Letter to the editor: Trump, not Brennan, the ‘erratic’ one |
Letters to the Editor

Letter to the editor: Trump, not Brennan, the ‘erratic’ one

President Trump revoked John Brennan’s security clearance, according to press secretary Sarah Sanders, because of his “erratic conduct and behavior.” Really? Has she ever read any of Trump’s scatterbrained tweets? If Trump weren’t president, he couldn’t even get a clearance to be a school crossing guard. Yet he is entrusted with the nation’s most secret intelligence information.

Trump only wants to listen to people who tell him what a great job he is doing — people like Alex Jones, who said the mass shooting in Sandy Hook, Conn., wasn’t real and that the victims were actors. These are the kind of people Trump listens to. It’s no wonder he believes Putin is America’s friend and countries like England, France, Canada and Germany are our enemies.

The people Trump surrounds himself with, like lawyer Michael Cohen, who pleaded guilty to campaign finance violations and other charges, and campaign chairman Paul Manafort, who was found guilty on eight charges, are an indication of the kind of people he associates with. It’s no wonder he considers the news media an enemy of the state. If he can get the American public to ignore facts and only believe his lies, then he has won.

We must not let this bully destroy our country with his lies, insults and demeaning of minorities. Our country is better than that. We as a people are better than that. Don’t be fooled by Trump’s lies. Get the facts, not fake news from a fake president.

Joe Palumbo


TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.