Opinion |  'Rude and Inaccurate' Trump at CNN Town Hall

To the Editor:

Re “Trump Repeats False Election Claims on CNN Show” (news article, May 11):

Thank you for your thorough and factual report at CNN town hall Wednesday with former President Donald Trump. You summarize every mischaracterization, exaggeration, and untruth uttered by Mr. Trump in your Fact Check and related articles.

Unfortunately, it's likely that many far-right voters who are interested in watching town hall will not be interested in reading it. Likewise, the studio audience for the show, apparently chosen to represent Trump supporters, will either be unaware or indifferent of the damage his crass and inaccurate remarks are doing to our nation's political body.

CNN made a major mistake following through on its plans to air the program after the verdict in the E. Jean Carroll case was announced Tuesday.

Mr. Trump benefited greatly from his constant non-discriminatory coverage of untruths in the 2016 election. It is time for responsible print and television journalists to pull the plug and refuse to provide a platform for Mr. Trump's lies and vulgarity. Trump.

Jim Linsel
Traverse City, Mich.

To the Editor:

I think it's appropriate for CNN to invite Donald Trump to appear in its town hall. After all, the former president is a leading candidate for the presidency of one of our two major political parties.

I don't subscribe to the philosophy held by some loud voices in the media that “I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death my right to prevent you from saying it.”

If there's a problem with the Wednesday night broadcast, it's the format. Specifically, having the host, Kaitlan Collins, serve as facilitator of the show's question-and-answer framework and fact checker for Mr Trump's response. Becoming effective in either role is quite challenging; doing both is impossible.

John E. Stafford
rye, NY

To the Editor:

Re “The MAGA King, Back in Prime Time” (Opinion, May 10):

Michelle Cottle, in her defense of CNN's decision to broadcast town hall with Donald Trump, didn't make a big point.

The problem isn't just that the network is providing a platform to people trying to overthrow our democratic process. CNN also gave him more airtime than any of his challengers, which is what got us into this mess at first.

From the moment Donald Trump walked down the escalator to announce his candidacy in 2015, cable networks provided him with unprecedented free coverage — cementing his status as a serious candidate in a way no other presidential candidate has ever treated.

The election is more than a year away, and Mr. Trump is already manipulating the media, pitting Fox against CNN and grabbing prime time by the hour.

For the most important question Ms. Cottle: No, we didn't learn anything.

Betty J. Cotter
Shannock, R.I

To the Editor:

Re “Santos Indicted as Claims Investigation 3 Financial Scheme” (front page, 11 May):

It's satisfying to read about George Santos being prosecuted, especially after months of enduring his arrogant defiance. Mr. Santos does not represent New York's Third District; he represents the worst types of people—people who lie to get ahead, people who prey on the less fortunate, people who cheat the system.

That such fraud should help break the laws of our country is appalling. Mr. Santos does not serve his constituents; he serves himself. And in his refusal to admit to his alleged fraud, he became the epitome of political cowardice.

Unsurprisingly, House Republican leaders have demonstrated their own political cowardice by winking at Mr Santos' bad behavior, even as he is being prosecuted for it, in an effort to maintain their tight majority.

I applaud House Republicans calling for Mr Santos' resignation and encouraging more to follow suit. In “Profiles in Courage,” John F. Kennedy write“Not all Senators will agree – but few will deny that the desire for re-election is a powerful impediment to independent courage.”

Will more members of Congress be able to hit the accelerator.

Gary J. Whitehead
Norwood, NJ

To the Editor:

Re “Santos Pushes Misuse of Campaign Money Across the Normal Line,” by David Firestone (Opinion, May 11):

Mr. Firestone wrote that George Santos' alleged scheme to funnel money into himself through a 501(c)(4) organization was “absolutely stupid”. In fact, it's brilliant and would have worked if he hadn't made the mistake of actually being elected to Congress.

Deception is discovered because the victim eventually finds out what is going on. In the case of misappropriated election donations, contributors almost never check to see if the donations actually went to the campaign, and they don't here. If he doesn't get elected, The New York Times will never check his statements, contributors will never complain and prosecutors will never investigate.

If Mr Santos loses, as he probably means, he could walk away with the money.

James Fogel
The author is the former head of the Fraud Bureau at the Manhattan district attorney's office and a former judge at the New York City Criminal Court.

To the Editor:

Re “Anxious Nation” (movie review, May 5):

I was a 14 year old “Anxious Nation” cast member. The film does more than talk to “some struggling teens and some of their parents”. For four years, we made the courageous decision to share our struggle with mental health to help others who are also struggling.

I find your use of the word “tantrums” very annoying. The raw video you see is a real panic attack. Not “tantrums”. Panic attacks that children as young as 3 years old have.

I know this. That's me. Parents do not realize or understand it.

The courage shown throughout the film is extraordinary and deserves to be appreciated. This will give the family the tools to learn. It would give kids my age someone to relate to, and that is very dear to me. I didn't grow up.

You're entitled to your opinion about “Anxious Nation,” but alienating a family in dire need of this film feels both wrong and irresponsible.

The family needs this. My generation is in crisis.

Seveann Morton
Cardiff, California.

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 that I loved for 13 years, and my last year there, I stopped every morning at Dunkin' Donuts on my way to work. On my last day of work, I went there as usual and told them about the event.

As all the Dunkin staff wished me well, I was nearly in tears (and laughing through tears at the same time) when I carried my coffee to my car. It made me really appreciate the importance of the informal relationships we encounter as part of our daily lives.

Amy S. Rich
Orange, Kon.