Im­peach Trump or make a deal with him?

USA TODAY US Edition - - NEWS | YOUR SAY -

LET­TERS LET­TERS@US­ATO­DAY.COM Pres­i­dent Trump’s com­plete disdain for

the law and dis­re­spect of the po­si­tion he holds is ev­i­dent in his con­de­scend­ing, pa­tron­iz­ing ap­proach to ad­dress­ing his con­flicts of in­ter­ests.

The fact that he would present the idea of for­go­ing the pres­i­den­tial salary is a petty to­ken to the Amer­i­can peo­ple. Re­ally, he will give his prof­its to the gov­ern­ment? I’m sorry, but his prof­its are not the only pay­ment at is­sue here. Re­gard­less of salary profit, which he can re­turn to the gov­ern­ment, his busi­nesses also profit by his pres­i­dency — by the galas he at­tends at his prop­er­ties and by the pub­lic­ity he elic­its at th­ese events.

Trump’s se­cu­rity de­tail, paid for by my tax dol­lars, pro­tects him as he ad­ver­tises his busi­nesses. My taxes pay for the plane that takes him golf­ing, pro­mot­ing his busi­ness prop­erty. I ob­ject to my tax dol­lars con­tribut­ing to his busi­nesses. We are be­ing played by a shrewd busi­ness­man hell­bent on us­ing the of­fice of pres­i­dent for his own mon­e­tary gain. Su­san Hein­richs Fair­banks, Alaska

FACE­BOOK FACE­BOOK.COM/ USATODAYOPINION

I fully agree with start­ing im­peach­ment pro­ceed­ings now. Why wait? It’s in­evitable, un­less you want to wait un­til Pres­i­dent Trump gives Amer­ica away to the Rus­sians. Richard Blue

Yawn. Lib­er­als, stop talk­ing and give it your best shot! Other­wise, just shut up al­ready. Mark Smith

Lib­er­als have been talk­ing im­peach­ment be­fore Trump even took of­fice. You have zero cred­i­bil­ity with Amer­i­cans. Sal Mag­giore

Im­peach­ment seems a lit­tle harsh. Trump says he likes to ne­go­ti­ate, and ob­vi­ously the ma­jor­ity of Amer­i­cans did not want him in the White House. And as Trump has demon­strated ev­ery week­end since he got there, he re­ally doesn’t want to be in the White House ei­ther.

Seems to me, there is a deal there wait­ing to be made so Trump doesn’t have to worry about it any more. Chas Hol­man

TWITTER @USATOPINION

Our fol­low­ers shared their thoughts on start­ing the con­ver­sa­tion about im­peach­ment pro­ceed­ings.

Don’t you usu­ally have to com­mit an ac­tual crime to be im­peached? @cmur­ray862

Re­ally? Af­ter what Pres­i­dent Obama did? Af­ter what Hil­lary Clin­ton did? Grow up. @Hill­billy45638

Whoops! For­got about that pesky pres­i­den­tial line of suc­ces­sion, didn’t we? @Tim­sier­ramist

Democrats lost, get over your­selves! Trump will not be im­peached! @cindywi57897113

If we don’t talk Trump im­peach­ment, at the very least we should be sched­ul­ing a psy­chi­atric exam for him. @mac­a­roni­bart

For more, fol­low @USATOpinion or #tel­lusato­day.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.