Our coronavirus coverage is free for the first 24 hours. Find the latest information at Please consider subscribing or donating.

  1. Opinion

What to make of the impeachment inquiry

Here’s what readers had to say in Thursday’s letters to the editor.

First loyalty is to United States

Dems, GOP lay out competing cases on Trump impeachment | Nov. 13

The insistence by Republicans in the House of Representatives that they be allowed to call Hunter Biden as a witness in the public impeachment hearings illustrates several things. It first must be acknowledged that there is no information that Hunter Biden can offer — none — that would have any bearing whatsoever on the question of whether President Donald Trump committed impeachable offenses. That said, it is then clear that the only objective the GOP seeks to achieve by this demand is to attempt to humiliate Hunter — and weaken Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. This ultimately meaningless and desperate ploy makes clear the legal, moral and substantive bankruptcy of the Republicans’ clownish efforts to defend Trump’s actions that gave rise to the impeachment inquiry. Pity they put loyalty to party, and to a man who is unworthy of it, before duty to country to undertake a serious, and dare I say honorable, role in this profoundly important event.

Morry Bornstein, Seminole

A one-sided investigation

Hearings must focus on the facts | Editorial, Nov. 13

This Times editorial was nothing but a regurgitation of Democratic talking points. There was no mention of the bias of the witnesses or exculpatory facts revealed in the closed-door meetings. But most all there was no mention of how the hearing rules have it set up to be one-sided with Republicans not able to call whom they want as counter witnesses.

Matthew Yarmel, Sun City Center

Keep dogs from grocery store

Puppies, let’s see your papers | Letter, Nov. 13

Two puppies wait it out in the holding area in November 2007 at the Hillsborough Animal Services Shelter.

Kudos to the letter writer, who is so right. I find it so unsanitary to have these animals in the grocery store. The owners are holding the small dogs up in their arms and hands, then they are touching food items, produce, meat products. I find this unacceptable. While I do have sympathy for their health issues, would not a small blanket or “stuffy” help with the small amount of time spent in the grocery store?

Judy Lavaron, St. Petersburg

Get down to serious talk

Don’t ‘just adapt,’ take action | Column, Nov. 13

Brickell Avenue in Miami was flooded after Hurricane Irma in September 2017.

What a perfect example of a column with good intentions that, at least for myself, has the wrong result. While the authors’ intention is to raise concern about global warming, the hyperbole creates doubts about the authenticity of the issue. Here’s just one example: “Florida’s geography leaves it vulnerable to attack by hurricanes from either side.” “Attack?” Hurricanes “attack”? With China, India and Africa rising and the resulting carbon burn that will accompany that rise, there is little the West can do to stem the rise of emissions and resulting consequences but adapt. To that point, I suggest a review of the actions that Western nations have actually taken that were agreed to in the Paris Climate Accord. Lots of words, little action. I don’t have issue with the stated fact of global temperature rise. I don’t have issue with supporting “green” initiatives. I do have issue with this type of article. Discussions about what can really be achieved in the face of the consequences of global temperature rise are needed. The horse is already out of the barn. We are going to have to adapt. It’s time to begin serious discussion on that issue.

Jeff Tawney, St. Petersburg