Letters to the Editor

Registered users may submit a Letter to the Editor after they first log in.

Editor:
The Mueller Report is a fascinating read. The investigation documented that contacts with Russia that had been uncovered by American journalists were not “fake news.” It also uncovered additional contacts that cause me to lose sleep at night. For example, the Campaign provided internal polling data to Russians, with information on battleground states, (v. I, pp. 129, 140). This may have enabled Russia to target its well-documented social media campaign, swinging those states for President Trump.

The report states, “Our investigation found multiple acts by the President that were capable of exerting undue influence over law enforcement investigations... The incidents were often carried out through one-on-one meetings in which the President sought to use his official power outside of usual channels (v. II, p. 157).” The details of these obstructive acts make the report a real page turner.

The report states, “[O]bstruction of a criminal investigation is punishable even if… the investigation ultimately reveals no underlying crime’… the evidence does not establish that the President was involved in an underlying crime related to Russian election interference. But the evidence does point to a range of other possible personal motives animating the President’s conduct. These include concerns that continued investigation would call into question the legitimacy of his election and potential uncertainty about whether certain events… could be seen as criminal activity by the President, his campaign, or his family” (v. II, p. 157). 

This may explain why the President fought so hard to quash an independent investigation into an ongoing threat to the future of our democracy — foreign government interference in a U.S. presidential election.

I urge Alameda Sun readers to read or listen to The Mueller Report and decide for themselves whether the report should be used as a starting point for an impeachment inquiry by the House Judiciary Committee. Join the Mueller Book Club to become a part of a community of thousands who are all reading the report at https://muellerbookclub.com.

 

Betsy Mathieson

Editor:
Alameda is a wonderful place to grow up in. A place where people are warm and friendly. A great example of this is, walking into South Shore Cafe, and being greeted by Don and Leslie, who own the place. We have known them for more than 25 years, before they married. They have made us feel like family. 

We are not the only who feel South Shore Cafe is made for Alameda. It’s the place that bridges us — seniors, families, friends —together. The aroma of homemade food, cooking in the kitchen, while Leslie and her staff serve coffee and other good things to eat. 

It’s a small piece of America’s charm with booths of the past currently decked out with red, white and blue decor to remind us of our Independence Day.

 

John & Vicki Bell

Editor:
So the rumor persists that City Council paid a consultant to ponder a $5 fee to leave the Island and to leave Bay Farm? You’ve already ruined Alameda streets. Overcrowding creates crime and it’s already too much for our police, fire, hospital, grocery stores and parking lots to handle, never mind the use of water.

Now 200 more apartments are planned, resulting in what I expect will be another 400 cars on the road. The tube is taking abuse already. Bike lanes take up half our car lanes. 

A homeless shelter by our beach, by Webster Street, will bring in more crime, traffic and beggars. Will we have poop and needles in the streets like San Francisco? 

No to the $5 toll. No to the shelter. No to sanctuary city status. No to the demise of Alameda. Lousy. That’s a “free consultation.”

 

Jo Williams

Pages