I would be remiss if I did not reply to Mr. Van Eck's view of abortion and it's place in our nation.  It would not be fair to the over 2000 babies who die each day in our country - or the over 50 million who have died since Roe V Wade became the law of the land. We, the pro-life members of our country are well aware that if Roe V Wade was overturned abortion would not end.  Unfortunately our country has become calloused to the truth of the importance each child is to our God - Jeremiah 1:5, Psalm 139 :13.  The truth is, however that many thousands of babies would be saved.  The question of legality would return to the states.

Prior to  Roe V Wade there was an article in the American Medical Association Periodical which stated that eventually people would become calloused and abortion would become legal - it would only take some time.  Dr. Nathanson, who helped make it legal, stated to anyone who would listen after preforming many abortions,  and writing  THE SILENT SCREAM, after viewing how a baby reacts to an abortion, tried to warn us of what was coming.
The accusation that we only care for the pre-born and do nothing for the born is ludicrous.  It is the pro-life workers who give free counsel, sonograms, safe houses for girls who need help avoiding an abortion and making a new life, clothing for the babies and best of all, healing from an abortion through the Church and Rachael's Vineyard.

The continued fight to displace Trump, if successful, could cause a revolution, for many are awaking to the evil of those fighting to keep abortion legal, and the total corruptness in their methods.  Abortion has always been and will always be an option for those who do not know what they do - but not with the blessing of our God or those of us who see it for the evil it is - not just to the baby but to poor women who wake up to the reality that their baby is dead.

Sincerely,

Annette Corrigan

Jackson Township

It's still almost two months until the Inauguration, and "the People's Choice" has already backtracked on nearly all his campaign promises.  Round up and deport all Illegals?  No, we'll only do the criminal ones.  (Like Obama's been doing for eight years now.)  Bring back waterboarding and "a lot worse"?  Nah.  Repeal Obamacare?  Not so fast.  He's also changed his mind about tearing up both the Iran deal and the Paris Agreement on climate change.  Why, he won't even "Lock Her Up!"  like he promised, to the roaring approval of ugly mobs.  That was just to get votes with.  Like the rest.

Not unexpected, actually.  But one way in which he's reneging is more serious.  During the campaign, we were assured that his businesses would be put in a blind trust.  Now we're told that the law doesn't require it (Sadly true, but there was a strong custom.  Like releasing tax returns.)  We're told that "The President can't have a conflict of interest".  Meaning that it's not even possible, not that he mustn't.  (Reminiscent of Nixon's claim "When the President does it, it's not illegal.")  He claims he can do it "perfectly".  But hey, isn't he perfect in every way?

So a man who falsely accused Hillary Clinton of self-dealing, of pay for play, of conducting public business for private gain will unashamedly be doing exactly that!  Our next (sort of) President can run the Executive Branch for the purpose of lining his pockets. 

And he's already profiting.  Visiting diplomats are making a point of staying in his new Trump International Hotel near the White House in order to curry favor.  If he had any scruples, he'd donate all profits from that to the Treasury.  But we know what he doesn't have.

Conflict of interest is a serious problem.  In addition to enriching himself while neglecting America's interests, it puts the next Chief in compromising positions.  For example, we know he owes a lot of money to the Bank of China.  How can the famous maker of deals make the best deal with that hanging over his head?  Will he make concessions to China that he mightn't have, in order to cover his assets?  Likely.  We know who comes first in his universe.  And you're not even Number Two.

What we have here is a man with no fixed principles, except for naked self-interest.  No one should be surprised.  Conflict of interest is a serious problem.  I wish his worshipers would take it seriously, but I doubt it.  Their Fuehrer can do no wrong.

Sincerely,

Stephen Van Eck

Rushville, PA