Letters to the Editor

Readers weigh in on the Nunes memo

Regarding “Sen. Burr should refute Trump’s comments” (Feb. 6): Senators Richard Burr and Thom Tillis are letting North Carolina citizens down by sitting on the sidelines and not actively getting involved in what is going on in Washington. Sen. Burr, the leader of the Senate Intelligence Committee’s investigation into Russian interference in our elections made a very big and public deal about the Steele Dossier and wanting to interview Fusion and understand how the intelligence was gathered.

As the Nunes memo was being prepared and discussed, Sen. Burr made no public comments about the fact that the memo contents left out valuable information and details he certainly was aware of and reviewed. Additionally, he knew that some of the data in the memo could have impacted our national security.

Sen. Tillis has voiced concern about protecting Robert Mueller from being fired by President Trump and has suggested legislation that was ignored. Yet he has remained silent in the face of the reality that the Nunes memo could be a platform abort the Mueller investigation and give the Russians what they wanted. Both senators have demonstrated they value party over country and because of that the citizens of North Carolina have been shortchanged.

Stephen Berg

Chapel Hill

FISA questioned

Regarding “Sen. Burr should refute Trump’s comments” (Feb. 6): The editorial board thinks the main “crime” here is what Trump tweeted? How about the DNC and Hillary paying for a dossier to attack a political opponent? How about the FBI and the Department of Justice under Obama using this dossier to get a FISA warrant?

How about the FBI using an unverified article from Yahoo as part of their case for a warrant? There is this going on and the main concern is a tweet by Trump? It is clear that the FBI and DOJ were not only biased but very possibly criminal in their dealings. The FBI and DOJ did not want the memo to come out for security reasons. Please, what are the security concerns? The only concern is getting caught.

One can only expect that the Trump collusion case was brought about by the same individuals.

Tom Austin


Think about memo

Regarding “Rep. Nunes drops his baffling memo: This is it?” (Feb. 3): So much pre-release hype and outrage, and then “the” memo failed to live up to expectations, particularly after you parse it carefully and actually think about it.

North Carolina’s Mark Meadows and Ohio’s Jim Jordan in a joint televised interview raged, ranted, and frothed, but they reminded me of air being forcibly expelled from a whoopee cushion.

Robert T. Adams



Regarding “Trump claims GOP memo ‘totally vindicates’ him” (Feb. 4): Once again, Donald Trump is overstepping his bounds in criticizing the FBI and the Justice Department. Does he not realize that these are the very men and women who have sworn to protect him even with their own lives if necessary?

This is another attempt to draw focus away from the Russian investigation. Trump and the Republican party are doing everything in their power to discredit this process even stooping to release false information. If he were innocent as he claims, why is he protesting so much?

Georgie F. Brizendine


The ‘facts’

Regarding “The Nunes memo revealed a damning omission” (Feb. 7): John Adams said that facts are stubborn things. And here are the facts. The FBI and some DOJ senior leadership knowingly deceived a FISA judge not once but four times to get a warrant to spy on Trump and his staff. They did this by concealing the fact that they knew that the dossier they used to justify the warrant was unverified and bought and paid for by the Clinton campaign.

These are the facts. The Democrats led by Rep. Adam Schiff did everything they could to prevent the American people from knowing the facts. What the FBI and DOJ officials did was criminal. Therefore Schiff and the Democrats obstructed justice by trying to conceal this criminal behavior.

Vincent M. DiSandro Sr.


Alternative facts?

Regarding “Trump claims GOP memo ‘totally vindicates’ him” (Feb. 4): In the court of public opinion the current Commander in Chief is relying on the American public to have short memories. When President Trump was candidate Trump he didn’t hesitate to mention the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server. During his campaign speeches we were told many times that he was going to both “drain the swamp” and “lock her up” based upon information regarding his opponent.

Now there are even more mosquitoes and water moccasins that have taken up residence in the swamp since Inauguration Day of last year. The timing of the Nunes memo suggesting that the Russian investigation by the FBI has been compromised by biased members of the intelligence community is highly suspect. It seems Trump is grasping at straws in hopes that the investigative spotlight will no longer shine on him and he won’t have to make good on his commitment to testify under oath.

Trump has attempted to credit the FBI when it suits his purposes and to be dismissive when their sleuthing uncovers information he’d prefer to remain hidden. There can’t be two versions of the truth.

Greg Bruhn