To the Editor:
Re “Trump Repeats False Election Claims at CNN Event” (news article, May 11):
Thank you for your thorough and factual reporting on Wednesday’s CNN town hall with former President Donald Trump. You summarized each of the mischaracterizations, exaggerations and untruths spoken by Mr. Trump in your Fact Check and related articles.
Unfortunately, it’s likely that many right-leaning voters drawn to watch the town hall will not be inclined to read them. Likewise, the studio audience for the show, evidently chosen to represent Trump supporters, won’t realize or don’t care about the damage his rude and inaccurate statements do to the body politic of our country.
CNN made a grievous mistake following through with its plan to air the program after the verdict in the E. Jean Carroll case was announced on Tuesday.
Mr. Trump benefited greatly by the undiscriminating and constant coverage of his untruths in the 2016 election. It’s time for responsible print and television journalists to pull the plug and refuse to provide a platform for Mr. Trump’s lies and vulgarity.
Jim Linsell
Traverse City, Mich.
To the Editor:
I think it was appropriate for CNN to invite Donald Trump to appear at its town hall. The former president, after all, is the leading candidate for the presidential nomination of one of our two major political parties.
I don’t subscribe to the philosophy held by some of the louder voices in the media that “I may disagree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death my right to prevent you from saying it.”
If there was a problem with Wednesday night’s broadcast it was the format. Specifically, making the host, Kaitlan Collins, function as both the facilitator of the event’s question-and-answer framework and the fact checker for Mr. Trump’s responses. Being effective in one of those roles is challenging enough; doing both is impossible.
John E. Stafford
Rye, N.Y.
To the Editor:
Re “The MAGA King, Back in Prime Time” (Opinion, May 10):
Michelle Cottle, in her defense of CNN’s decision to air a town hall with Donald Trump, doesn’t mention an important point.
The problem is not just that the network is giving a platform to a man who tried to overthrow our democratic process. CNN is also giving him more airtime than his challengers, which is what got us into this mess in the first place.
From the moment Donald Trump descended the escalator to announce his candidacy in 2015, the cable networks gave him unprecedented free coverage — cementing his status as a serious candidate in a way no other presidential hopeful had ever been treated.
The election is more than a year away, and already Mr. Trump is manipulating the media, pitting Fox against CNN and grabbing an hour’s worth of prime time.
To Ms. Cottle’s most important question: No, we have learned nothing.
Betty J. Cotter
Shannock, R.I.
George Santos and Republican Profiles in Cowardice
To the Editor:
Re “Santos Is Indicted as Inquiry Claims 3 Finance Schemes” (front page, May 11):
It was satisfying to read of George Santos being charged, especially after enduring months of his smug defiance. Mr. Santos doesn’t represent New York’s Third District; he represents the worst type of person — one who lies to get ahead, one who preys upon the less fortunate, one who cheats the system.
That such a fraud should help decide the laws of our nation is appalling. Mr. Santos doesn’t serve his constituents; he serves himself. And in his refusal to admit to his alleged fraud, he serves as the epitome of political cowardice.
Not surprisingly, House Republican leaders have shown their own political cowardice in winking at Mr. Santos’s bad behavior, even as he’s taken to task for it, in an effort to maintain their tight majority.
I applaud House Republicans who have called for Mr. Santos’s resignation and encourage more to follow suit. In “Profiles in Courage,” John F. Kennedy wrote, “Not all Senators would agree — but few would deny that the desire to be re-elected exercises a strong brake on independent courage.”
Would that more members of Congress could depress the accelerator.
Gary J. Whitehead
Norwood, N.J.
To the Editor:
Re “Santos Pushed Campaign Money Abuse Past the Usual Line,” by David Firestone (Opinion, May 11):
Mr. Firestone writes that George Santos’s alleged scheme to funnel money to himself through a 501(c)(4) organization was “spectacularly dumb.” In fact, it was brilliant and would have succeeded if he hadn’t made the mistake of actually getting elected to Congress.
Frauds are discovered because the victim eventually figures out what is going on. In the case of misappropriated election contributions, contributors virtually never check whether the contributions actually went to the campaign, and indeed they didn’t here. If he had not been elected, The New York Times would have never checked his assertions, contributors would not have complained and prosecutors would have never investigated.
If Mr. Santos had lost, as he may have intended, he could have walked away with the money.
James Fogel
Bronx
The writer is a former chief of the Frauds Bureau of the Manhattan district attorney’s office and a former judge of the New York City Criminal Court.
‘Anxious Nation’: A 14-Year-Old Cast Member Speaks Out
To the Editor:
Re “Anxious Nation” (movie review, May 5):
I’m a 14-year-old cast member of “Anxious Nation.” This film is much more than talking to “a handful of struggling teenagers and some of their parents.” Over four years, we made a brave decision to share our struggles with mental health to help others who are struggling too.
I found your use of the word “tantrums” especially upsetting. The raw videos you see are real panic attacks. Not “tantrums.” Panic attacks that kids as young as 3 are having.
I know this. That is me. Parents don’t realize or understand it.
The courage displayed throughout the film is extraordinary and deserves to be acknowledged. It’ll give families a tool to learn from. It’ll give kids my age someone to relate to, and that’s so dear to my heart. I didn’t have that growing up.
You are entitled to your opinion of “Anxious Nation,” but to steer away families who really need this film feels wrong and irresponsible.
Families need this. My generation is in a crisis.
Seveann Morton
Cardiff, Calif.
Informal Connections
To the Editor:
Re “They Know Your Face, Maybe Not Your Name” (The New Old Age, Science Times, April 25):
I worked for a company I loved for 13 years, and the last year I was there, I stopped every morning at a Dunkin’ Donuts on the way to the office. On my final day of work, I went there as usual and told them of the occasion.
As the Dunkin’ staff all wished me well, I was on the verge of tears (and simultaneously laughing about crying) as I carried the coffee to my car. It made me truly appreciate the importance of those informal connections we encounter as part of our daily lives.
Amy S. Rich
Orange, Conn.