Letters to the Editor

I would like to take up Jack DeVine’s challenge to debate his perspective.

Were not the whistleblower’s concerns validated by the testimony of live witnesses? Is the whistleblower even relevant at this juncture?

I suppose we are to rely on your constitutional acumen that concludes, “it was not an impeachable offence.” Abuse of power is impeachable according to many constitutional scholars and by the way he was indeed impeached in article one on that basis.

While it may not be improper to seek help from another country regarding corruption there are valid processes in place to pursue that, which were not pursued.

DeVine also overlooked some other cogent facts: This was not some random innocent seeking help on corruption. Rather it was a president of the United States seeking that help from a newly elected president of a war-torn country that needed our help and just so happened to be about investigating his political rival at a time when the war-torn country needed us. Coincidence? I think not. That Biden did not recuse himself from leading Ukraine policy while his son served on that board was wrong and he will suffer the consequences.

This entire process has always boiled down to some basics but some are still chasing the shining object that obfuscates those basics.

Did the president abuse his power by seeking a political advantage by enlisting a foreign power to investigate his rival? Did he do it? Not why did he do it, not what others have done or not done, and not if “they were always out to get him," but did he do it?

If so, what should the consequence be?

Impeachment is the remedy provided by the Constitution. Impeachment means bringing charges. The House did that; they brought the charges to the Senate.

The next question is, if you believe he did that, does it rise to the level of removal from office? The Senate said no.

That is the end of the story. Both houses of congress did their jobs as they see it. I happen to agree with both the House and the Senate.

Do there have to be villains?

We should all be proud that we all had an opportunity to see this play out on television for the last several weeks. Take pride in the process. It was sober and bound by president and the constitution. We enjoyed a civics lesson. Was there bias and political motivation? Of course there were. There was respectful decorum on all sides. We should try to emulate those virtues. We can disagree agreeably as I have tried to do here.

Maybe it’s too late to ask for us to open our minds and listen to all sides before predetermining an outcome. Be respectful of one another.

The big question: has the president learned anything? It will be a bumpy ride over the next several months so buckle up.

Ralph DiSibio

Aiken