Trump was addressing ‘Squad’ that criticized him

I respond to the July 17 letter “Trump’s tweets insulting to Columbus community” from Matthew Weisgarber. One would think a mature citizen would understand that their president was aiming his remarks primarily at The Squad — four junior congresswomen who so brashly criticized and inaccurately blamed him for what is happening at the southern border.

Their foul language and lack of respect toward our president was despicable and inexcusable. The letter that followed — “Presidential election has grown in importance” — from Helen V. Hubbard, was much shorter but nearly as misguided, in comparing President Trump to Adolf Hitler.

Then read the editorial “Verbal anthrax: Trump poisons democracy, tweet by tweet” and it’s easy to tell whom The Dispatch does not support.

Mike Schad, Grove City

Money from state tax cut could be better spent

While the 4% tax cut in the recently passed state budget might garner some votes for lawmakers, it reduces the quality of life in Ohio. The money given away in the tax cut could have been better spent on education, recovering polluted waterways, helping disadvantaged citizens, improving roads and bridges or many other important state needs.

We get what we pay for. Clare Anderson, Columbus

Critics: Put yourselves in president’s shoes

I respond to the Los Angeles Times editorial “Trump is truly America’s bigot in chief” in the July 16 Dispatch, regarding President Trump’s comments to the new members of Congress.

Sometimes it helps if one would put one’s feet into another’s shoes for a time, as the old saying goes.

Did the writer consider the disrespect given to the highest office of our land and having taken place before Trump took office? Did the writer view this as becoming to a citizen of the United States of America? Certainly we are no longer united in cause as a people.

What President Trump said was not racist in any form, for he was stating his opinion. Editorial writers have expressed an opinion, so has he not the freedom to do so as well?

Many comments have been made in recent years that can be said publicly in our nation alone. We need to thank our Founding Fathers for this. May we never forget that there are many cemeteries around the world that hold the bodies of those who made the supreme sacrifice to protect the freedoms we enjoy as a people.

Perhaps it would help us all to read from time to time the preamble to our Constitution. The office of the president of the United States should be given due respect regardless of who holds office or what our opinions might be.

Certainly we are far from a perfect union today.

Don Brown, Columbus

Would Trump supporters have changed their minds?

There are ample reasons to doubt the legitimacy of the Trump presidency, and recent disclosures lend more support for that conclusion. Consider the following.

First, Donald Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 by almost 3 million ballots. Stated otherwise, more Americans voted against Trump than voted for him.

Second, Trump carried the majority of the Electoral College by narrowly winning three key Midwestern states — Wisconsin, Michigan and Pennsylvania. If a mere 105,000 voters had not voted for Trump (representing 1% of the voters in those states), Trump would have lost the Electoral College as well.

So, what have we learned about what information those voters had, or did not have, that might have materially influenced their votes for Trump? We now know that a hostile foreign power (Russia) was conducting a pervasive campaign to deceive the American public into either supporting Trump (Russia’s favored candidate) or not supporting Hillary Clinton. While Trump may brag that there was “no collusion” between his campaign and the Russians, it is clear from the Mueller report that his campaign staff (and his family as well) were gladly courting the help of Russia, as well as other shady sources, such as Wikileaks.

We also now know that Trump actively, with the help of his lawyer and others, illegally surpressed, right before the election, information in the form of salacious recounts of his affairs that would have damaged his election chances. So, would at least 105,000 voters not voted for Trump if they had known that his campaign officials (some of whom are now in jail) were accepting help from a foreign adversary to get him elected, and that his personal life was far more sleazy? I think so.

Of course, an examination of the track record of Trump’s inane policies since he has been in office can only confirm the mistake made in his bogus election in the first place.

The tragic irony of Trump’s alleged victory is that the “rigging” of the election that he bemoaned when he thought he would lose turned out to be a “rigging” that he orchestrated to get elected. When the voting public goes to the polls in 2020, let’s hope they remember the chicanery that gave us Trump.

Robert Sidman, Upper Arlington

Mueller report’s goal was to attack Trump

The Mueller report was not the product of Robert Mueller, a frail, forgetful old man. It was the product of Mueller’s team. Mueller’s team was loaded with Trump haters and adversaries.

The report was the result of the anti-trump bias of these haters and adversaries. It was designed to undermine the president and provide ammunition to the president’s adversaries in Congress.

Every American is entitled to the fundamental right to be treated fairly before the law. Mueller’s team of Trump haters and adversaries trashed this fundamental right.

They were not fair. They were biased against the president from the start. Biased people hear, see and write what they want to based on their bias. Every word in the Mueller report is the product of biased people who viewed the president in a negative light.

Assume you are investigated for a crime where intent is the key issue, as in obstruction of justice. Would you want the investigators to be your friends or your adversaries? Obviously, you would want the investigators to be your friends. Your friends would view the evidence in a light favorable to you. Your adversaries would view the evidence in a light adverse to you.

While you are not entitled to have your friends investigate you, you are entitled to be investigated by someone who is without bias. Someone who does not hate you, who is not your adversary.

The Mueller report should be viewed for what it is, a biased document designed to undermine the president and help his adversaries in Congress. It is not worth the paper it is written on. Michael Holman, New Albany

Immigrants should be grateful to be here

Years ago, immigrants came to this wonderful country. They helped build it up, so grateful for their freedom.

Now they come here, reap the rewards and proceed to bad-mouth our leaders. I feel that if they are no longer happy here they should leave and go back to their country.

Every day I am so grateful that my family, five generations ago, made it possible for me to be born in this country. I’m so grateful to be an American.

Bonnie Hanes, Galloway