Dear Mr. Trump,

Some who read my letters echo your posturing that you were “exonerated” by the Mueller report. These people haven’t not read the report, however, and neither have you.

Here’s what the report does say about working with Russia:

“The [Special Counsel’s] office uncovered numerous links … between Trump Campaign officials and individuals having … ties with the Russian government” (Report 180). The Russians explicitly “promis[ed] derogatory information on Hillary Clinton” (Id.). Donald Trump, Jr., responded “I love it” when offered this damaging information (Report 185). “Trump Jr. appears to have accepted that offer and to have arranged a meeting to receive those materials.” (Id.)

Despite our country’s “compelling interest in limiting the participation of foreign citizens in activities of democratic self-government and in thereby prevent foreign influence over the U.S. political process, … several U.S. persons [associated with your campaign] made false statements about those contacts and took other steps to obstruct the Office’s investigation and that of Congress” (Report 180).

So how does this exonerate you? People don’t make false statements and obstruct justice when they feel they’ve acted properly.

You escaped prosecution only because of Mueller’s ridiculously narrow definition of the evidence necessary to convict you and the Campaign, only by virtue of Mueller’s citing your pitiful ignorance of the law. You get an undeserved pass from the Special Counsel based on his judgment that your Campaign knew nothing about the United States laws that prevent foreign contributions to election campaigns. (Report 187)

Really? You run for president, and you don’t know even the most basic laws about political campaigns? It’s hardly believable. Your so-called “exoneration” is an abomination, depending on your willful ignorance of the law.

What do you have to say, Mr. Trump?

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

Whatever else you think you may be doing by stonewalling – playing to your base, acting “tough,” trying to goad House Democrats to starting impeachment hearings against you – you’re teaching Americans the worst possible lesson.

You’re teaching us that our sacred institutions of government should be disrespected, that government by an elected legislative branch is a fantasy, and that lawful process – subpoenas intended to allow policy access to the information they need to govern – can and should be ignored with impunity.

As House Judiciary Chairman Nadler properly put it, you are placing your own personal needs “over the fair administration of justice” by decreeing that your administration will not respond in any way to Congressional requests for testimony and documents.

Why should we respond to a summons to jury duty? You’ve shown that our way of government can be flouted.

Why should we comply with laws that require drivers to have a driver’s license? You, Mr. Trump, apparently don’t have to obey the law, so why should anyone else?

Why should we respect our police officers? You, Mr. Trump, spit in the face of Congress, so why can’t common citizens spit in the faces of those trying to enforce our laws?

Chairman Nadler said, and I agree, that “Every one of us must make the same choice. … The choice is simple. We can stand up to [you] in defense of the country and the Constitution and the liberty we love or we can let the moment pass us by.” And he warned that “There is no way forward for this country that does not include a reckoning for this clear and present danger to our constitutional order.”

Ultimately the American voters in 2020 will decide the way forward or the way to destruction. We will decide if we want a president who feels that he is above the law, like a despot, like you, Mr. Trump, or whether we want a president who fulfills his oath to defend the Constitution.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

Whatever else you think you may be doing by stonewalling – playing to your base, acting “tough,” trying to goad House Democrats to starting impeachment hearings against you – you’re teaching Americans the worst possible lesson.

You’re teaching us that our sacred institutions of government should be disrespected, that government by an elected legislative branch is a fantasy, and that lawful process – subpoenas intended to allow policy access to the information they need to govern – can and should be ignored with impunity.

As House Judiciary Chairman Nadler properly put it, you are placing your own personal needs “over the fair administration of justice” by decreeing that your administration will not respond in any way to Congressional requests for testimony and documents.

Why should we respond to a summons to jury duty? You’ve shown that our way of government can be flouted.

Why should we comply with laws that require drivers to have a driver’s license? You, Mr. Trump, apparently don’t have to obey the law, so why should anyone else?

Why should we respect our police officers? You, Mr. Trump, spit in the face of Congress, so why can’t common citizens spit in the faces of those trying to enforce our laws?

Chairman Nadler said, and I agree, that “Every one of us must make the same choice. … The choice is simple. We can stand up to [you] in defense of the country and the Constitution and the liberty we love or we can let the moment pass us by.” And he warned that “There is no way forward for this country that does not include a reckoning for this clear and present danger to our constitutional order.”

Ultimately the American voters in 2020 will decide the way forward or the way to destruction. We will decide if we want a president who feels that he is above the law, like a despot, like you, Mr. Trump, or whether we want a president who fulfills his oath to defend the Constitution.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

Your efforts to kill our democracy continue unabated.

Your press secretary now admits more outrageous deeds on your part. You’ve had the gall to talk to your master, Vladimir Putin, to confirm that there was “no collusion,” your meaningless catch phrase, given that your campaign “expected it would benefit electorally from information stolen and released through Russian efforts.” Nothing like coordinating with a co-conspirator to keep your stories straight.

This can only mean that Russia – with your encouragement – feels fully invigorated to interfere again in our elections. There can be no doubt that you told him you would once again welcome Russia’s help so that you could stay in the White House. You probably told him how to evade FBI’s counter-intelligence effort.

You also apparently “discussed whether you would allow former White House counsel Don McGahn to testify before Congress.” NBC News.

What reason could possibly have for explaining to Putin how you intend to assert executive privilege, interfere with Congress’s investigatory duties, and embroil our country in a constitutional crisis? The only reason is to assure Putin that his main objective in interfering in our election – to sow discord in America, to make people doubt the efficacy of democracy – is playing out perfectly as he planned.

In my mind, that conduct by itself constitutes an impeachable offense. You’re begging for it. But be careful what you wish for.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

So now you’re saying that it was a “disaster” to stop tearing babies away from their mothers at the border, to stop separating families permanently.

Maybe the real disaster is that you are our president. Maybe the real disaster is that you wanted to inflict pain and permanent loss on these families who were, after all, only seeking asylum. Maybe the real disaster is that your government still cannot track down the families that were separated and reunite them. Maybe the real disaster is that your government is willfully refusing to comply with court orders to reunite these families, at your direction.

Throw around the term “disaster,” Mr. Trump, and most Americans will know the real disaster. It’s staring you in the face when you look at the mirror, isn’t it?

You’re not a religious man, but many voters are religious. We think deeply about what the Bible says and how it might apply to our national disaster. I think about this often, when I’m reading Psalms. Consider what the Bible says:

“The wicked … are like the chaff which the wind driveth away. Therefore the wicked shall not stand in judgment …” Psalm 1:4-5.

You will be driven away.

“[God does not] hath pleasure in wickedness; Evil shall not sojourn with [God]. The boasters shall not stand in [God’s] sight. [God] hatest all workers of iniquity.” Psalm 5:5-6.

Your wickedness brings God no pleasure, and, after the 2020 election, you will not stand as president-elect.

“Depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity.” Psalm 6:9.

Yes, depart Mr. Trump. The voters in 2020 will make sure you depart.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

So you have ordered your present and former aides not to appear before Congress, a move that no president in our history has ever attempted.

Have you possibly forgotten that Congress has a constitutional duty of oversight of the Executive Branch? Or possibly never learned that? Or perhaps it’s that you want to subvert our constitutional order and become king and dictator, that your fondest hope is to become Putin-like and Kim-like, to walk in the steps of those other thugs that you have so often praised?

It seems as if you don’t want your aides to testify truthfully to explain the chaos in the White House and lack of leadership. E.g., you don’t want them revealing your insistence that Russia didn’t interfere in our election – the Mueller Report be dammed – and how you’ve prevented them from working against Russia’s continuing efforts.

It’s true. There’s a political component to the House of Representatives seeking information. Congress is, after all, a political body. The House of Representatives is now controlled by Democrats because that’s what the majority of the country wanted in the last election. But to preclude knowledgeable people from testifying because you don’t like the tenor of the investigation is essentially to subvert the will of the people who put a Democratic House in place.

You didn’t complain when a Republican-led House took the political position to ignore your working for and with the Russians. Consistency has never been your strong suit, though, has it?

Honorable Americans who are working or have worked for you will comply with the House requests to testify. Let the truth emerge so that all Americans can hear and decide.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

Not so fast!

Having your bootlicking A.G. distort the Mueller Report doesn’t do the trick. We, the American people, can read.

Whether or not “collusion,” we see your conduct. It’s indisputable your entire campaign welcomed Russian interference in our election and failed to alert the FBI. Indeed, you were delighted that an enemy of America was working hard to subvert our democracy and you wanted that to continue.

That’s “exoneration”?

Although Mr. Mueller is honorable, he grossly forgave your coordination with the Russian interference, taking a ridiculously narrow view of the concept. He claimed that coordination requires “an agreement – tact or express — between the Trump Campaign and the Russian government.” (Report 2) Since he found no direct evidence of an agreement, he concluded there wasn’t coordination.

Excuse me, but coordination doesn’t require an agreement. Merriam-Webster defines coordination as “the harmonious functioning of parts for effective results. The Business Dictionary defines it as “the synchronization and integration of activities.” These definitions exactly fit.

Mr. Mueller notes “The [Russian] social media campaign and the GRU hacking operations coincided with a series of contacts between Trump Campaign officials and individuals with ties to the Russian government.” (Report 5) That’s more than enough for reasonable people to know there was coordination. The “coincidence” – things happening together – was no accident.

Furthermore, Mr. Mueller said he would’ve found more, except that “several individuals affiliated with the Trump Campaign lied to the Office, and to Congress, about their interactions with [Russia.] … Those lies materially impaired the investigation.” He was hampered too because “subjects of the investigation  … [pled the] Fifth Amendment.” (Report 9-10). How convenient!

We’ll keep reading about your immoral and deceitful behavior.

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

Thank you so much for proving once again to the majority of Americans that you are despicable.

If you don’t know what that word means – despite your self-described high intelligence – it means “vile and deserving contempt.” https://www.definition-of.com/despicable it means “arousing or deserving of loathing and disgust.” https://www.merriam-webster.com/thesaurus/despicable These are excellent descriptions of your behavior throughout your life and presidency, but particularly in the last week.

Once again, you have invited your supporters to use violence against other Americans. By suggesting that Rep. Omar supported the 911 attacks, which she obviously did not, you are painting a target on her. You are inviting your crazed followers – whom you have called “our Second Amendment people” – to take her down, G-d forbid that should ever happen.

Go ahead and pretend that’s not what you intended. We know better.

Your conduct with regard to Rep. Omar jives with everything else you’ve done: your slanderous claim that Muslims danced with joy in the streets of Jersey City on 911; your knowingly false accusation that President Obama was a Muslim (something your cult still believes); your campaign theme that Muslims should be banned from entering the country. That’s your sick idea of how to stay in power: to divide America along racial and religious lines and to incite civil violence.

If your behavior this week doesn’t arouse loathing and disgust in right-thinking Americans, nothing will.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

I have just looked at the Executive Office for Immigration Review website, because I wanted to see if I qualified to apply to become an immigration judge. I thought: Harvard Law School, Harvard Law Review, four years’ service in the Department of Justice Civil Rights Division, 25 or so career trials … maybe?

To my great surprise, the Department of Justice website is not taking applications. Supposedly, as of March 27, 2019, when the job announcement expired, the United States has enough immigration judges. That cannot possibly be the case.

The United States has only 394 immigration judges. More than 800,000 cases remain to be resolved, so why don’t you seek the authorization of more judges? If each judge, on average, has 2,000 pending cases, no wonder there’s a problem, but you’re doing nothing to fix it. You don’t like the U.S. law that allows people to apply for asylum, so you won’t do what you need to do to adjudicate those claims.

What you should be doing is asking for a 400% increase in the ranks of immigration judges, so asylum pleas can be dealt with quickly and fairly. Instead of 394, we should have at least 2,000 judges.

But that’s not how you think, is it? You’re a reality show host. You think it’s cool to say “You’re Fired!”

Well, firing everyone who works for you in the Department of Homeland Security doesn’t solve the problem on our border.

Firing your nominee for head of ICE before he’s even confirmed – in the hope of someone “stronger” – doesn’t solve the problem on our border.

There’s one thing that you will understand. “You’re Fired!” We will fire you. Your firing will take place as a result of the 2020 election. You can bet on it. And no new judges will be necessary.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger

Dear Mr. Trump,

It’s one further example of the absurdity and meanness of your presidency.

You are calling the Republican Party the “Health Care Party” because … because …, I really don’t know why. It doesn’t make any sense.

The Department of Justice, at your direction, is attempting to completely invalidate the Affordable Care Act in court.

If you had your way, you would thus immediately strip medical insurance from about 17 million people who now have it through the ACA. If you had your way, medical insurance coverage could be denied again on the basis of pre-existing conditions. If you had your way, medical insurance would no longer have to extend to children of the insured up to age 26.

Why are you so mean and thoughtless? Don’t you remember that the Affordable Care Act originated as a Republican concept in Massachusetts and that it uses the free market, a favorite rallying cry of real Republicans?

You tell us without support that you’ll propose even better medical insurance, that pre-existing conditions won’t be an excuse for denying coverage, but …. You won’t propose any plan until after the 2020 election. So the truth is that you have no idea how, years down the road, you’ll protect those people with pre-existing conditions, the very people who, if you had your way in court, would immediately lose their insurance.

Do you really think that Americans are so stupid as to rely upon such a promise? Isn’t that just like the promise that you would release your tax returns after the 2016 election?

Tell the Justice Department to drop its opposition to the Affordable Care Act now and forever. And don’t try to con the American public that you give a fig about our ability to obtain medical care.

Very truly yours,

Bruce J. Berger