A Day of Political and Legal Drama

To the Editor:

Re “Pleading Guilty, Cohen Implicates President” (front page, Aug. 22):

President Trump’s “fixer” may have just fixed America’s nightmare. Michael Cohen’s stunning guilty plea on Tuesday directly linked Mr. Trump to paying off women he allegedly had affairs with in order to influence the outcome of the 2016 presidential election.

Mr. Cohen, who has said he would “take a bullet for the president” and is facing real prison time, decided to give sworn testimony that may turn out to be the fatal blow to Mr. Trump’s presidency. While there was no cooperation clause in Mr. Cohen’s plea, there is little doubt that prosecutors from the Southern District of New York would not have accepted Mr. Cohen’s guilty plea had he not already begun to cooperate.

Along with the conviction of Paul Manafort, the president’s former campaign chairman, in Virginia at almost the same moment that Mr. Cohen was pleading, Donald Trump is several steps closer to becoming a former president.

Henry A. Lowenstein
New York

To the Editor:

Re “In Manafort Trial, Conviction on 8 of 18 Charges” (front page, Aug. 22):

Some have pointed out that the lesson of Paul Manafort’s trial is that you shouldn’t lie about your income. This is true! But there’s another takeaway: Working for Donald Trump doesn’t end well. Mr. Manafort would have likely gotten away with his crimes if he’d never been part of Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign.

Simon Brown
Washington

To the Editor:

Re “The Michael Cohen Conundrum,” by Christopher Buskirk (Opinion Today newsletter, Aug. 22):

Yes, Mr. Buskirk, Michael Cohen “lies a lot,” just as Donald Trump lies a lot. They comfortably and shamelessly lie together.

But no, Mr. Buskirk, you cannot present this stream of federal indictments and guilty pleas from a sitting president’s inner circle as unworthy of our attention and admonish Americans for “obsessing over gossipy West Wing intrigue.”

No, Mr. Buskirk, this is not a prurient soap opera, one of the “psychodramas” for the lazy-minded. Exposing felons infesting the halls and highest offices of our own government deserves every American’s fullest, most critical attention.

And no, Mr. Buskirk, this is not at all like the headline-grabbing Clinton/Lewinsky affair. Sex between consenting adults is not a federal offense. Tax evasion, bank fraud and federal campaign violations are.

Any “politically mature” citizen knows the difference between “scandal mongering” and legitimate, in-depth reporting on federal felons in government.

Carlene Haworth
Woodstock, Conn.

To the Editor:

Republican lawmakers and party officials have been loath to criticize President Trump so that they can keep their cushy jobs. Luckily, there is at least one Republican willing to sacrifice self-interest in the name of integrity: Michael Cohen.

With Mr. Cohen’s recent guilty plea, and his lawyer’s subsequent claim that Mr. Cohen would never accept a pardon from a potentially felonious president, Republican lawmakers now officially have less integrity than a criminal. Shame on them.

Bennett Ferris
New York

To the Editor:

Any Trump supporter who still believes President Trump’s claims of a “witch hunt” after his personal lawyer pleaded guilty to various serious felonies implicating Mr. Trump in a cover-up, and after his campaign chairman is found guilty of eight serious felonies, is delusional.

Forget about whether a sitting president can be indicted or not; forget about whether the Republican Senate would convict if the Republican House summoned the courage to impeach; forget about whether not supporting Mr. Trump in November will hurt in Republican states. Remove this man under the 25th Amendment — now! For the survival of the country as we know it.

John E. Colbert
Arroyo Seco, N.M.

To the Editor:

While President Trump faces allegations of criminal conduct, Republicans in the Senate push forward with the Supreme Court nomination of Brett Kavanaugh. It may be a nomination that was motivated by Mr. Trump’s desire to install a justice who could save him from an indictment while he is in office. At the very least, the hearings of the Senate Judiciary Committee should be delayed until we know the true nature of the president’s involvement in alleged crimes.

Is it really possible that Republicans would allow a president who is potentially guilty of criminal acts to appoint a justice to the Supreme Court? Do they not see how such an appointment would taint the court?

David Baldwin
Petaluma, Calif.

To the Editor:

Being old enough to appreciate the tactile pleasures of The Times in print, I have for many years saved copies of the paper in which events of national or world significance have been reported. I have in my collection some of the great headlines of the last five decades describing events both tragic and triumphant as well as those that foreshadowed historic events.

Suffice it to say that the Aug. 22, 2018, New York Times declaring “Pleading Guilty, Cohen Implicates President” will not be dispatched to the curb for recycling. It will take its place with my growing stack of yellowing papers. Will its headline prove prescient? As our president might say, “We’ll see what happens.”

Steven B. Alderman
Manlius, N.Y.

To the Editor:

I wonder whom President Trump would have chosen for his team if he weren’t looking for the “best” people.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall at the White House these days.

Judy Zwiebach
Westport, Conn.