To the editor:
Re «President defeats the United States general as part of Purge» (cover, February 23):
Let us be clear about one thing: the actions taken to eliminate the president of the chiefs of the Joint General Staff, General Charles Q. Brown Jr., and other leaders of the Pentagon have little to do with what you inform as «the president’s insistence that the leadership of the military is too mixed in diversity problems.»
This is, however, the action of a growing dictatorship. Each dictator knows that he must have an army that owes his loyalty to the dictator, not to the citizens or the constitution of a country. This action is a flagrant attempt to destroy the tradition of an independent apolitical military service in the United States and replace it with an army that will make César’s offers.
Among all executive orders, judicial presentations and public fury, I believe that this action is possibly the most dangerous action than the administration and its sponsors have taken. It establishes the basis for the complete destruction of our Republic. It would be wise to pay attention.
Douglas Haskin
Carrolton, Texas
To the editor:
During the presidential campaign, Donald Trump offered a very cold comfort for those who were more than concerned about their authoritarian aspirations and admiration when he said that it would be a dictator only the «day 1.».
Now we spend the 30 -day brand of that longest day. Trump has already compiled a dictatorial list that includes its issuance of a diktat that ends the citizenship of birth law and its continuous violation of the Foundation Control Law of 1974 and other statutes based on article I of the Constitution.
He has now added a new entry with his flagrant politicization of the Department of Defense through the dismissal of the president of the Joint Chiefs of General Staff, General Charles Q. Brown Jr., and others in the upper leadership of the Pentagon.
Clearly, when breaking the railings of the laws and norms that our democratic republic have sustained, even during the times of its greatest stress, Trump has shown that his presidency is insecure at any speed.
Chuck Cutolo
Westbury, NY
Refuse to obey
It can be more challenging for him inventing scenarios that support his pronouncements and reckless loyalties. It could be forced to recognize that the seed of tyranny is not spread by anyone and all who have reduced or rejected their praise or profits, but for the own interest that he demonstrates so horrifiedly. The most disturbing has become the currency of other antidemocratic kingdoms.
A Ukrainian friend responded a letter of apology and repentance: “Everything will be fine at the end. If it’s not right, it’s not the end. «Maybe.
It is difficult to cite a headline like the impetus for this letter. Every day we face new instances of the impetuous mandates of President Trump confirmed by a congress caught by the own interest and cowardice.
We are a population in shock, stepping on to remain above the chaos that he handles so skillfully. With so much that protest we can only support those as American prosecutors Danielle Sassoon and do, and others, who have refused to obey.
Rebecca Okrent
Wellfleet, mass.
The Dilemma of the Supreme Court
To the editor:
Re «Roberts’s entire life has led to this moment», by Jeff Shesol (Opinion guest essay, February 23), about the next judicial cases on the actions of the Trump administration:
The Supreme Court is in the horns of a dilemma. If the Court rules against the Administration, it runs the risk that President Trump ignores his decision and, therefore, avoids the authority of the court and precipitates a constitutional crisis.
On the other hand, if the Supreme Court cannot defend the law and the Constitution, it is crazy about our democracy.
Even if an executive order is obviously illegal, it is unlikely that our highly politicized court risk Trump’s rejection of his decisions. It is probably put on the side of the administration, but with a small occasional victory for the rule of law.
Another favored strategy of the court is to govern for little on a case and send it back to the lower courts for greater award, leaving considerable ambiguity in its path.
Stanley A. Rubin
Santa Monica, California.
Children will pay
To the editor:
Re «How the Era of Trump looks for disabled students in K-12» by Jessica Grose (Newsletter, Nytimes.com, February 12):
The attacks against the Trump Administration Department and the so -called Government Efficiency Department, led by Elon Musk, are consistent with the broadest assault of the Maga Movement to the Government.
But it worsens even more for its toxically simplistic approach to learning and psychology. In your world there is only one type of student and only two results: success or failure. The concepts of neurodiversity and learning disability do not fit within their close worldview, and not the millions of American children who participate in special education.
These children will be among the most vulnerable victims of a fully implemented magician agenda.
Joseph Moldover
Wellesley, Mass.
The writer is a development neuropsychologist.
The profits of a company and its social responsibility
To the editor:
Re “Dei comes and goes, but the focus on profits is constant, by Jeff Sommer (column of strategies, Sunday business, February 23):
Mr. Sommer is correct: Milton Friedman allowed corporations to adequately pretend to adopt social causes of fashion if covering their actions that will increase their profits.
Mr. Sommer could also have noticed how Professor Friedman’s capitalism also leads to desirable social purposes.
Take the example of the sign in most hotel rooms urging guests to reuse towels to help the environment. All probability, those in the C-Suite do not have a particular concern about the environment, but they actually focus on reducing laundry expenses to increase hotel profits.
Here, the company fulfills its sole social responsibility, to maximize profits, and the environment is a winner.
Kenneth A. Margolis
Chappaqua, NY
The writer is a labor and labor lawyer.
Try some tenderness
To the editor:
Re «Tenderness as an act of resistance», by Margaret Renkl (essay of opinion guest, nytimes.com, February 10):
Mrs. Renkl’s essay has just created a calm, a sign in my heart and mind that will guide me through these horrible years ahead. Today, a fiercely cold wind is destroying the gorge of the Columbia River that I can feel through the walls of my humble trailer. My Shih Tzu, Teddy, has its ears flying back, while my eyes and nose run.
That reality motivates me. Mrs. Renkl’s writings are always based on the base. I am very grateful.
Laura Burnett
Portland, mineral.
