For the sake of our dogs, let's replace fireworks with drones: Letters

Editor's note: The following letters were all written prior to the assassination attempt on Donald Trump on July 13.

For the sake of our dogs, let's replace fireworks with drones

July 11 -- To the Editor:

The city’s Independence Day celebration has become a problem for dog owners. My dog is very stressed by the noise of the explosions, as well as animals in the wild, i.e. birds. It is necessary to take “Dickens” out of Portsmouth before the explosions are set off.

Maybe it’s time to revisit fireworks as a means of remembering. Veterans suffering from PTSD may welcome a change. May I suggest that next year we recognize this holiday with a drone show that creates a visual, yet quiet, display in the sky.

Eleanor G. Bird

Portsmouth

Column defending Supreme Court immunity decision not convincing

July 11 − To the Editor:

Charlie Griffin’s editorial in support of Trump v USA is unconvincing. The reason is that immunity for the President for anything is nowhere to be found in Article 2 of the Constitution. It is a totally invented concept now ensconced in law by six Justices who claim to be originalists. I listened to the arguments on the case last April and cannot recall any mention of the Constitution by the attorneys for Trump or in the questioning. The discussion was a series of hypotheticals that relied heavily on partisan logic.

Article 2 Section 1 paragraph 3 outlines in detail how the electors are chosen, and how those votes are counted. They are chosen by States and counted by House and Senate in joint meeting. For a President to intervene in the selection of electors, and to attempt to thwart the counting of their votes according to Constitutional mandate cannot possibly be construed as an official Presidential act. It is a violation of the oath of office which is also clearly stated in the Constitution, Article 2 Section 1 the final paragraph, to “defend the Constitution of the Unites States.” For Chief Justice Roberts to state otherwise is beyond the pale. How can a violation of the oath of office possibly be an official act? Then, for the Court to remand the case back to the lower courts while at the same time suppressing testimony from eyewitnesses, is appalling. Fact is that this case was decided as it was to build a firewall around one man, and now, as Atty. Griffin says, it applies to all future presidents, vastly expanding the power of the presidency in ways that the Founding Fathers expressly chose to prevent. That discussion is fully documented in the Federalist Papers, though I cannot personally quote them.

BTW, Presidents cannot be found guilty for the official act of signing a treaty because they cannot sign treaties without two thirds majority of the Senate, according to Article 2 Section 2 paragraph 2 of the Constitution. The Court worries that without immunity a President could be found guilty for issuing a pardon, but according to the Constitution he can only issue pardons for offenses against the United States. Article 2, Section 2, paragraph 1 toward the end. You may recall that as President, Trump handed out pardons like candy to his cronies for all sorts of crimes. This ruling upholds his right to do that, which the Constitution does not grant. For example, if Trump is re-elected (which seems increasingly likely) he can pardon a January 6 rioter for trespass in the halls of Congress, but he cannot pardon for assault of an officer of the law. Except that he will, with complicity of the six Justices.

Jeffrey Cooper

Portsmouth

I trust Donald Trump to answer the phone at 3 a.m.

July 10 − To the Editor:

The Democratic Party is living up to the image that conservatives possess of them—hold onto power at any all costs and beat Trump by whatever means necessary.

In my opinion, Democrats are not angry with the Biden coverup, they are simply angry that their deceitful attempts to coverup what Americans have seen over the past 3+ years has been exposed by Donald Trump.

While the Democrats twist and turn and haggle over whether Biden should step down, no one speaks about national security. The Democrats’ only publicly stated issues are who can beat Trump; and, how will Biden’s candidacy affect the balance of power in the House and Senate.

As Hillary stated in her infamous political ad, “Who will [you trust to} answer the phone at 3:00 in the morning?”

Cheryl Russell

Dover

Column defending immunity decision missed the big picture

July 11 -- To the Editor:

I was disappointed in Charlie Griffin’s column defending the Supreme Court’s ruling on Trump’s presumed presidential immunity. It was clearly a lawyerly piece focused on the detailed leaves of the trees while being oblivious to the big picture, a dense and dark forest.

As recorded in his public and social media rants, Donald Trump is clearly obsessed with exacting revenge against his political opponents. While lawyers quibble over whether his behaviors constitute official or personal actions, he would, if elected, have little or no constrictions on his vengeance.

His volumes of lawsuits throughout his business career give a clear indication of what this convicted felon and sexual offender can do. He sued municipalities over tax bills he didn’t like. He attacked the Justice Department for enforcing fair housing laws when he posted false “no vacancy signs” to avoid renting to Black Americans in NYC boroughs. The ghostwriter of his book, “The Art of the Deal” described Trump’s instinct for revenge against anyone whom he perceives has done him wrong and does so “with guns blazing.”

His actions as president in his first term give further evidence of his reckless drive for revenge. He hated Obama for joking about him at the National Press Club luncheon. In response, Trump sought to eliminate the Affordable Care Act and targeted vestiges of his predecessors’ achievements. This included eliminating the White House office that dealt with the pandemic. The cost of Trump’s vengeance was the loss of over 400,000 American lives to COVID.

Trump no longer must worry about holding back for another election (unless, of course, he manages to circumvent or have his Supreme Court minions change the Constituion’s two-term limit on holding the office of the presidency). He and his allies are speaking out about attacking the FBI, the CDC, and other government agencies. Trump’s disingenuous dismissal of Project 2025 belies his own campaign statements on how he’ll dismantle or weaken these and other core parts of our governmental system, including our electoral processes. His Christmas message to opponents was to “rot in hell.”

No, Charlie, there is much at stake here and the Supreme Court decision injected a new note of chaos and confusion that is integral to how Trump operates. It is a decision harmful to our nation and another tool in Trump’s repertoire for vindictiveness. There is a litany of other harms a second Trump administration would inflict, but that requires much more space than available here.

Chuck Rhoades

Dover

The Supreme Court has raised the president above the law

July 10 -- To the Editor:

Since its founding after a revolt against the King of England, the idea of a king ruling this country has been unthinkable.  During the world wars of the last century, we proudly defeated dictators.

Lately, it has become fashionable to claim that democracy is unworkable and that, under the guise of the “unitary executive”,  we require a dictator.  These ideas were taken up by MAGA supporters and the right wing news media and, for years, the public was inundated these false claims. Meanwhile, groups like the Federalist Society were recruiting Supreme Court candidates who reflected their desire for increasing presidential powers.

Recently, the US Supreme Court, with three Trump-appointed justices, has brought this fever dream of the right wing to fruition.  Despite the fact that such immunity is not contained in the Constitution, the Court’s recent decision on presidential criminal immunity has raised the president above the law.  The president likely has the nearly unfettered ability to act as a dictator and can face no criminal prosecution for his acts.

Once anyone (especially the President) is above the rule of law, our democracy is no longer.  We will fall under the shadow of dictatorship.  Should Trump be re-elected, any justices he appoints likely will be just as extreme, only younger, and their views extended for at least another generation.

Support democracy.  Elect a Democrat for President.

Lorraine L. Hansen

Rollinsford

Herald should write more about affordable housing, less on million-dollar homes

July 10 − To the Editor:

Re. the July 9 headline of the Portsmouth Herald  "Former Rye on the Rocks home listed for $4.25 million".

I can't take this anymore.  Why does the Herald lead with yet another headline featuring the listing or sale of a multi-million dollar private residence?   Is it really vital to the community's interest that we're on top of the latest mega million dollar residential transaction?

The Herald devoted almost a full page to a "lifestyles of the rich and famous"  real estate listing, but only a third of a page to the 360 unit market rate housing project that's now jeopardized due to delays in "third party reviews".   Aside from the obvious irony here...perhaps the Herald might have invested more space (and reporting time) in reporting on the date the project was formally proposed and how much time has elapsed since then; or  what concerns necessitate a third party review ; or why is it that a third party review takes x amount of months; or why can't the redevelopment/repurposing of vacant shopping mall space with such substantial benefit to the community be streamlined in some way; or why does this redevelopment have to be so difficult/this time consuming?

The redevelopment of the 100 Durgin Lane site seems to be an obvious win/win for the community.  The Herald does not well serve the needs of the community by its superficial coverage of this issue.   Thanks.

Mike Mackey

Newfields

Biden should seal successful presidency by not seeking re-election

July 12 -- To the Editor:

Joe Biden’s list of remarkable achievements domestically and internationally is too long to recite here. His amazing bi-partisan legislation measures favorably to that of FDR and LBJ. He can now retire gracefully, enjoying the full appreciation the country to which he has devoted a lifetime of service

President Biden can now gracefully and with full confidence, pass the torch of leadership to Kamala Harris—a fighter, prosecutor, seasoned public servant who will bring in millions of votes from women, Blacks, Asian-Americans, minorities and mainstream voters from both sides of the aisle.

Joe: This dedicated supporter since your first run for Congress, knows that now is the time to do the right thing.

Malcolm Odell

Exeter

Don't give up on Joe Bident

July 12 -- To the Editor:

To Fellow Democrats,

What part of the last four years of Biden’s accomplishments do you not feel earns him another term to “finish the job” as he frequently says.

Economic recovery from the pandemic?  Health care policies that mandate affordable and available life-saving medications, vaccinations and also relief to toxic-exposed Veterans?  The Marriage Equality Act? The bipartisan Infrastructure Law? The Chips (and science) Act? The list goes on. He is definitely the most accomplished President in my six-plus decades. His lifelong stuttering, age-related memory mixups, and typical senior physical balance issues, pale in comparison to his leadership abilities, attributes and qualifications. He knows how to run a government and engage the participation of brilliant minds in his administration… all of whom are dedicated to our democracy.  He knows how to lead as so many other world leaders can attest to.

Get off his back and return to the front of the line to win this critical election. He is not giving up, and you should not either.

Tess Holom Schneier

Kittery, Maine

Trump lacks an understanding of basic science

July 13 − To the Editor:

Verbal gaffes are a part of life, whether they be Freudian slips or something else. If you dig down a bit, the typical error rate of Freudian slips is one or two errors for every 1,000 words spoken. Depending on the amount one speaks, this can be to seven to 22 verbal slip-ups a day. It is bits of your unconscious mind leaking out into your conscious behaviors, according to Freud.

So what does that say about a political candidate who called his wife Mercedes instead of Melania? Beyond Freudian slips, what normal person believes that water can make magnets stop working? Numerous items have been retrieved from the bottoms of rivers, lakes and ponds using magnets. What normal person believes electric vehicles, whether on the road, water or airborne, stop working when the sun isn’t shining? Perhaps the reply to that ridiculous statement would be, batteries?

To have a potential Commander in Chief with such a poor understanding of science is a risk to our national security. As for an example of the risk, the Secretary of Energy under the last President was Rick Perry, who had an animal science degree. Then Secretary Perry commented that he didn’t realize that the job made him responsible for our nation’s nuclear weapons. Imagine if a President got rid of the thousands of career scientists and engineers working for our government and replaced them with oblivious, unqualified loyalists. Personally, this is a little more of an issue than a few Freudian slips.

Don Cavallaro

Rye

Send your letter to opinion@seacoastonline.com

Please keep letters to 250 words or less. Submissions must include the writer’s first and last names, city or town and a daytime telephone number (which is for verification purposes only and will not be published). Send letters or commentaries to opinion@seacoastonline.com. Letters from Seacoast-area writers addressing local topics will be given priority for publication.

This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: For the sake of our dogs, replace fireworks with drones: Letters