OPINION:
It isn’t practical to respond to each issue presented in Andrew P. Napolitano’s recent op-ed, “Trump’s trial is not a charade but deadly serious business based on constitutional norms” (Web, Jan. 22). But I can briefly respond to the following sentence: “In Mr. Trump’s case, though the House chose delicately not to accuse the president of specific crimes, there is enough evidence here to do so.”
Does Mr. Napolitano really believe (and expect his readers to believe) that Democratic members of the House actually had sufficient evidence “to accuse the president of specific crimes” but “chose delicately not to?”
Certainly, Mr. Napolitano must be aware, given the palpable animosity of Democrats for this president, that the left is more than willing to accept hearsay and opinion as evidence to support Mr. Trump’s removal. Actual evidence of specific crimes would have been welcomed with open arms.
DANIEL P. MCKIM
Springfield, Va.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.