A ‘Rubicon Moment’ for Donald Trump

To the Editor:

Re “Trump Thrives in a Broken System. He’ll Get Us There Soon,” by Thomas L. Friedman (column, June 14):

Mr. Friedman is exactly right. We are approaching a most dangerous moment. Donald Trump will finally be tried in a federal court of law after being indicted. His lifetime of avoiding comeuppance for outrageous behavior is over.

We have to believe that nobody — nobody meaning even an ex-president and possible future president — is above the law.

Even though we will trust in the courts to carry out the legal process, a very serious monkey wrench has been thrown into the mix. Almost beyond belief, Judge Aileen M. Cannon has been randomly selected to preside over the court proceedings.

Based on her strange and “creative” rulings in his favor several months ago related to the F.B.I.’s search of Mar-a-Lago, Mr. Trump has finally found a judge he dare not slander and demean, as he has consistently done in cases in which he has lost.

We must hope that Judge Cannon will rise to a level that does not favor anyone in this case, and that perhaps she has learned from being overturned and severely chastised by a higher court.

Mr. Trump has arrived at his Rubicon moment, and perhaps it could be his Waterloo as well.

Harvey Glassman
Boynton Beach, Fla.

To the Editor:

I am in strong agreement with Thomas L. Friedman’s conclusion that Donald Trump’s thirst for absolute power represents “a dangerous moment” for our country. And yes, many Republican lawmakers who could have stopped him failed to do so.

But Mr. Friedman didn’t mention the fact that 30 to 40 percent of our nation’s citizens have been completely brainwashed by Mr. Trump’s and his ardent supporters’ lies and propaganda. And it is this sizable part of America that continues to provide the oxygen for Mr. Trump’s burn-it-all-down approach to obtaining power.

As long as these Americans continue to blindly support Mr. Trump, he will continue his selfish path to destruction of America’s democracy. Thus, the question is: How do the rest of us try to convince Trumpers of the peril that their support of Mr. Trump poses for our nation? And I am afraid that this is the crux of the Trump problem.

Michael Hadjiargyrou
Centerport, N.Y.

To the Editor:

Re “Momentous Scene in Miami as Trump Pleads Not Guilty” (front page, June 14):

Former President Donald Trump received a bizarrely warm welcome at a Cuban sandwich shop he popped into after pleading not guilty in response to the 37-count indictment. Embraces all around. “Food for everyone!”

What struck me about Mr. Trump amid this sea of worshiping fans, as well as in his earlier court appearance in New York City on hush money charges: Not one family member accompanied him. No wife putting on a brave front, clutching her husband’s hand, however mortifying the circumstances, as they entered the courtroom. No daughter and son-in-law, always center stage in White House photos and his close aides for four years, standing by his side.

Unlike so many Republican politicians who continue to offer support to a man whose criminal charges grow by the day, his family seems to have had little difficulty in abandoning him.

Cathy Bernard
New York

To the Editor:

Charging the former president with espionage is absurd. Lower the political temperature a little, please. Our country is sick enough. Just consider Mar-a-Lago Mr. Trump’s presidential library.

Antonia Tamplin
Bronx

To the Editor:

Re “Lock Him Up,” by Bret Stephens (column, June 14):

OMG! I never agree with Mr. Stephens, though I enjoy his columns. Today I agree with him completely and unequivocally.

I too have read the indictment (I am a lawyer and a former federal prosecutor). It is quite damning. Donald Trump admits that he has secret documents and that he has taken many steps not to return those documents.

Do we have the rule of law in the United States? If so, Mr. Trump must be held accountable, and if found guilty, go to prison. That’s how it works.

Yes, lock him up.

Marc Chafetz
Washington

To the Editor:

Re “The G.O.P. Field Faces a Choice: Law and Order or Loyalty” (Political Memo, June 12):

It is not just Republican candidates who must choose. The nature of the charges in Donald Trump’s indictment and the detailed facts set out there, coupled with the former president’s attacks on the special prosecutor and the Department of Justice, confront all of us with a choice.

The nation is now divided into two camps: those who believe in the rule of law, and those who oppose it. There is no third alternative.

Jonathan J. Margolis
Brookline, Mass.

Affirmative Action: Help or Hindrance?

To the Editor:

“To Understand Affirmative Action Debates, Look to the Past,” by Randall Kennedy (Opinion guest essay, June 11), is unfair to many of us who oppose the current state of affirmative action because we believe that it harms the very people it intends to help.

The Center for Equal Opportunity has studied the effects of preferential treatment in admission of Black and Hispanic students at some 80 colleges, law schools and medical schools. These students were, in too many cases, set up to fail.

Black and Hispanic students admitted with substantially lower test scores than their white and Asian peers graduated at lower rates and, in medical schools, failed to pass qualifying exams that would allow them to continue their medical studies.

For example, research by Richard Sander, a U.C.L.A. law professor, has shown that there would likely be more Black lawyers if race-neutral admissions applied at all law schools.

In his most recent analysis, Mr. Sander has shown that Black students who attended law schools where their incoming LSAT scores matched those of their white peers were far more likely to pass the bar when they graduated — even if the schools they attended were less selective.

Artificially inflating college admissions rates for Black and brown students who are ill prepared to compete on an equal footing with their white and Asian peers may make college administrators feel good, but it doesn’t solve the problems wrought by years of educational neglect and malpractice.

Linda Chavez
Washington
The writer is the chair of the Center for Equal Opportunity.

A ‘New’ Beatles Song

To the Editor:

Re “McCartney Says ‘Last’ Beatles Song Uses A.I.” (Business, June 14):

You report that Paul McCartney “did not give the title of the song or offer any clues about its lyrics.”

Possible titles:

“I Wanna Hold Your Bandwidth.”

“Don’t Let Me Download.”

“Get Backup.”

“Everybody’s Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Delete Key.”

“A Hard Drive’s Night.”

“I Am the Paywall.”

David Jelinek
New York