AN OPEN LETTER TO REPUBLICAN LAWMAKERS

February 3, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: An open letter to Republican lawmakers

I thought you’d appreciate receiving a copy of the open letter I posted on social media, addressed to you and your Republican colleagues. Here it is:

Attention, Republicans!

Has it not occurred to you that your Tr*mp might be a Russian mole? That he could have been recruited by the Kremlin years ago, like Carter Page, as one of their “useful idiots” (полезный идиот)?

For anyone finding it hard to figure out just why he defends Putin so vigorously, why he refuses to enact sanctions approved overwhelmingly by both houses of Congress, why he so adamantly denies charges of Russian intervention in the 2016 election and attacks (or has his minions attack) every effort to get to the truth about that intervention, and fails to make even the slightest effort toward preventing it in the future, this is a simple and totally plausible explanation.

Whether because of shady financial dealings, money-laundering or unpaid debt to oligarchs, or some other more salacious source of blackmail, the Kremlin certain seems to have him by the balls.

Why is it that the heads of the three main Russian espionage agencies, the FSB, the GRU and the SVR, were in Washington last week, one of them without the authority of a legal visa? Aleksandr Bortnikov, Director of Federal Security Service (FSB), Colonel General Igor Korobov of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) and Sergei Naryshkin of the Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) huddled in our country’s capital, supposedly to discuss “terrorism and other issues."

Why is it that the Trump administration has thus far refused to enact the full package of sanctions against Russia that you, Republicans, overwhelmingly approved last year?

Why is it that Tr*mp continues to defend Russia and attack our own intelligence agencies?

Does none of this seem even remotely odd to you? Why, then, do you line up with such evident enthusiasm behind an obviously flimsy and dishonest “memo” to discredit your own country’s law enforcement? To which country do you owe allegiance? Is it not possible that you have been duped into first electing, then protecting a Russian asset in the highest office in the country?

I know that I am not alone in asking you, as the patriots you claim to be, to join with your Democratic colleagues in making an honest and exhaustive effort to reveal the truth. This affair has already passed the point of reasonable doubt and has entered the realm of reasonable certainty that something is seriously amiss.

It is your sworn duty to protect the country from foreign enemies. Time to pack in the pretense and get back to doing your sworn duty.

That’s it, Congressman. This is something that demands your serious attention.

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

BETRAYAL

February 2, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: The memo

As I write, that memo is about to be released to the American public and the world, declassified by Donald Trump in its full, unredacted form.

Does it not bother you one bit to see an American president undermining the country’s law enforcement and intelligence agencies? Worse, that he belies his own sanctimonious  pieties about his “sacred duty” of “keeping us safe” by ignoring warnings of the grave risk the release of that memo incurs to our national security by revealing intelligence sources and methods to possibly hostile interests—including Russia’s.

Trump makes no secret any more of his obstruction of justice. His minions in your House of Representatives aid and abet him in this effort. And will you, personally, Congressman, continue to remain silent, and by your silence remain complicit in this betrayal of America?

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

PROTECTION

February 1, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: Protection

Must we all be protected all of the time? I heard Trump say in his speech the other night that it was his “sacred duty”—and that of every politician—to protect the American people from every contingency. When it comes to nuclear attack, well, I can see his point. But I personally don’t need to be protected to every one of life’s unpredictable misfortunes. This sounds like the “nanny state” that Libertarians are so fond of decrying.

This is related, as I see it, both to the way we educate our children and the whole problematic #metoo movement. I read an interesting article about bullying by a woman educated in Switzerland, I think, who had learned the hard way how to defend herself and was concerned about our need to overprotect our children, depriving them of the skills they will certainly need as they grow up into a not-always friendly world. Now I deplore bullies, of course, like everyone else. It’s one reason I deplore our “president.” But the woman has a point. We coddle our children and wrap them in layer of protection at their eventual cost. There must be, somewhere, a middle path.

The #metoo issue is no less problematic. It is vital for those who have been victimized to speak out. That’s the first step in the path to healing. And it’s a sad truth that there are many men out there (women, too, though far fewer, it seems) who are willing to abuse their power and physical dominance to satisfy twisted or misplaced sexual needs. But there’s a shifting, nebulous line somewhere that we have not yet been able to discover, between the most shameful of abuses and the innocent or minor transgression. We need work, empathy, thoughtful analysis, discernment, not Trump's dubious protection.

In any event, I feel a shiver in my spine when Trump sees it to be his sacred duty to protect me. And I find it more than reprehensible that he exploits fear as a political weapon, to deployed—in the context of his speech—against mostly entirely innocent and hard-working immigrants.

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

THE MEMO

January 30, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: The Memo

My apologies for a rather long silence. I have had other preoccupations, including a long and impassioned Facebook exchange on the subject of sexual harassment and its consequences.

I am now concerned to know your stand on the infamous “memo,” authored by Devin Nunes and his staff and much touted as some kind of evidence that the FBI and the Justice Department have been conspiring to impugn the reputation of Donald Trump and undermine the Russia inquiry, with the immediate goal, it seems, of removing suspected enemies from office.

It does seem inappropriate, would you not agree, to manufacture your own evidence? Especially when you conspire, at the same time, to suppress the evidence of others. I suspect that much is being made of very little and that the roar is that of a mouse rather than a lion.

Perhaps you know more about this than I do? If you support the release of this disputed memo, I’d be grateful if you would let me and my fellow constituents know your reasons. We are sorely in need of some sanity and reason here. Why is it so important to disprove what is widely known: that a hostile country interfered in our democratic process. Should all Americans not agree to know the truth about this attack on our country, and devise ways to prevent its recurrence in the future?

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

THE REAGAN DOCTRINE

January 26, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: “Reagan Doctrine”

I note that the “American Conservative” disapproves of your call for a “Reagan Doctrine” to combat the mullahs in Iran:

[…] the “Reagan Doctrine” usually involved stoking internal conflicts that did serious harm to the affected countries. If the U.S. tried something similar in Iran, it would most likely lead to pointless bloodshed and deeper repression. The problem with Rohrabacher’s proposal isn’t just that U.S. meddling would harm the cause of those it is supposedly trying to help, but that it mistakenly takes for granted that the U.S. has some right to force political changes in another country. 

You might be surprised to hear that I agree with this conservative voice. I have no great love for the Iranian regime, but your desire to stir up trouble for those in power there is to court disaster in that country and further turmoil in the region. We have no business sticking yet another finger in that hornet’s nest.

I know that you, along with most of your colleagues, are a big fan of Ronald Reagan. I see things differently. For me he remains a false idol, whose tenure in the White House gave impetus to a downward spiral in our culture and our politics that persists until this day; given the historical precedent of Reagan, it’s no surprise that we ended up with Donald Trump.

What is more surprising, perhaps, is that Ronald Reagan would have despised the unmannerly and undisciplined Trump and most of what he appears to stand for—if indeed he stands for anything. If you wish to be a good Reaganite, I say: join the resistance!

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

WHOSE SIDE ARE YOU ON?

January 25, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: Whose side are YOU on?

You asked this question of Democrats the other day, in comments published on your website. You accused them, essentially, of a lack of patriotism, suggesting they are not on America’s side (I read carefully what you wrote). The very accusation that you make, Congressman, is in itself unpatriotic. What happened to “the loyal opposition”? Do you want to be a part of that loyal opposition, when your party is no longer in power? I would assume you do. To impugn the loyalty of Democrats is to impugn the whole notion of American democracy.

But now it’s my turn. What is this war on the FBI that’s being conducted by members of your party? Are you, too, persuaded that the organization whose purpose is to enforce the country’s laws is some kind of enemy of the government? Are you, too, so adamantly opposed to unearthing the truth about Russia’s involvement in our election process? I know you’re a Russophile and widely reported to be a long-time friend of the Kremlin, but… at the cost of our democracy? Do you not want to know the truth about attempts to undermine it, now that there is ample evidence that these in fact took place? Or are you content to allow it to happen again, in the next election? Will you be content to allow it when it favors the “other” party?

When I ask whose side you’re on, I do not intend to question your patriotism, as you have done with Democrats. Instead, I want to ask you whether you’re on the side of truth or falsehood? Of our respected institutions or against them? Of Republicans against Democrats? Of American values and the American form of government or those—including those in our own country—who would seek to undermine them?

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.

IMMIGRATION

January 24, 2018

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,

101 Main Street #380

Huntington Beach, CA 92648

Dear Congressman,

Re: Immigration

May I ask where you stand on the draconian “Securing America’s Future Act”, which is currently being touted by extreme conservative Republicans who are urging Paul Ryan to bring it to the floor for a vote? My understanding is that your views on immigration are hard right. Do you support this bill? Will you vote for it if it comes to the floor?

Proponents of this measure must know that it wouldn’t stand a chance in the Senate. The only reason for its promotion is to score political points and further poison an already toxic relationship between Republicans and Democrats on this issue. This is distinctly not what is needed as a way to resolve an obviously complex problem. What is needed is greater understanding and cooperation between the two parties, not further polarization.

I do hope you are not planning to side with the authors of this unhelpful bill, and would appreciate a clarification from you or your staff. Do you support the bill, or do you oppose it?

As a footnote, let me add that the paucity of information available on your website or in your public statements makes it difficult to know you thoughts on this and other important issues of the day. Your constituents need and deserve to know better where their representative stands.

Respectfully,

Peter Clothier, Ph.D.