To the editor: Jonah Goldberg is partly right in denouncing House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's double standards, and yet should all the sexual abusers be judged the same way? ("Nancy Pelosi thinks congressmen deserve 'due process' on harassment — but only if they're liberal," Opinion, Nov. 27)
If one is to believe all the accusations, we have on one side serial offenders — like President Trump, Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore and Rep. John Conyers — who admit nothing, regret nothing and of course offer no apologies. One of them even boasted of being able to get away with anything because of his star status.
On the other we have occasional ones, like Sen. Al Franken, who admits his errors, regrets them and apologizes for them. I think that in any court of law these two groups would be handled quite differently.
Jean Lecuyer, Los Angeles
To the editor: Pelosi failed to point out, and Goldberg did not discern, that there's a real difference between not electing someone who likely committed sexual predatory acts and removing such a person from office.
In the case of the former, applicable civil and criminal statutes of limitation will have run their course, and the electorate must, accordingly, decide the matter upon probability alone and determine whether the person is fit for office.
In the case of the office holder, however, the body politic can hold hearings, witnesses may be called, mitigating evidence presented, the severity of the allegations be considered — just where does the extent of the hypocrisy, pain inflicted and criminality place the transgressor in the pantheon of his fellow miscreants and creeps? — and the matter be put to a vote.
I assume that's what Pelosi meant by "due process." She might, however, have stated her position more clearly.
Les T. Zador, Encino