We applaud holding politicians accountable for donation acceptance (“Why did they accept hate money?” June 24). Also, your stated desire to ask the pertinent questions to every candidate. Your editorial would have more validity if you did that.
I subscribe to The Tribune. I don’t recall your questioning the acceptance of millions in donations to the Clinton Foundation from Saudi Arabia while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. Did you question her acceptance of millions from a Nigerian donor during the same time, which may have resulted in Boko Haram not being declared a terrorist organization? This is the group that kidnaps schoolgirls for sex slaves for their army.
Lumping causes important to your conservative readers in such a way that you denigrate them to hate thought is not honest. It’s guilt-by-association mudslinging.
It’s not a hate crime to oppose efforts weakening the family structure. It’s not a hate crime to work for U.S. withdrawal from international organizations. It’s not a hate crime to uphold the Constitution, believing the government should operate constitutionally. It’s not a hate crime to advocate for the repeal of gun control.
Sign Up and Save
Get six months of free digital access to The Tribune
These things may be politically incorrect but not hate speech as your editorial implies.