Readers’ Letters: House Impeaches Mayorkas

The Issue: Whether the House was right to impeach Homeland Security boss Alejandro Mayorkas.

The Post is wrong to say that the impeachment of Homeland Security Director Alejandro Mayorkas is futile (“A Hollow Impeachment,” Editorial, Feb. 15).

Yes, this will die out in the Senate. He will not be convicted, and he will not be removed from office. But this is one of those little cogs in a democracy that works in a certain way. Controvertible proof will be presented that Mayorkas lied to Congress and that he committed a crime.

Then, the people who don’t vote to impeach him in the Senate have to explain their decision to their constituents at home.

Bruce Goodman

Centerville, OH

Mayorkas has been proclaiming that the southern border, though under invasion these past three years by millions of illegal migrants, has been operationally secure.

In his numerous public pronouncements, an ongoing “crisis” has not existed, but only a “challenge.”

This smug individual deserves House impeachment, the first of its kind against an executive-branch cabinet officer since William Belknap in March 1876. Sadly, his Democratic cronies will not remove him from office.

At least Mayorkas’ ignominious conduct for refusing to execute United States immigration law will be publicly documented in an upcoming Senate trial.

Earl Beal

Terre Haute, Ind.

Impeaching Mayorkas should only be the tip of the iceberg. President Biden is the leader of the border crisis, and many other Democrats are involved.

They have created dangerous situations for American citizens on purpose. And their reasons for doing so are purely politically motivated.

Charles Yannelli

Barnegat, NJ

Can someone at The Post please explain to me how the impeachment of Mayorkas is “hollow”?

Even if Democrats from Texas, Arizona, California, Montana, West Virginia and Ohio vote against impeachment, perhaps there a deeper motive on the part of House GOP congressional members for this.

Peter Incardone

Long Beach Island, NJ

The Issue: President Biden’s comments warning against an Israeli attack on the Gaza city of Rafah.

Initially, President Biden stated that US support for Israel is “ironclad,” but then attempted to walk back on his comments, admitting Israel’s attacks on defenseless Palestinians was “over the top” (“Biden warns Bibi on Rafah,” Feb. 13).

Yet he is attempting to bypass Congress and send billions more in military aid, which will allow Israel to continue its relentless bombing campaign. Meanwhile, ignoring mass starvation and the slaughter of civilians, he puts his reelection prospects above the welfare and safety of tens of thousands of Palestinians.

Using mass starvation as a weapon of war is a clear violation of the Geneva Convention.

Jagjit Singh

Los Altos, Calif.

Why is the Biden administration suddenly turning its back on its closest ally — Israel?

Because it is an election year, and Biden knows he will not get the Arab and Muslim-American vote if he continues to support Israel’s war with Hamas. But doesn’t Biden also need the Jewish-American vote to win the 2024 presidential election?

Of course he does. But Biden knows full well that he already has the Jewish vote in his pocket. No matter what he does to Israel, Biden will still get roughly 60% of the Jewish vote.

Barry Koppel

Kew Gardens

Want to weigh in on today’s stories? Send your thoughts (along with your full name and city of residence) to letters@nypost.com. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, length, accuracy, and style.