To the Editor:

Martin, regarding last week’s editorial, in the Spirit of Christmas, I won’t repeat now my serial refutations of your fanciful but apparently self-invigorating views of the political/social scene. May you have a restful, peaceful, and old-fashioned, bubble-lights holiday season. Now, don’t lick off all the icing and reject the more substantial cookies as you so love to do with politics.

I commend the Republican House for finally voting with Democrats to approve funding for our allies and for overriding Tommy Tuberville’s (R-LA) military hostage standoff in the Senate, absent add-ons for military reimbursement policy.

SCOTUS has agreed to decide if it will take immediate action on whether a president has absolute immunity for criminal acts committed while he was president, but outside the scope of his constitutional authority. A Federal Appeals Court has already determined that a president does not have absolute immunity in civil cases. My guess is that SCOTUS will take the case and ultimately not decide in Trump’s favor (I’ve been wrong before), as no president is a king who can act with impunity.

What Trump and his pouty-mouthed and procedurally challenged attorney, Alina Habba, fail to grasp is that there is no more defensive a body for judicial honor and respect than SCOTUS. It is highly unlikely that they are apathetic to the consistent Trumpian assault on the institutions of American law. Thomas and Alito are possible exceptions.

Last Wednesday, the House voted along Party lines to initiate formal inquiry into impeachment against President Biden. The allegations are said to be vast and dark; the proof has been ephemeral or absent. Even Fox is questioning the nebulous conclusions of the Republicans. Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC), in supporting the inquiry, said of Biden, "You cannot just….say you are innocent and not have to prove it," indicating a complete failure to understand how the presumption of innocence works in these United States.

Republicans claim they could “go on and on” with their claims of “plenty of proof” of “seedy criminal behavior” of the President, but they don’t elaborate, hoping that repetitive accusation will convince their base. It has worked many times before. Their biggest bitch is that Hunter paid his father back for a truck and may have used a funding source ultimately originating in a Chinese business Hunter worked with.

If that’s what Republicans think is their most imperative obligation to our country, go for it.

Kelly Scoles,
Fillmore, Ca.