Readers Write: Trump’s Day One, Biden pardons, animal welfare

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Felon President Donald Trump, on Day One of his reign, pardoned 1,500 people who laid siege on the Capitol in an attempt to overturn the 2020 election of Joe Biden. True to his criminal band of brothers, he pardoned these rioters who committed crimes he encouraged them to commit. He was the one who orchestrated the Jan. 6 riot and would likely have been tried and found guilty had his case been brought to trial. The facts were there, are there, in plain sight. We witness his guilt every time the footage of Jan. 6 is rerun, whether in our minds or in photos and videos of the riot. So much for the rule of law. The Trump reign of terror can now move to his promise to deport millions of immigrants.

Pete Boelter, North Branch, Minn.

•••

Alarmists criticized the U.S. Supreme Court decision to convey close to total immunity to U.S. presidents in order to empower presidents to undertake bold action without fear of being accused of committing criminal acts. It certainly was a bold presidential action to pardon 1,500 Jan. 6 insurrectionists, including those charged or convicted of assaulting police officers, obstructing police or using deadly weapons to harm officers. The quote “Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man’s character, give him power” is often attributed to Abraham Lincoln.

Bruce Schelske, Burnsville

•••

Trump’s irresponsible and cavalier pardoning of the Jan. 6 insurrectionists was a middle-finger salute to every law enforcement officer in this nation and a sign of his unapologetic contempt for the rule of law in this country. Those of you who voted for him should be so proud.

Thomas Jesberg, East Bethel

•••

A Nazi salute! The new presidential administration wasn’t even in power for 12 hours before the nastiness started. Elon Musk gave two Nazi salutes in his speech and the people in attendance just ate it up. This is a dog whistle to the Nazi groups in the U.S. They must be dancing in their gathering places. If I were a person of color in this country I would be shaking in my boots. What a shameful start to the daily chaos we know is coming.

Linda Ziegelmeyer, New Richmond, Wis.

•••

Here we go again. Whether or not I like Trump does not matter (to be clear, I do not). He does not owe me anything. I have zero expectations of him — so anything he accomplishes will be a bonus for me. On the other hand, he owes a lot to those who voted for him. For those people, I would expect unemployment in 2028 to be better than the current 4.1%. I would expect inflation to be better than the current 2.9%. I would expect the number of uninsured Americans to be less than 8%. I would expect the seven-day daily average of border encounters to be less than the current 1,150. But these are just expectations if you actually voted for the guy.

Jim Hanton, Arden Hills

•••

To the Jan. 21 letter writer who maligned Sen. Amy Klobuchar: The Minnesota Democrat didn’t support the current president and could have turned down the opportunity to speak, but as chair of the bipartisan Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies, she followed through on her speaking and planning responsibilities for the event. As one of her constituents, I am proud of her and admire her courage. To paraphrase another upstanding woman, Michelle Obama, our senator decides to go high when others go low.

Barbara Gacek, Minneapolis

Since the founding of the republic, every U.S. president has issued pardons with the exceptions of Harrison and Garfield. Both died in office and did not have the chance.

Article 2, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution grants the president broad power to pardon or grant clemency. But are they so broad as to allow preemptive pardons without a successful prosecution and a sentence imposed? I think preemptive pardons are almost always a bad idea. The possibility of receiving one creates a moral hazard.

According to the Minnesota Star Tribune, The New York Times and others, on Inauguration Day, in the final hours of his presidency, Biden issued preemptive pardons to five members of his family, Anthony Fauci, Gen. Mark Milley, Liz Cheney and some other members of the Jan. 6 committee, as well as some who testified before that committee. Preemptive pardons are rare but not unprecedented.

From my layperson’s perspective, some might be construed as an abuse of power or obstruction of justice. In President Biden’s case, I prefer to think of them as him simply being misguided. Moreover, accepting such a pardon might be construed as a tacit admission of guilt.

Pursuant to the separation of powers in our Constitution, the way I see it, whether a particular presumptive pardon should be challenged in court is a decision for an independent attorney general, after a thorough investigation and objective analysis.

Bob Jentges, North Mankato, Minn.

In Minnesota, we are blessed with an abundance of wildlife species, recognized for their beauty and diversity and held in trust for the benefit of all people. Coyotes and foxes in particular are among our most delightful wild neighbors. It should come as a surprise to most that state law permits a small minority to abuse our treasured native carnivores by engaging in cruel wildlife killing contests.

In these sordid competitions that occur throughout January and February, participants compete for cash and prizes for killing the most, the heaviest or the smallest coyotes and foxes over one or two days. Hundreds of animals may be killed at a single event. One example is the upcoming Hough Fur 7th Annual Coyote Contest in Downer, Minn.

Despite false claims from participants, wildlife killing contests serve no science-based wildlife management purpose, don’t prevent conflicts and don’t increase numbers of deer or turkeys for hunters. A growing number of hunters and wildlife management professionals are speaking out in opposition to them, and 10 states have now banned them.

Treating Minnesota’s wildlife as if they are disposable pieces in a “cash and prizes” game is not representative of what most people in our state find tolerable. A recent poll revealed that 80% of Americans oppose killing contests. They’re nothing more than an embarrassment to all of us, and especially to the hunting community.

I hope readers who care about protecting our state’s wildlife will urge the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources to ban this blood sport.

Andrew Willman, Fridley

The writer is Humane Policy Volunteer Leader for the Humane Society of the United States.

•••

Nobody who loves bacon or a chicken sandwich will enjoy this letter, but I ask you to stop and think about how meat products land on your plate. Slaughterhouse employees are at high risk of chronic pain due to injuries caused by high line speeds (“USDA report outlines high injury risk for pig, poultry workers,” Jan. 16).

Pork and poultry producers want those line speeds even higher so they can make more money. Please imagine yourself as a line worker who, in the 30 seconds it takes to read this letter, has cut up 70 chickens; that’s at least two birds per SECOND! Or consider the pork worker who is required to handle and kill a large pig about every four seconds. Do you care about high worker injury rates so you can pay less per pound? If you eat meat, you’d better at least care about protecting immigrants, because I doubt anyone reading this would do those extremely difficult jobs.

Christine Lewis, Minneapolis