A18 EZ RE T H E W A S H I N G T O N P O S T.S A T U R D A Y, O C T O B E R 5 , 2 0 1 9
L E T T E R S T O T H E E D I T O R[email protected]L O C A L O P I N I O N ST
HE ROUGH transcript of President Trump’s
July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President
Volodymyr Zelensky prompted a debate
about whether, in pressing for politicized
investigations of alleged Ukrainian interference in
the 2016 election and of Joe Biden, Mr. Trump dan-
gled rewards for Mr. Zelensky as a quid pro quo. In our
view, the transcript contained at least a hint that
Mr. Trump was linking the “favor” he wanted to arms
sales, and clear evidence that he was tying it to a
White House invitation.
That conclusion is now confirmed. Text messages
among U.S. diplomats and a Ukrainian official re-
leased by House committees definitively show that
not only did the Trump administration seek to extract
Ukrainian promises of political probes in exchange
for a summit meeting, but also they spent weeks
negotiating the deal both before and after the Trump-
Zelensky phone call.
There was no lack of clarity on either side. “Heard
from the White House,” U.S. special envoy to Ukraine
Kurt Volker texted a top aide to Mr. Zelensky on
July 25, just ahead of the call. “Assuming President Z
convinces trump he will investigate/ ‘get to thebottom of what happened’ in 2016, we will nail down
date for a visit to Washington.”
About two weeks later, amid negotiations over
what, exactly, Mr. Zelensky would say in publicly
announcing the probes, the aide, Andrey Yermak,
texted Mr. Volker: “I think it’s possible to make this
declaration and mention all these things.... But it will
be logic to do after we receive a confirmation of date.”
In the end, the deal did not go through. Instead, the
record shows that Mr. Trump and his retainers kept
raising their demands, like a casino developer squeez-
ing a plumbing contractor.
Mr. Zelensky was supposed to get his meeting date
after promising the investigations in the July 25
phone call. Instead, the Ukrainians were told
Mr. Zelensky needed to make a public statement
committing to the probes. Mr. Volker told Congress
Thursday that when the Ukrainians then offered a
general statement about fighting corruption, it was
rejected by Mr. Trump’s personal lawyer, Rudolph
W. Giuliani, who said Mr. Zelensky had to refer
specifically to allegations of Ukrainian interference
in the 2016 election and to the gas company that
employed Mr. Biden’s son Hunter. In the end, theUkrainians — to their credit — refused.
Meanwhile, the senior U.S. diplomat in Kiev, Wil-
liam B. “Bill” Taylor, had become concerned that not
just a White House meeting but also U.S. military aid to
Ukraine — which Mr. Trump had suspended — were
linked to the demand for investigations. In an enigmat-
ic text message on Sept. 8, Mr. Taylor referred to a
“nightmare” scenario in which “they give the interview
and don’t get the security assistance.” That sounds like
a reference to yet another political trade-off, this time
involving the $391 million in aid Mr. Trump was sitting
on. The next day, the career diplomat texted: “I think
it’s crazy to withhold security assistance for help with a
political campaign.”
Congress clearly has more to learn here, from
Mr. Taylor and others. As we have written, our
information is that the White House was condition-
ing security assistance on Ukraine’s promise to con-
duct the politically motivated investigations. But
legislators already know this much: Mr. Trump liter-
ally used his office — in the form of a promised White
House meeting — to induce a foreign leader to
investigate a potential opponent in the 2020 election.
That was a blatant act of corruption.Corruption in black and white
Diplomats’ texts confirm quid-pro-quo talks between the Trump administration and Ukraine.
Kari Buchanan’s Sept. 23 letter, “The path to fair
maps in Virginia,” argued that the current redis-
tricting reform amendment before the Virginia
General Assembly does not go far enough. She is
right, but the amendment is still important to pass
because it would devise a system far superior to the
current one that allows incumbents to flagrantly
gerrymander their own districts.
Alongside the amendment, we should also pass
legislation that would require new districts to be
drawn in an unbiased and neutral way (without
regard to personal preference, party affiliation or
ethnicity) while keeping boundaries compact and
cities and communities intact. We should make it
easy for citizens to learn about and join the
commission. In the name of increased competitive-
ness, we could experiment by trying the “efficiency
gap” algorithm proposed to minimize “wastedvotes,” a ranked-choice voting process like one
Maine has deployed, or even the proportional
representation methods of Ireland.
There are many good supplemental options the
legislature could and should pass alongside the
pending amendment to guide its commission in
drawing neutral, sensible district maps. But the
proposed amendment must first be approved.
Bruce Falk, AlexandriaABCDE
AN INDEPENDENT NEWSPAPER
V
IRGINIANS SHOULD not forget what hap-
pened at the state’s special legislative ses-
sion on gun safety this summer, when
Republicans who control both houses
forced an adjournment after just 90 minutes and
sent everyone home — and the GOP House speaker
allowed the National Rifle Association to set up its
command post in his conference room. The party’s
leaders made sure there was no debate there on
even one of the dozens of bills submitted before-
hand.
Could there be any more obvious sign that the
NRA and gun-toting acolytes from other groups are
indistinguishable satellites of Virginia’s Republican
Party — and vice versa?
By now, it is beyond clear that a GOP-controlled
General Assembly in Richmond will never enact
meaningful measures to reduce gun violence — even
after one gunman mowed down 32 people at
Virginia Tech in 2007, and another killed a dozen
people at a Virginia Beach municipal building this
spring, and after more than 1,000 other Virginians
die annually in gun violence.
And whatever the Republicans’ latest pretext for
inaction — the special session was “premature,”
declared House Speaker Kirk Cox (R-Colonial
Heights), weeks after the Virginia Beach massacre
— it is plainly true that the only way to restrict gun
use, curtail the lethality of firearms or add muscle to
penalties for gun-law violations is to elect Demo-
crats who, if they capture a handful of seats, would
gain control of both houses of the General Assembly
for the first time in more than 20 years.
Elections for all 140 members of the Virginia
legislature are Nov. 5, and while the state has trended
Democratic for years — including huge gains by the
party in elections for the House of Delegates two
years ago — off-year elections like this year’s, with
neither a presidential nor a gubernatorial contest on
the ballot, typically attract a low turnout.
They shouldn’t. Republicans such as Mr. Cox, who
wields enormous power in the House of Delegates,
and Timothy D. Hugo, who represents parts of
Fairfax and Prince William counties and is the
House GOP caucus chairman, have systematically
opposed measures that would advance the sort of
reasonable gun reform that has broad support
among Virginians.
Those measures include closing a loophole in
state law that allows purchasers to elude back-
ground checks simply by buying a handgun at gun
shows. Republicans argue that most guns in the
state are sold by licensed dealers, who are required
to submit buyers’ names for background checks.
That’s exactly the point: Criminals may easily know
to approach private dealers at gun shows, who are
exempt from the background check requirement.
Similarly, it was Republicans in the General
Assembly who in 2012 pushed to repeal a state law,
on Virginia’s books for nearly 20 years, that limited
handgun purchases to one per month. Allowing
unlimited handgun purchases is a boon to criminal
gangs such as MS-13; most law-abiding citizens
would have no need to buy more than a dozen such
weapons in a year.Republicans have adopted wholesale the NRA’s
orthodoxy on gun reform, which is to oppose even
the most incremental proposals on the ground that
they may erode Second Amendment absolutism. For
instance, in the 13th District state Senate race, west
of Washington, the Republican candidate, Geary
Higgins, a member of the Loudoun C ounty Board of
Supervisors running for the state Senate, rejected
tweaks to local law after eight incidents over the
past 18 months in which bullets struck houses and
strayed into other properties, including one case
involving a woman who was reportedly grazed by a
bullet. He attacked other supervisors, including
fellow Republicans, who favored the mere study of
new gun regulations.
Mr. Higgins is opposed in that race by Del. John
J. Bell, a Democrat who has pushed safety measures,
such as requiring in-person (as opposed to online)
training for Virginians seeking permits to carry
concealed handguns. Mr. Bell is no radical — he
dismisses any confiscation of firearms. But he would
provide a vote in favor of gun sanity, unlike
Mr. Higgins.
Virginia’s apotheosis of Republican extremism on
guns is first-term state Sen. Amanda F. Chase, who
delights in wearing a pistol on her hip on the floor of
the Virginia Senate and vowed in a digital advertise-
ment to “shoot down” gun-control groups. (She
blamed her advertising firm for the language; the
firm said she approved it.) Ms. Chase, who repre-
sents the mostly suburban 11th Senate District
south of Richmond, responded to the August
massacre in El Paso by making a video insisting on
the abolition of “gun-free zones” — in other words,calling for more guns, not fewer.
The Republican Party in Chesterfield County, in
her district, ejected her — not because of her armed
antics but because she had the temerity to oppose a
fellow Republican candidate for sheriff. (His offense
was to withdraw his support of her after she
reportedly mouthed off to a state Capitol Police
officer at the General Assembly in a dispute over a
parking spot.)
The GOP default on guns is to deflect and
distract. Having squashed the special session of the
General Assembly in July, Republicans shunted
legislative proposals to the bipartisan state crime
commission, whose members include Republicans
who have voted to allow concealed firearms in bars
and classrooms, and resolved to reconvene the
legislature on Nov. 18 — after the elections. In that
way, they signaled their intent to avoid reminding
voters of their insistent inertia on the issue.
Though loath to grapple with gun violence head
on, a few Republicans have floated proposals in
response to recent mass shootings. Del. Todd Gilbert
(R-Shenandoah), the House majority leader, has
offered measures that would promote a police
crackdown on gangs and incentivize gang members
to renounce violence and clean up their lives. Those
seem like sensible responses to a different problem.
Polls have consistently shown that Virginians
favor more gun control, including overwhelming
support for expanded background checks for pur-
chases. Their views are not reflected in the state
legislature, whose districts have been heavily gerry-
mandered by Republicans who have controlled
Richmond for too long. It’s time that changed.The Virginia GOP’s
gun cowardice
State voters should send a strong
message to the party on Nov. 5.ABCDE
FREDERICK J. RYAN JR., Publisher and Chief Executive Officer
News pages: Editorial and opinion pages:
MARTIN BARON FRED HIATT
Executive Editor Editorial Page Editor
CAMERON BARR JACKSON DIEHL
Managing Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor
EMILIO GARCIA-RUIZ RUTH MARCUS
Managing Editor Deputy Editorial Page Editor
TRACY GRANT JO-ANN ARMAO
Managing Editor Associate Editorial Page Editor
SCOTT VANCE
Deputy Managing Editor
BARBARA VOBEJDA
Deputy Managing Editor
Vice Presidents:
JAMES W. COLEY JR......................................................................................Production
L. WAYNE CONNELL..........................................................................Human Resources
KATE M. DAVEY..................................................................................Revenue Strategy
ELIZABETH H. DIAZ.................................................Audience Development & Insights
GREGG J. FERNANDES........................................................Customer Care & Logistics
STEPHEN P. GIBSON...................................................................Finance & Operations
SCOT GILLESPIE..........................................................................................Engineering
KRISTINE CORATTI KELLY...................................................Communications & Events
JOHN B. KENNEDY.................................................................General Counsel & Labor
MIKI TOLIVER KING........................................................................................Marketing
KAT DOWNS MULDER........................................................................Product & Design
SHAILESH PRAKASH...............................Digital Product Development & Engineering
JOY ROBINS...........................................................................................Client SolutionsThe Washington Post
1301 K St. NW, Washington, D.C. 20071 (202) 334-First steps to electoral reform
BOB BROWN/RICHMOND TIMES-DISPATCH /ASSOCIATED PRESS
State Sen. Amanda F. Chase (R-Chesterfield) wore a gun in the Virginia Senate.Jeff Flake’s Oct. 1 Tuesday Opinion piece, “Fellow
Republicans, there’s still time to save your souls,”
set the stage for Republicans to stop wringing their
hands for their jobs and do the right thing for the
country.
It is merely interesting that the whistleblower
got the information from intelligence officers
rather than being on the call. That aside, the White
House released the rough transcript, which clearly
stated a request for assistance in investigating
President Trump’s political rival. As if that is not
enough, the president himself admitted saying it on
the call.
Stop the cries of “secondhand” or “thirdhand”
information. The act has been admitted to. What
moral compass are Republicans using to determine
illegal acts?
As more information comes out about continued
activity by this administration to solicit foreign
assistance to discredit political opposition, we see
we are at the tip of the iceberg of a dangerous
mind-set that has overwhelmed the GOP.
Please stop. Do the right thing for your country,
not your jobs. Save your souls and our country.
Debbie Frame, AshburnIt would be easy, on the surface, to agree with
much of Hugh Hewitt’s Oct. 1 Tuesday Opinion
commentary, “Want the truth? Stay away from the
fringes.” After all, there are many moderates, as I
cast myself, who try to avoid the hyperpartisan echo
chambers and educate ourselves on what is really
happening in our bitterly divided country.
I read both The Post and the Wall Street Journal,
avoid Fox News and MSNBC, and watch PBS and
BBC World News, sometimes cringing at what I
perceive as their even-handedness lending cre-
dence to false equivalence.
So, a careful reading of Mr. Hewitt’s piece
revealed his conclusions that Journal columnist
Kimberley A. Strassel is a “thoroughly persua-
sive” author, implying that she is not hyperpartisan,
while casting House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.)
and Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) as “fringe”
figures. Anyone who regularly reads Ms. Strassel’s
Journal opinion pieces, or has closely followed the
actual careers of these two Democrats — who are no
more partisan than any Republican — might, like
me, assess Mr. Hewitt’s piece as just more partisan-
ship masquerading as “fair-mindedness.”
Michael H. Kostrzewa, BurkeThe GOP and the fringe
In the article cleverly headlined “A yak on the lam
from slaughter dies in crash” [Sept. 29, Metro], I was
struck by the ironic quote from an employee at the
Farm Bureau in Nelson County, Va.: “We’re all
heartbroken for Meteor and his owner who has
suffered such a devastating loss.”
Seriously? The yak was on his way to be slaugh-
tered when he escaped! Is the devastating loss
perhaps the $1,000 his owner didn’t get for yak
meat?
As for flying the county flag at half-staff to mourn
this loss, why do so for a yak and not for the countless
deer and other animals who are killed by vehicles
daily? (Answer: because the flag would never fly
high again.)
Martha E. Powers, Lake Frederick, Va.This yak deserved better
The inaction over white supremacy is a byproduct
of misdirected concern [“Confronting white su-
premacy,” Sept. 21, editorial]. Right-wing extremism
is not one person standing on a street corner holding
a sign that says “White is right.” It is deeper than
that. It is a violation of humanity, yet it has been
widely underestimated and allowed to fester within
the very country that resents it. Why do we let this
happen?
White supremacy has escalated to acts of terror-
ism, but whenever it lands on the front page, it isn’t
seen as a matter of public security. Hate crimes are
committed, lives are taken, yet we still value the
political drama over our own safety. Do the lives lost
mean nothing?
Thomas Vu, Falls ChurchWhite supremacy is insidious
As a regular recreational user of the broad and
brackish lower Potomac River, I was happy to see
that about 1,000 dolphins are also enjoying those
lovely waters [“Dolphins thrive — in the Potomac,”
Metro, Oct. 2].
I only wish I’d read such an article a year earlier
when I encountered a suspicious-looking dorsal fin
following me there one day while windsurfing. At
the time, I knew I was sharing the Potomac with bull
sharks (whose annual eight-foot, 300-pound appear-
ances in the local pound nets usually merit a
mention in the newspaper), but not with bottlenos-
es. As I was anxiously tweaking the sail in an attempt
to get away, the ominous-looking fin overtook me. A
nervous glance over my shoulder revealed that my
pursuer happened to be a smiling Flipper rather
than a grimacing Jaws.
When I finally exhaled, he’d already swum off to
find a rockfish for dinner. It’s great to have them
back.
Dan Wittenberg, BethesdaFlipper or Jaws?
It’s another embarrassing disaster of a season for
the Washington professional football team, and I’m
happy about it.
As long we are saddled with a juvenile, offensive
and stunningly inappropriate name, one that many
of us are unwilling to utter aloud, the team will
continue to be an embarrassment to an otherwise
great city. Give us a team name we can be proud of,
and maybe that pride will be reflected on the
gridiron.
William McLeese, Falls ChurchThe gridiron’s great shame
EDITORIALSWe should pass legislation
that would require new districts
to be drawn in an unbiased
and neutral way.
Letters can be sent to [email protected].
Submissions must be exclusive to The Post and should
include the writer's address and day and evening
telephone numbers. Letters are subject to editing and
abridgment. Please do not send letters as attachments.
Because of the volume of material we receive, we are
unable to acknowledge submissions; writers whose letters
are under consideration for publication will be contacted.