I am writing in regards to Kelton Smith’s letter (Jan. 8). You seem a bit prejudicial in your letter when you write about why certain “types” of people will not vote for Michael Heldman, and those who will vote for him.

If you look up my record, you will see that I have been a law-abiding citizen for nearly a decade so, according to you, I will be voting for Heldman.

Well, sir, you are wrong.

Back when I was not a law-abiding citizen, I had nothing against Sheriff Heldman. My mistakes were my fault. In past elections, I did vote for him, but a recent event has changed my mind.

What event might this be? Well, I’ll tell you. It was how the Hancock County Sheriff’s Office handled the disappearance of Dallas “Tim” Critchet. It seemed as though the sheriff’s department did absolutely nothing to try to locate him while hundreds of citizens (myself included) helped with the many searches for Tim.

Why has his death not been investigated more? The area where he was found had been searched, and he was obviously not there during the search. How did he get there? I’m sure his family wants answers, as does the public.

Why wasn’t his disappearance taken more seriously by the sheriff’s department? I guarantee if the missing person was related to one of our government officials (or Mr. Heldman himself) it would’ve been a priority of the sheriff’s department to find whoever was missing. Heck, Tim’s father is retired from the sheriff’s department, yet Tim was treated like a second-class citizen who didn’t matter to them. It’s ridiculous and uncalled for. One thing is for sure, and that is that this “law-abiding” citizen will NOT be voting for Heldman.

Tiffany Laberdee



I strongly disagree with Michael Janton’s Jan. 9 letter blaming Obama and other Democrats for the problems with Iran and Soleimani. I believe Janton is listening to the Fox News “Ministry of Propaganda” way too often. Contrary to Janton’s letter, I will refrain from name calling to defend the facts.

French President Emmanuel Macron said France, Germany and the United Kingdom regret the United States’ decision to leave the Iran nuclear deal, adding that “the nuclear nonproliferation regime is at stake.” Trump announcing that the United States would exit a nuclear pact with Iran and reimpose sanctions on Iran have resulted in the conflicts and potential for war with Iran the U.S. now faces.

Former President Obama didn’t give Iran “150 billion in cash.” The deal released Iranian assets frozen under many sanctions. A point is that these assets, whether they were cash in the bank, real estate or something else, belonged to Iran in the first place.

Obama didn’t carry out any part of the agreement by himself. The nuclear agreement included China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union. Some sanctions were lifted, including a freeze on Iran’s assets that were held largely in foreign, not U.S., banks.

The total that was freed up after some sanctions were lifted was not the $150 billion. Treasury Department estimates put the number at about $50 billion in “usable liquid assets.” Most of the funds Iran received were used to pay off the debts owed to Iran’s creditors, not weapons of war.

Iran admitted stockpiles of enriched uranium have exceeded the limits previously in place before Trump scrapped the Iran nuclear deal. The move is thought to be Tehran’s first major breach of the accord since Trump withdrew from the agreement last year.

The world is more dangerous thanks to Trump’s impulsive and irrational actions rather than diplomacy and following the advice of experts.

Don Iliff