On Project 2025 

Editor:

Thank you Mr. Greenson for your editorial "The Crisis of Our Time," and reporting on Project 2025 ("Huffman Talks Project 2025," July 18). I think this issue will galvanize the majority of voters who would prefer not to have a huge police state and fewer checks on presidential power. Project 2025 has 140 members of Trump's administration associated with it to: place the federal bureaucracy, including the Justice Department under direct control of the president, AKA "unitary executive theory;" replace thousands of government employees with appointees loyal to the president; eliminate the Department of Education and much of the FBI and Homeland Security.

Regarding the Republican presidential candidate Mr. Trump, his former department chiefs and numerous support staff have publicly stated that he is unfit for office. Every citizen should pay attention to the Republican plan and as you say, think critically about it before voting this November.

Dennis Whitcomb, Blue Lake

Editor:

Jared Huffman's attempt to "raise awareness" of the "dangers of Project 2025" couldn't have been more timely. As if Donald Trump's nonstop vitriol and plans to undo the republic weren't enough, there is now the Heritage Foundation's design plan for how to do it, i.e., undo the United States and replace it with authoritarian tyranny.

Americans need to become familiar with what is included in Project 2025 and I, for one, am grateful to Congressman Huffman for pointing us toward that end. Any American valuing the balance of power in our government ought to be terrified of the outlined steps in Project 2025. That, I believe, is why Donald Trump is, once again, lying about his having knowledge of the foundation's extreme plan. The United States was not founded on religious nationalism or the rule of one megalomaniac — just the opposite.

Not only is separation of church and state in danger now, but also every foundation that a democratic republic relies on. Why so many Americans seem unaware of the danger, or seem just plain disinterested, is mystifying. When I listen to Donald Trump's language, I am reminded of Joseph Welsh's comment to Joe McCarthy: "At long last, have you left no sense of decency?" The answer was, and is, obvious. But Project 2025's language, like Donald Trump's plans for the country, should be of far greater concern than his hateful ranting and ability to control a portion of the population.

Patricia Lazaravich, Trinidad

Editor:

Project 2025 betrays true conservative principles. Every Republican I've ever known, including members of my family, have long believed that the executive authority of POTUS should be limited. The recent U.S. Supreme Court decision that granted far-reaching immunity to the president also threatens our country. Does this decision mean that Biden can do whatever he wants without fear of consequences?

Even before the Supreme Court decision, Trump seems to have been granted immunity by a bewildering number of people. Many members of his own party and White House staff have reported that they went to great lengths during Trump's presidency to stave off total chaos due to the president's erratic behavior and mental instability. They were engaged in damage control the whole time. I can't understand how people have forgotten that.

Here's a little mental experiment for anyone who believes that Trump deserves a second term. Let's say that Biden loses in November but won't accept his loss. After mounting at least three state-wide investigations into possible fraud in states where fellow Democrats, who were governors or secretary of state, could not find fraud, the desperate ex-president calls the governor of Georgia and demands that he find the necessary votes. Then he hatches a scheme to replace delegates at the Electoral College and pressures Harris to refuse to certify the election results. When none of that works, he incites a crowd of angry people to march on Capitol Hill and stop the certification. How immune should he be?

Martha Walden, Westhaven