To the Editor:
Re “Trump Intended to Send His Mob to Disrupt Count” (front page, July 13):
Maybe as Donald Trump’s loyal followers start to understand how their hero has conned, duped and used them for his own ends, they will start to feel moral outrage about it. He never had any interest in them except as tools for his Big Lie. It must be very hard to hear or accept this if you’re a Trump fan. But it would be satisfying to the rest of us — and so just — if their anger would shift from being based on a lie to something real.
Mr. Trump himself is the appropriate target for their rage. Some of them are facing jail time because of his selfish lies. Some have donated their hard-earned money to a con man.
Now they have something real to be justifiably angry about.
Nancy Bennett O’Hagan
Portland, Maine
To the Editor:
Some have worried that to indict the former president would be inadvisable because it could set off a national crisis, including civil violence. I feel otherwise. We have already entered a national crisis, and we need to realize that. While other than Jan. 6 there has been no widespread violence as yet, the chance of such violence down the road is increased dramatically by letting the president and other perpetrators of Jan. 6 off the hook.
Either the rule of law prevails or it does not. If it does not, future violence is certain. We must realize the situation we are in and not think we can avoid it by “kicking the can down the road.” Now is the time to stand tall and protect our democracy.
Don Barnby
Menlo Park, Calif.
To the Editor:
How is it that the extremists who stormed the Capitol could believe the Big Lie and be so consumed by propaganda and hate that they could think it appropriate for them to attack the Capitol? The story of Jan. 6 cannot be told without an examination of the critical role that Fox News hosts such as Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and Jeanine Pirro played promoting Donald Trump’s lies, outrageous conspiracy theories and the fiction that the election was stolen, and in revving up the Trump-Fox base.
The Jan. 6 committee should be asking members of the Proud Boys, the Oath Keepers and other extremists how it is that they came to believe this nonsense and saw fit to storm the Capitol. While Congress has no business stifling free speech, it is certainly fair for the committee to lay out for all to see the tawdry role of Fox, its commentators and other far-right commentators in spreading and promoting these outrageous lies. Indeed, unless the committee tells this side of the story in its hearings, the story is far from complete.
David S. Elkind
Greenwich, Conn.
Manchin vs. Biden’s Plans
Now Mr. Manchin, who has personally derailed all of Mr. Biden’s economic plans, may very well be laying out the red carpet for Donald Trump to strut back into the White House and complete his destruction of American democracy.
Bill Gottdenker
Mountainside, N.J.
Mocking the News of a 10-Year-Old Rape Victim
To the Editor:
Re “In Rape Case, Politics Raced Ahead of News” (front page, July 15):
The sickness that oozes from Republicans and right-wing media was never more evident than in their heartless mocking of the report of a 10-year-old Ohio rape victim having to travel to Indiana for an abortion.
The Republican Ohio attorney general went on Fox News dismissively wondering how the story could be true since his office hadn’t heard “a whisper” from local law enforcement. Representative Jim Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, tweeted: “Another lie. Anyone surprised?” The Wall Street Journal published an editorial, “An Abortion Story Too Good to Confirm.”
Then the horrific rape incident was confirmed as the perpetrator confessed to the crime. The Ohio attorney general, confronted as to why he hadn’t heard a whisper, defended his earlier despicable comments, claiming, “I’m not omniscient.” The Wall Street Journal wrote that it was “correcting the record” in a subsequent editorial, and Jim Jordan simply deleted his tweet.
Just another day in the right-wing bubble.
Stephen F. Gladstone
Shaker Heights, Ohio
Abortion Travel, for Some
To the Editor:
Re “Concurring Justice Opens a Door to Abortion Travel. But What Happens Next?,” by Adam Liptak (Sidebar column, July 12):
Justice Brett Kavanaugh asserts the existence of a constitutional right to travel that may be enjoyed by residents of states that outlaw abortion. But the existence of a right to travel hardly guarantees the ability to do so. Not every person in need of an abortion is so fortunate as to possess the time, money and support network that interstate travel requires.
The exclusive nature of a right that, according to Justice Kavanaugh, the Constitution guarantees for all is another manifestation of the Dobbs decision’s disparate effects on people of limited means and those who are already experiencing barriers to health care.
Juliet S. Sorensen
Chicago
The author is a clinical professor at Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law and the director of the Northwestern Access to Health Project.
