonies.
No, Donald, this wasn’t political retribution, although that is what you keep promising if you ever set foot in the White House again. It was bringing you to legal accountability because even presidents are not above the law.
“Disgrace,” Donald, is a word you like to use when you don’t get your way. The word suits you perfectly.
Bruce Joffe
Piedmont
Witnesses defense didn’t
call speak volumes
Re: “Trump guilty on 34 counts” (Page A1, May 31).
From testimony under oath at the trial, there were three people at the hotel room at Lake Tahoe in July 2006 — Stormy Daniels, Donald Trump and the bodyguard. Why didn’t the defense lawyers call Trump or the bodyguard to testify?
There were at least three people in the January 2017 meeting at Trump Towers — Donald Trump, Michael Cohen and Alan Weisselberg, who outlined on paper that day the plan to cover the hush money Cohen had paid. Why didn’t the defense lawyers call Trump or Weisselberg to testify?
It seems very strange that Trump’s legal team would not call the three key witnesses who supposedly could have refuted Cohen’s contention.
I’ve been on a few juries before and this type of deafening silence from the defense team would certainly ring an alarm bell in a juror’s mind.
Bob Fish
Danville
Pardon for Trump
could aid Democrats
Re: “Trump guilty on 34 counts” (Page A1, May 31).
A polling organization needs to ask undecided voters in battleground states whether a pardon from New York Gov. Kathy Hochul for Donald Trump’s felony conviction would make it easier for them to vote for Joe Biden and other Democrats. If such a pardon would make a difference, it should be pursued. I want to see Trump called to account for his actions as much as the next person, but more than that, I want to keep him out of the White House.
If a pardon is granted, all appeals and ensuing drama end, but Trump will still be a felon. Democrats would look merciful and statesmanlike to undecided voters. Conflicts over the belief that this is just a paperwork infraction and politically motivated are resolved. Sacrificing this verdict is a small price to pay to prevent another Trump administration. Let’s keep our eyes on the prize: the White House.
Margie Williams
Richmond
Climate warriors must
reelect Joe Biden
Re: “Trump guilty on 34 counts: Bay Area and state Democrats applaud outcome; GOP slams it” (Page A1, May 31).
The same Republicans who deny President Biden’s election, Donald Trump’s felony convictions, and reports of Russian electoral interference also say that climate change is a hoax.
The same fossil fuel businesses that are funding climate change denial are the same corporations from which Trump requested $1 billion to fund his reelection campaign.
Let’s stop playing politics with our only planet. We’ve witnessed the stark fact that climate change is real and has disastrous implications all around the country and the world.
Do not allow right-wing media to influence your vote. Democrats trust climate scientists and have already enacted basic legislation to combat global warming. We cannot stop now. Make sure you and your like-minded friends are prepared to fight back by financially supporting and voting for President Biden and every Democratic candidate this Nov. 5. Our planet can’t wait.
Sandy White
Fremont
Seniors are being priced
out of hearing aids
Re: “How to get older Americans to start wearing hearing aids” (Page A6, May 30).
I read with interest the article on hearing aids for seniors, being in the market for hearing aids myself.
Last year, Medicare was paying $1,200 per hearing aid with basic coverage. But now in 2024, the reimbursement payment is zero. Luckily, Kaiser extended the coverage period into 2024 since the demand was so strong. Afterward, the only coverage will be $850 per aid if you carry supplemental coverage.
The bigger question to me is why hearing aids are so expensive. I have chosen the middle-range ones and even those are $2,100 per device. You could buy two state-of-the-art computers for the same price as just one hearing aid.
Michael Garner
Alameda