30 thoughts on “News/Politics 12-28-19

  1. See the problem here?

    The outrage is selective. When it’s Trump, they lose their minds. When Obama did it? Meh……



    Liked by 2 people

  2. Nice of you to notice. But, too late. 🙂

    Watch as Trump’s judicial appointments become the new worst thing ever,. 🙂

    Note how judges who follow the law and constitution became lawless in the eyes of the left.


    “What Happened When Trump Reshaped a Powerful Court

    For the 5th Circuit, 2019 was an experiment in extreme right-wing jurisprudence.”

    “With the help of Senate Republicans, Donald Trump spent the first three years of his presidency remaking the federal judiciary in his own image. The president has appointed 133 district court judges, 50 appeals court judges, and two Supreme Court justices—meaning about one-fifth of the nation’s federal trial judges, and one-fourth of its federal appellate judges, are Trump appointees. These jurists are leading a conservative revolution that will upend decades of precedent and enshrine reactionary policies into the law. The transformation has only just begun. But for a glimpse of where the judiciary is heading if Trump wins a second term, Americans can look to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. A traditionally conservative bench, the court has been newly reshaped by Trump—and quickly got to work translating right-wing priorities into legal doctrine that will govern generations.

    The 5th Circuit’s descent into lawlessness did not happen by accident. Senate Republicans would not let President Barack Obama fill several seats on the court, allowing Trump to reshape it after taking office. He appointed five of the court’s seventeen active judges, who immediately allied with the court’s existing far-right bloc, which includes extremists like Judges Jerry Smith and Edith Jones (appointed by Ronald Reagan) and Jennifer Walker Elrod (appointed by George W. Bush). There are now 11 GOP nominees on the court and just five Democratic nominees. (There’s also one vacancy, because some Republican senators deem Trump’s choice for the seat insufficiently militant.)

    Trump didn’t flip the court—it already had a majority of GOP appointees—but he neutralized the influence of moderate conservatives. Judge Catharina Haynes, for instance, was appointed by George W. Bush but sat near the ideological center of the court. A trio of Reagan appointees—Judges E. Grady Jolly, Patrick Higginbotham, and W. Eugene Davis—leaned right but supported judicial restraint and adherence to precedent. Trump’s five appointees joined the axis of extremists like Smith, Jones, and Elrod in 2018. This year, we witnessed the results.

    Like all federal appeals courts, the 5th Circuit first hears cases as a three-judge panel whose members are randomly selected; a majority of the court can then choose to rehear the case “en banc,” with every active judge sitting. Today, extremists are more likely to constitute a majority on three-judge panels, and they have an insurmountable majority when the court sits en banc.

    In 2019, the conservative majority went on a rampage. In December, the court ruled that Obamacare’s individual mandate had become unconstitutional in an overtly partisan decision, and suggested that the rest of the law may have to fall, as well. Another appalling December ruling provides a good example of the 5th Circuit’s cruelty. The court granted immunity from civil suit to prison guards who locked an inmate in two filthy cells for six days. These cells, including the floor and the faucet, were covered in “massive amounts” of feces. The inmate, who was completely naked, was forced to sleep in feces and could not eat or drink because excrement contaminated everything. He sued the guards, who laughed and taunted him as he suffered, for subjecting him to cruel and unusual punishment in violation of the Eighth Amendment.”

    “The 5th Circuit granted the guards immunity. In Smith’s opinion, the court held that an inmate’s right not to be locked in a feces-covered cell for six days was not “clearly established,” so the guards could not have known they were violating the Constitution. Smith added that, while future guards must avoid this precise form of torture, “we do not suggest” that “prison officials cannot require inmates to sleep naked on the floor. There can be any number of perfectly valid reasons for doing so.””


    Yeah, for reasons like the prisoner keeps crapping on everything, which this “poor” prisoner did.

    I feel like I should panic and run, yet I’m smiling. 🙂


  3. Gee, I wonder why?……

    Said no one.


    “Biden: I won’t comply with subpoena to testify at Senate impeachment trial

    Biden is saying he will obstruct Congress by not complying with a subpoena. Isn’t that supposedly why Trump is being impeached?”

    “There is no indication that Mitch McConnell and his Republican majority in the Senate are going to let the impeachment trial turn into a wide-ranging free-for-all.

    Democrats desperately want to try to rescue their woefully inadequate impeachment case by locating evidence outside the record on which impeachment was based. At the same time, some Republicans wish for the day they can get Joe Biden, Adam Schiff and other Democrats on the witness stand.”


    “But it’s still fun to think of Adam Schiff on the witness stand being grilled under oath on national TV about everything he has done with regard to Trump, including whether he or his staff leaked to the media and colluded with the so-called ‘whistleblower.’

    It likewise would be fun to have Joe and Hunter Biden on the stand to demonstrate why it was in the national interest, not just Trump’s political interest, to seek an investigation as to what appears to be payola to Biden’s son in an attempt to influence the then-sitting Vice President.

    So, playing along with this thought experiment, things could get really interesting if Biden, as he previously stated in early December, would refuse to honor a Senate trial subpoena:

    Joe Biden is dismissing calls from President Trump and his allies that Biden testify during an impeachment trial in the Senate, saying any effort to compel his testimony should be viewed as part of a strategy to distract from the president’s conduct.

    “No, I’m not going to let you take the eye off the ball here. Everybody knows what this is about,” the former vice president told NPR when asked whether he would cooperate with a subpoena. “This is a Trump gambit he plays. Whenever he’s in trouble he tries to find someone else to divert attention to.”

    Asked a second time whether he would comply with a subpoena, Biden said: “No, I will not yield to what everybody is looking for here. And that is to take the eye off the ball.” He added, “No one has … one scintilla of evidence that I did anything other than do my job for America as well as anybody could have done it.”

    Biden repeated that vow to defy a trial subpoena in an interview today with the Des Moines Register. Johnny Verhovek, an ABC News reporter who watched the interview, tweeted:

    In @DMRegister ed board intv today @JoeBiden re-iterated that will not comply w/ a subpoena in Senate impeachment trail”


  4. Now as to questioning Schiff about his colluding with the “whistleblower” (he’s not really a whistleblower)……

    That may be a moot point by then. 🙂


    “Conservative watchdog sues for alleged whistleblower Eric Ciaramella’s communications”

    “A conservative watchdog is suing the CIA and the Justice Department for the communications of a CIA analyst who is alleged to be the Ukraine whistleblower.

    Judicial Watch said Thursday it had filed Freedom of Information Act lawsuits against the agency and the department for the communications of Eric Ciaramella.

    The watchdog filed FOIA requests in November to the Justice Department seeking communications between Ciaramella and former FBI agent Peter Strzok, former FBI attorney Lisa Page, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe, and special counsel Robert Mueller’s office. It also filed a request with the CIA for Ciaramella’s emails between June 1, 2016, and Nov. 12, 2019.”


    “He worked closely with Vice President Joe Biden and attended a State Department banquet at Biden’s invitation in 2016.

    Ciaramella was also cited in Mueller’s report in connection to a meeting between Trump and Russian officials in the Oval Office in May 2017, the day after James Comey was fired as FBI director.

    Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said there is “significant public interest” in Ciaramella’s actions.

    “CIA operative Ciaramella is documented to be involved in the Russia collusion investigation, and was a key CIA operative on Ukraine in both the Obama and Trump White Houses. Our lawsuits are designed to break through the unprecedented cover-up of his activities,” Fitton said in a statement.”


  5. LOL.




    “Ernest Hemingway defined courage as grace under pressure.

    One might think a terrorist detonating a suicide vest with his children in tow rather than facing sweet American justice did not live up to Hemingway’s description.

    One would be wrong.

    Just ask Max Boot, the Washington Post columnist who wrote upon the demise of Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi: “The assertion that Baghdadi died as a coward was, in any case, contradicted by the fact that rather than be captured, he blew himself up.”

    A response to President Trump’s claim the ISIS founder died “whimpering” and “screaming,” Boot clearly couldn’t abide some well-earned jingoism. But he didn’t merely check the president’s facts.

    Max Boot does not do half measures. He always brings the Maximum Bootness to his takes.

    After all, this is the author of “18 Reasons Trump Could Be a Russian Asset” we’re talking about. This is the man who brings remarkable variety to his content, such as how he won’t vote for Republicans, won’t vote for Trump, will vote Democrat, and will never, ever vote Republican.

    Boot personifies the age-old question: if a NeverTrumper doesn’t remind us every 20 minutes he’s a NeverTrumper, has he died?”


    He didn’t die, but his career did. 🙂


  6. Cal Thomas has some questions.

    The questions we all need to ask ourselves….


    “Anti-Trump Christians, Would You Prefer a President Who Supports Secular Social Agenda?”

    “The battle between church and state is as old as church and state, as is the conflict within religious circles over who supposedly speaks for God.

    The latest dustup occurred after the departing editor of Christianity Today magazine, Mark Galli, wrote an editorial in which he said President Trump is an immoral man and his impeachment by the House is cause for his immediate removal from office.

    This ignited a firestorm. Major media, which regularly ignore the opinions of religious publications, overnight transported Galli from relative obscurity to national prominence. Anti-Trump evangelicals called his comments a breath of fresh air. More like stale political air.

    During the debate over slavery in America, pro- and anti-slavery clergy selectively quoted Scripture to President Abraham Lincoln to justify their positions. Lincoln responded to the contradictory arguments of North and South in his second inaugural address: “Both read the same Bible and pray to the same God; and each invokes His aid against the other.”

    Scripture, which conservative evangelicals claim is inerrant and infallible, contains stories of leaders with severe moral flaws, whom God used for His own purposes. Those who want Trump removed from office and can’t wait until the next election for voters to decide, ignore one of the most profound verses about temporal power: “Everyone must submit to governing authorities. For all authority comes from God, and those in positions of authority have been placed there by God.” (Romans 13:1 NLT)

    If “everyone” and “all” doesn’t mean everyone and all, including people for whom some evangelicals did not vote, pray tell what does it mean?

    Galli and other anti-Trumpers don’t tell us their presidential preferences. One hopes it isn’t any of those on the far left who have an agenda that evangelicals would consider an abomination. President Trump is right when he says he has done more to advance evangelical concerns than any other president.”


    “What would their position have been had Hillary Clinton, a liberal Methodist, been elected president? Do they believe they would have been in a better position to share their faith?

    People have always used such excuses for not pursuing faith, but my friend does have a point. When non-churchgoers (who are increasing in numbers, especially among the young) see people they think should be preaching about another kingdom and another King selectively ignore a leader’s moral failings, they justify their unbelief.

    On the other hand, anti-Trump Christians must answer this question: Would they be happier if a liberal Democrat were president, one who supports abortion and the rest of the secular-progressive social agenda and sees the Constitution as a “living document” to be interpreted by individual judges? That was the choice in 2016.

    The same choice is likely in November.”

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Like I keep saying, one side has been honest, the other hasn’t.


    “Ex-British spook Christopher Steele is irritated at the notion that his dossier is disinformation. I mean it is total garbage. Two government investigations exposed that. Robert Mueller’s special counsel investigation into Russian collusion torched it. The Department of Justice Inspector General’s Office delivered the final head shot. The latter review came with a scathing rebuke of the FBI’s FISA warrant application process against former Trump campaign official Carter Page, who was then seen as public enemy no.1 concerning this whole mess. The FBI omitted or excluded key information when trying to obtain the spy warrant against Page, including his past work with the CIA which would’ve made the initial allegation—that he was a possible foreign agent—look ridiculous. Someone at the FBI thought they knew best and altered the warrant. That’s a big no-no. Inspector General Michael Horowitz said this failure was systemic, from the supervisor on down concerning the FBI’s FISA abuses during the 2016 election. The FISA court itself said all of the warrants sought against Page should be reviewed because the credible evidence—the Trump dossier which Steele created—was unreliable hearsay. Nothing in this document is confirmed—nothing. It’s most unverifiable. And yet, everyone treated it as gospel. It plunged the anti-Trump liberal media into a frenzy for two years. This was the birth of the Russian collusion myth—and it was totally false. In the meantime, we have a chapter of American history where the dossier, a piece of political opposition research that was funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign, was used to secure a spy warrant against someone from a rival party’s presidential campaign.

    The Washington Post’sErik Wemple is doing a multi-part series on the dossier and how it spread through the media like a brushfire. Concerning Steele, Wemple wrote that he’s “galled” by the notion that his dossier is a misinformation-ridden piece of fiction. As we’ve said often, the Post is biased. Their self-righteousness encapsulated in the “democracy dies in darkness” motto is nauseating, but this is a good piece about how The New York Times found out that the dossier was, well, totally wrong. Certainly, not solid enough to secure a spy warrant against an American citizen. ”


    “In their book “Crime in Progress,” Fusion GPS co-founders Glenn Simpson and Peter Fritsch write that the suggestion of a disinformation-tainted dossier “galls” Steele. “These people simply have no idea what they are talking about,” Steele told Simpson. “I’ve spent my entire adult life working with Russian disinformation. It’s an incredibly complex subject that is at the very core of my training and my professional mission.” The dossier author also charges that the idea the Russians would promote negative information about Trump is “not logical.” At least 70 percent of the “assertions” in the dossier are accurate, Steele believes, according to “Crime in Progress.”

    Steele can believe that, but it’s still wrong. This circus is over. The big top has come crashing down hard. The dossier is fiction and yet it was used to try and delegitimize a president because the vast legions of the liberal media don’t like him. Oh, and there was this tidbit that the Washington Examiner’s Byron York caught concerning Fiona Hill’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee this year, the hearing that was supposed to ensnare Trump in the Democrats impeachment push but—shocker—didn’t. It was her claim that the dossier “likely contained” Russian misinformation. Adam Schiff is still skeptical that Steele was taken for a ride, which is precisely why the liberal media would avoid shining a light on this point. After all, Schiff is the starting QB with this Russian collusion nonsense. He’s invested too much in peddling and weaponizing misinformation to get Trump, so he has to go full steam ahead. Democracy sure does die in darkness, huh?”



  8. Trump doesn’t smoke. He doesn’t curse. He doesn’t drink alcohol.
    We need to get rid of this evil man and put a Clinton back into the White House.


  9. I don’t know about the cursing part….. 🙂

    Publicly and privately are two different things. I could easily believe either. 🙂

    But you’re right about the other two. The alcohol choice is a personal one involving his alcoholic brother. He simply didn’t want to be what his brother became. It was a wise choice.

    Liked by 1 person

  10. Sad. 😦


    “Islamic State says it beheaded Christian captives in Nigeria”

    “Islamic State released a video purporting to show its militants beheading 10 Christian men in Nigeria, saying it was part of a campaign to avenge the deaths of its leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and its spokesman.

    The militant group posted the footage on its online Telegram news channel on Thursday, the day after Christmas, with Arabic captions but no audio.

    The video showed men in beige uniforms and black masks lining up behind blindfolded captives then beheading 10 of them and shooting an 11th man.

    An earlier video seen by Reuters said the captives had been taken from Maiduguri and Damaturu in Nigeria’s northeastern state of Borno, where militants have been fighting for years to set up a separate Islamist state.

    In that video, the captives pleaded for the Christian Association of Nigeria and President Muhammadu Buhari to save them.


  11. Real question, if anyone knows.

    If Trump were impeached and removed from office.
    Would he not be permitted to run again in 2020?

    It would be strange if an impeached president were re-elected. But it could happen.


  12. On FoxNews they are discussing how “US should combat terror groups in Africa?”
    This may sound harsh but, we need to leave them alone. Not that we favor terror groups, but we can’t police the world. England, France and some of the civilized nations need to step in.
    It’s difficult because it is a religious war and America does not interfere in religious affairs. The Muslim world, when united, will be a dominant force in the world.
    I expect this to happen in Iran.
    The battle of Zechariah 12 has not happened yet.


  13. As I read the Constitution, it requires only removal from office on impeachment, but it allows disqualification from holding office. I have no education in constitutional law, though.

    I’ve heard people on the radio make all kinds of statements about how the Constitution says impeachment works, but in fact it says very little. Here’s every reference:

    Article I is about Congress
    Section 2 (about the House of Representatives):
    “5: The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker and other Officers; and shall have the sole Power of Impeachment.”

    Section 3 (about the Senate)
    “6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

    “7: Judgment in Cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.”

    Note, by the way, that the president is not the only officer who can be impeached.

    Article II is about the Executive branch.
    Section 2:
    “1: The President… shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.”

    Section 4:
    “The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

    Article III is about the Judicial branch. The only reference to impeachment is in Section 2, exempting impeachment from the requirement that trials have juries.
    “3: The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury…”

    That is everything the Constitution says about impeachment.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. You can be impeached, as Clinton was, and remain in office unless 2/3rds of the Senate convicts. That won’t happen to Trump either. Impeachment is a political procedure. Just because the House impeached him, doesn’t mean he can’t seek re-election, unless the Senate convicts and removes. Again, 2/3rds, not happening. He will seek, and be re-elected. The rest is just political noise from Democrats and NTers who have nothing else to offer. So they rage.

    The rest of the country has moved on. They’re too busy working and living their lives. 🙂


  15. Impeach represents an indictment more than anything. The actual trial hasn’t even started, do entirely to Pelosi and Schiff’s feet dragging They know this has no hope, so it’s only being drug out to further smear the president and hope a delay provides yet another opportunity to add something people might actually care about.

    They can’t beat him on the issues, so this is their only hope.


  16. Like I said, it’s a political procedure, nothing more.


  17. It’s always fun to see what they dumped in the latest holiday weekend news dump.

    Some beauties.


    “While U.S. Attorney John Durham continues his criminal investigation into FISA abuse and other misconduct at the FBI, CIA, DIA and other federal government intelligence agencies, one of Special Counsel Robert Mueller allies was just sentenced to prison.

    Mark Tolson, a former FBI analyst, illegally accessed the emails of right wing activist Jack Burkman in order to protect Mueller. He admitted to doing so in federal court last week. He will serve seven days behind bars and has been ordered to pay a $500 fine.

    “I did what I did to try to protect Director Mueller, who can protect himself,” Tolson told U.S. District Court Judge Leonie Brinkema.

    After illegally sifting through emails, Tolson attempted to leak them to the press.

    “After snooping through Burkman’s account, Tolson sent screenshots of the messages and offered the password to an unspecified journalist, court filings say,” POLITICO reports.

    Tolson’s wife was also involved, but she wasn’t charged. From the Washington Examiner:

    Tolson’s wife had the password to Burkman’s email after doing some work for the lobbyist, and she provided the password to her husband. Tolson accessed Burkman’s email and sent screenshots of messages as well as the login information to Burkman’s email account to a journalist.

    “This is actually a very serious offense,” Brinkema said. “You’re lucky. Your wife is lucky. The government could have prosecuted her as well.””


  18. And this.


    “Durham Investigation Focusing Attention On John Brennan And Some CIA Veterans Aren’t Pleased”

    “A week ago the NY Times reported that the ongoing Durham investigation was looking at former CIA Director John Brennan’s possible role in pushing the Steele dossier. Today Politico published a piece which reads like push back against the Durham investigation from the CIA:”


    “You can scroll through his feed on your own but it’s 70% about impeachment.

    If there’s nothing to see here, what are Sipher and McLaughlin so worried about? Durham has a good reputation as a straight-shooter. Why not let him run his investigation and follow it wherever it leads? Maybe he won’t find anything but if he does, shouldn’t we know about it? After all, the Horowitz investigation found that Nunes’ memo was basically correct about the FISA application while the Schiff counter-memo was wrong. The FISA court has already demanded changes from the FBI in the wake of the Horowitz report to improve the process. Horowitz also found that an FBI agent had intentionally lied to the FISA court about Carter Page’s involvement with the CIA. So where is the downside? All of this seems significant and worth knowing even if it’s not what Sipher and McLaughlin want to hear.”


  19. One more…..

    Seems Mr. Steele’s just a fount of false information.


    “British ex-spy Christopher Steele spread other accusations against President Trump not included in his well-publicized election dossier, according to the Justice Department’s recent report on FBI misconduct.

    The report by Inspector General Michael E. Horowitz shows at least three little-noticed Steele assertions that went to Crossfire Hurricane, the bureau’s Trump probe headquarters. And like 13 of his dossier’s accusations of a conspiracy between the Trump campaign and the Kremlin, those three didn’t pan out either.

    The three allegations had to do with supposed Trump campaign cash from Moscow via Azerbaijan, a Russian intelligence officer, and a purported intervention by Russian President Vladimir Putin on the next secretary of state.”


  20. Attacks on Jews on the East Coast continue to mount.

    And NY isn’t doing anything about it. In fact, their bail “reforms” are turning those responsible lose to re-offend.


    “New York machete stabbings at Hanukkah event in rabbi’s home result in 5 wounded: reports”

    “A frightening attack at a Hanukkah celebration in the home of a rabbi in a suburb north of New York City on Saturday night placed the entire New York region on edge and had public officials vowing to stop the violence.

    The assault in Monsey, N.Y. — by a machete-wielding suspect who drove away but whom authorities believe was the man they apprehended later — continued a string of incidents in recent weeks that have included beatings of Jewish people on the streets of New York City and a massacre at a kosher grocery store in nearby Jersey City, N.J.”


  21. ———–

    Bail reform is setting suspects free after string of anti-Semitic attacks


    “Suspects arrested in last week’s spree of eight anti-Semitic attacks are being quickly released right back into the neighborhoods they terrorized thanks to “bail reform” legislation — which doesn’t even take effect until Jan. 1.

    The most recent case of revolving-door justice came Saturday morning, with the release, with no bail, of a woman charged with punching and cursing at three Orthodox women, ages 22, 26 and 31, in Crown Heights, Brooklyn at dawn the day before.

    The accused assailant, Tiffany Harris, was hauled in handcuffs before a Brooklyn judge on 21 menacing, harassment and attempted assault charges.

    “F-U, Jews!” Harris, 30, of Flatbush, allegedly shouted during the attack.

    “Yes, I was there,” Harris later admitted to cops, according to the criminal complaint against her.

    “Yes, I slapped them. I cursed them out. I said ‘F-U, Jews.”

    As she stood before a judge in Brooklyn Criminal Court with the hood to a navy blue jacket over her head, Harris was in familiar territory.

    She still has an open harassment and assault case on the Brooklyn docket from November 2018.

    And last month, she was sentenced to no jail time for felony criminal mischief in Manhattan, court records show — a case for which she had repeatedly failed to make court appearances.

    Brooklyn prosecutors didn’t even bother requesting bail Saturday, as they could have, given that the reform law, approved in April, technically doesn’t take effect until Jan. 1.

    “The de Blasio administration has made it clear that we all need to get into compliance with bail reform now,” said a law enforcement source.

    “If prosecutors had asked for bail, corrections would release them immediately,” or they would be sprung on Jan. 1, the source said.

    Brooklyn Criminal Court Judge Laura Johnson even made mention of the coming bail reform legislation in ordering Harris freed.”


  22. https://abc7.com/entertainment/charlie-brown-christmas-producer-dies-on-christmas-day-at-86/5794151/


    … Lee Mendelson headed a team that included “Peanuts” author Charles Schulz, director Bill Melendez, and pianist and composer Vince Guaraldi, whose music for the show, including the opening “Christmas Time Is Here,” has become as much a Christmas staple as the show itself.

    Mendelson told The Cincinnati Enquirer in 2000 that he was short on time in finding a lyricist for the song, so he sketched out the six verses himself in “about 15 minutes on the backside of an envelope.”

    He found a choir from a church in his native Northern California to sing the song that sets the show’s unforgettable tone, beginning with Mendelson’s words:

    “Christmas time is here, happiness and cheer, fun for all that children call, their favorite time of year.” …

    … Mendelson said the team showed the (Peanuts Christmas) special to executives at CBS a week before it was slated to air, and they hated it, with its hyper-simplicity, dour tone, biblical themes, lack of laugh track and actual children’s voices instead of adults mimicking them, as was common.

    “I really believed, if it hadn’t been scheduled for the following week, there’s no way they were gonna broadcast that show,” Mendelson said on a 2004 documentary for the DVD of the special.

    Instead, it went on to become perhaps the biggest holiday classic in television.

    “It became part of everybody’s Christmas holidays,” Mendelson told The Los Angeles Times in 2015. “It was just passed on from generation to generation. … We got this huge initial audience and never lost them.” …

    Liked by 3 people

  23. I think everyone here understands the difference between impeachment and conviction. I was addressing Chas’s theoretical question of whether Trump could be elected again if the Senate did convict, which we all know is not going to happen. Though two presidents have been impeached before, none has been convicted and removed.

    Nixon would certainly have been impeached and convicted if he had not resigned first.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.