Envelopes with window

Hatred for Trump supersedes truth

Editor:

I love my country, the beacon of light and liberty to the world. I am disheartened by the hypocrisy and corruption of the left. When Dr. Blasey-Ford brought sexual assault charges against Kavanaugh, she was invited to speak in Congress. 

The leftist #MeToo movement started “Believe all Women,” except Tara Reade. I hope Reade’s allegation is false, but this hypocrisy is sickening. Gen. Flynn was falsely targeted, and Obama knew about it. Is this what Obama meant when he promised his administration would be the most transparent in history? Obama gave a political speech in Singapore and said old men should get out of the way. Then he endorsed white guy Joe Biden, aged 77 years. 

Hans Von Luck, a non-Nazi colonel in the German Wehrmacht during WWII observed: “We did not realize that we had become an instrument in Hitler’s policy...Fascinated by Hitler’s charisma and his ‘achievements,’ young men thronged into the Wehrmacht...How could a people from whom a Goethe and a Beethoven had sprung become blind slaves of such a leader and fall into hysteria...I believe all people are ready to follow idols and ideals if they become sufficiently emotionalized.” 

Many among us have indeed become “sufficiently emotionalized.” Socialist hatred for Donald Trump supersedes truth, fact and law. Think on this a moment; would you like to be on trial in front of a prosecutor, judge, jury and press who are indifferent to truth and loathe your soul? When will this behavior be rightly considered hate crimes against Trump? The left’s brazen hypocrisy doesn’t end there. Biden will not be the Democratic nominee. The DNC knows Bloomberg was right when he said of the 2020 Dem hopefuls, “Trump’s going to eat them for lunch.” The DNC is lying to Biden, too.

Jason Russell

Goodyear

Vote ‘no’ on HB2724

Editor:

In the February issue of Tonopah Times, there was an article entitled “Spurred by Egg Industry, Arizona Weighs a Ban on Caged Hens.” The bill HB2724 has passed the Arizona House of Representatives and is in the Senate. If passed by the Senate and signed into law, the state can ban the sale of all eggs laid by confined or caged hens starting in 2025.

Indiana-based Rose Acre Farms has one facility in Arizona and meets the proposed requirement. If they did not need regulatory action to choose a cage-free operation, why does Hickman’s Family Farms, the largest egg producer in Arizona, need a regulation to make the same business decision? We do not need more government regulation. The public should have freedom of choice in purchasing eggs.

Email your senator to vote “no” on HB2724. They can be found at www.azleg.gov/emailazleg/?legislatorid=1929 and “click here” to send directly to her/him.

Sandy Larson

Tonopah

Civil liberties

Editor:

As Americans, we all enjoy certain rights as declared in the Constitution. These rights were added to the Constitution in 1791 and were known as the Bill of Rights. Their main purpose was to constrain the power of the government by giving citizens certain rights. These rights are also known as the first 10 amendments to the Constitution. 

The first amendment deals with the freedom of religion, freedom to assembly and freedom of the press. The fifth and 14th amendments deal with protection against self-incrimination (Miranda) and the right to due process, something Gen. Flynn was not afforded to him, as recently exposed in documents made public. As a result, a review of the case was made by U.S. attorney Jeff Jensen and it was found that the Obama FBI had set up Gen. Flynn in a perjury trap to “get him to lie, so we can prosecute him or get him fired.” Based on these findings and other troubling facts, the current DOJ decided to drop the charges against Gen. Flynn.

This decision has become controversial with the usual actors taking sides. So, whose view is correct? One way to find out is to seek the opinion of the foremost expert on civil liberties, Alan Dershowitz (voted for Hilary in 2016), U.S. Constitutional scholar and law professor at Harvard for 50 years, now emeritus. In a May 8, article in Newsmax, Professor Dershowitz stated, “every civil libertarian should be applauding the Justice Department for dropping its case against former National Security adviser Michael Flynn.” The professor gave three reasons why: the investigation was illegitimate because no crime had been committed, the Obama FBI had on tape a record of Gen. Flynn’s conversation with the Russian ambassador and thus were not looking for information, and finally all kinds of exculpatory information was not turned over because they knew Gen. Flynn was innocent. Indeed, Professor Dershowitz commented that the whole investigation was a “sham.” Unfortunately, the general was forced to plead guilty because the FBI had threatened to prosecute his son. 

This criminal effort to frame a retired, honorable three-star Army general because the Obama administration disagreed with his views and despised the newly elected president may go down as one of the most egregious, dangerous abuses of power in our nation’s history. Let’s hope it never happens again.

Igor Shpudejko

Goodyear

A message for

pandemic

protestors’ rights

Editor:

I would like to respond to Charles Peabody’s letter on May 6. How can the “stay-at-home order” be unconstitutional? When the Constitution was written, there was no mention by the forefathers of any type of pandemic, and certainly no mention of the federal or state governments requesting a stay at home order in order to save countless lives from one of the worst diseases to strike the planet. 

If protesters can’t take the state and federal governments attempt to save their lives, who are we to stop them from wanting to commit suicide? These protesters who have ants in their pants, want to go protesting without masks and no sign of social distancing and bring home the virus to expose it to those who are intelligent enough to safeguard their lives and families. 

It’s hard enough for the medical experts to try to help the state and federal governments to stop the pandemic but the protestors make their job twice as difficult and drag the lockdown on and on much longer. If you have protesters in your family who insist on committing suicide or endangering your life by not following the guidelines that the rest of us follow to try to survive this life threatening event, if they leave your home to protest, make sure they know they will not be welcome back because you value your life and the lives of others in your home. 

Stress to them that during this pandemic they won’t have a proper funeral because visitors won’t be allowed in and the churches are also in lockdown, so their demise will be pretty bleak. But by all means, don’t deprive them of their constitutional rights to commit suicide! It means so much to them and God forbid we upset them. 

Make the forefathers proud that you honored their Constitutional rights, so they can join our forefathers in peace. Most of all, it would be a kind gesture to have a nice inscription on their tombstone when it is safe to get a tombstone to the cemetery. God only knows how much longer those of us who prefer to live, will have to wear masks. It’s not fun when it’s 107, so I can hardly wait till it’s 117 outside. Hopefully the heat will slow down or stop COVID-19 so we can get back to normal. But, I guarantee if the forefathers were here and experienced their first pandemic of this magnitude, before finishing the Constitution, they would have inserted a paragraph or two to advise those of us who want to survive death from a pandemic, to listen to the medical and government experts who are directing our safety, for the sake of the survival of humanity. 

I’m also sure that they would throw in a few words to protesters to back off and let the experts do their job. If the protesters wish to join our forefathers in the hereafter, please stress to them that you don’t want them to drag you with them to their early grave. I’m sure the Constitution will be fully explained to the protesters when they arrive at the Pearly Gates. Not Mr. Peabody’s version of course. Medicine has advanced quite a lot since the Constitution was written. Medical masks were not invented yet nor the ability of countries to use biological warfare, nor nuclear weapons. Nobody besides those responsible for this virus knew that it is impossible for a Constitution to protect the world from a virus of this magnitude, so why is it so hard to try to save billions of lives? 

James Logan

Buckeye