Readers Write: Support for police, Hennepin County race policy, librarian of Congress

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

U.S. Rep. Pete Stauber’s statement that law enforcement officers don’t enter their profession “for glory or power ... [but] because there is gratification in keeping their friends, neighbors and communities safe” is a glittering generality (“From defund to defend,” Strib Voices, May 15). While many officers may have been motivated by noble intentions, it is indisputable that a significant number of soulless and sadistic people have also been attracted to the profession. How else do you explain officers who ram a broken broomstick up the rectum of a prisoner, or who break a prisoner’s neck by purposely giving him “rough ride” (with no seat belt) in a paddy wagon, or who beat handcuffed prisoners to death, or, or, or? The list of atrocities could fill this page. Stauber (who shows up at ribbon cuttings in his district for projects funded by the bipartisan infrastructure act, which he voted against but claims to have “advocated for” — whatever that means), attempts to mislead his readers by trotting out the tired “defund the police” meme. A Google search confirms that the “defund the police” movement flopped years ago. In fact, police departments nationwide have overwhelmingly received more funding, rather than less, since George Floyd’s murder.

Stauber’s clever wording (“After … Minneapolis City Council put forward a proposal to defund the police, Minneapolis police staffing levels reached historic lows ... ”) is purposely deceptive. Minneapolis voters defeated the proposal. It never went into effect. Minneapolis police staffing levels are low because the public has been given a jaded view of policing, driving many good people to explore other occupations. Minneapolis and other cities are addressing this problem, but respect for the profession among people who are actually paying attention won’t improve until the bad apples are removed from the barrel.

Craig Steven Laughlin, Longville, Minn.

•••

Stauber lauds President Donald Trump’s executive order empowering law enforcement members to do their jobs safely and protect innocent civilians, including enhanced punishments for those who harm law enforcement. Perhaps Stauber has forgotten that Trump pardoned all the convicted criminals who attacked Capitol Hill police officers on Jan. 6, 2021.

Stauber’s hypocrisy is even more disgusting because of his law enforcement background. He and the rest of the Republican congressional delegation from Minnesota should stand up in a public forum and defend their support for Trump’s executive actions. They won’t, because they are very afraid of revealing any daylight between themselves and Trump.

Glen T. Backman, Duluth

•••

How Stauber was able to write a lengthy opinion piece in support of Trump’s pro-policing position without mentioning the 1,500 people Trump loosed on the country in his blanket pardon is beyond imagination. That is like writing about the Titanic without mentioning the iceberg. If there were ever a president more antithetical to the rule of law and order than Trump, he has not been alive in my 70-plus years. His list of criminal convictions is well known. His pillaging of the police then but praising them now is pandering to a base too cynical or too dumb to care.

Stauber manages to lump in Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty in his attack on Democrats. She is an easy target to jab at, but how do her strange policies stack up against Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem or Attorney General Pam Bondi? Noem showed up at an El Salvador prison in a tight top wearing a $50,000 Rolex for a photo op at the expense of a pile of prisoners. Bondi cannot seem to find the moral compass to investigate Trump for what each day reveals as another grift done for Trump’s family and friends’ advantage.

Stauber, if you are too cowardly to call out Trump on his many, many civil and criminal shortcomings, please spare us the hypocrisy of vilifying Democrats who have broken no laws.

Bob Brereton, St. Paul

In his column about Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty, Star Tribune contributing columnist Andy Brehm writes, “The law should be adjudicated impartially. Dermatology should have no place in it” (“Hennepin County Attorney Mary Moriarty is an embarrassment for Minnesota,” Strib Voices, May 15). I agree. This is exactly the problem that Moriarty addresses with her directive to take race into account as a factor for sentencing negotiations.

All humans are prone to bias, and the police and judicial system are no exception. The two consent decrees levied against the Minneapolis police force speak to that. Our city’s police do not treat people of different races equally. That is not the impartiality we all seek for all in our community. Currently, “dermatology” does have a place in our policing and justice system.

This is not the fault of police, lawyers and judges. It is the fault of our culture and deserves to be addressed. This deserves special attention when considering systems with state-approved use of lethal force and privation of freedom.

Should county prosecutors consider cultural bias against people of color when making prosecutorial decisions? The only reason to say no is if you believe that racial bias doesn’t play a significant role in our culture. The available evidence shows that racial bias still exists, right here in Minnesota.

Hugh Smeltekop, Minneapolis

•••

David Zimmer of the Center of the American Experiment has made what appears to be a good-faith effort to detect racial bias against Black people in Minnesota’s criminal justice system. See “Minnesota’s Offender Outcomes Devoid of Racial Bias: A political narrative at odds with the data.” He looks at the major categories of crime that would most likely result in prison. He follows the process “from identification as offenders, through arrests, charging, sentencing, and incarceration.” His conclusion is that when one takes into account the disproportionate rate of criminal offending by Black people there is no evidence of bias. If anything, the bias appears to be against whites. Those who claim Minnesota’s criminal justice system has an anti-Black bias should carefully look at his work and, if they still think there is an anti-Black bias, tell us what is wrong with Zimmer’s analysis.

John Peloquin, Lakeville

•••

Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Talk about pathological cluelessness — or good old-fashioned, self-serving, intentional-failure-to-state-the-obvious dishonesty. In his May 15 column, Brehm excoriates Moriarty for being too partisan but concludes that same column with a passage laughably blind to his own ultra-partisan bias: “We can start by ridding ourselves of embarrassing and dishonorable public officials such as ...” No two words would end that sentence more honestly and more accurately than “Donald Trump.”

Steve Schild, Falcon Heights

I had to shake my head in disbelief at the abrupt and unjustified firing of Carla Hayden, former librarian of Congress. For those unfamiliar with the Library of Congress, it is a research library that serves the information needs of the U.S. Congress and is the de facto national library of the United States. It also administers copyright law through the U.S. Copyright Office. Hayden was fired because of her supposed stance on diversity, equity and inclusion and because she is purportedly “woke, anti-Trump, and promotes trans-ing kids” (quote from X).

People! The Library of Congress is not your local library! It is a source of materials not available through local, state and regional libraries. Interlibrary loan is available to access its collections, and owning a Library of Congress library card is the only way to use its materials on site. So, no, little kids cannot show up and take out a book with LGBTQ themes behind their parents’ back.

This firing is purely political and absolutely unjustified. This is what the Trump administration is doing to undercut citizen access to information and services. The people responsible for this action should be ashamed of themselves.

Katherine Jursik, Plymouth

The writer is a retired librarian.

•••

So now Trump has dumped the chief librarian of the Library of Congress because she’s insufficiently enthusiastic about banning books? Well, he’s going to have a heck of a time replacing her, if he keeps to the “standards” of his appointments so far — these days it’s really hard to find someone in America who can’t read.

Steve Hoffmann, Anoka