To the editor: Scott Jennings’ attempt to prove a political motivation for the prosecution by the Manhattan district attorney’s office because neither the Department of Justice nor the Federal Election Commission pursued prosecution is deceptive reasoning. (“The guilty verdict only makes Donald Trump stronger,” Opinion, May 30)
The proper standard is whether the prosecutor can obtain a conviction based on the evidence. If the Manhattan district attorney believed he had evidence to convict but did not pursue prosecution merely because the federal government did not, that decision could have been suspect as a political decision.
By obtaining unanimous verdicts on all 34 counts, the Manhattan district attorney proved he was just doing his job.
Donald Payne, Santa Ana
..
To the editor: We must all applaud the courage of 12 citizens who discerned the truth “beyond a reasonable doubt” despite the obfuscation.
Given the history of former President Trump’s MAGA followers to threaten anyone who goes against this now-convicted felon, we owe a huge debt of gratitude to these jurors.
The rule of law still stands. Bravo and blessings on the jurors.
Eileen McDargh, Dana Point
..
To the editor: Jennings illustrates the problem with media that has led to the political dominance of Trump and his ilk.
Normalizing and justifying Trump’s criminal activities by claiming that no one else would be prosecuted or convicted for his fraudulent cover-up of adultery, in service of influencing an election, is like saying that Al Capone should not have been taken off the streets through his indictment for tax evasion.
Whatever legal means it takes to remove this proven criminal and traitor from public influence is a moral and ethical imperative for America and democracy.
Steve Leyton, Palmdale
..
To the editor: As a longtime reader, I have always commended The Times for its fact-based reporting and extensive coverage of important events. I know that opinion columnists give their view, and although I might disagree with Jonah Goldberg, I can still appreciate his perspective.
The same isn’t true for Jennings, a former Republican operative whose commentary often appears in The Times.
He manipulates facts and bases them on half truths. He specializes in false comparisons. I have no problem with hearing views from the other side as long as the authors are honest and not dabbling in false equivalences.
Richard Kaufman, Irvine
