We've changed our minds
Last week, as the jury began considering the guilt or innocence of U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., in a federal corruption trial, a 9-year-old news release quietly disappeared from the Senate Democrats' website. That news release was then-Majority Leader Harry Reid's take on what should happen if Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, were convicted in a trial in 2008.
"A convicted felon," the Democrat wrote, "is not going to be able to serve in the United States Senate. And as precedent shows us," a convicted senator "will face an ethics committee investigation and expulsion, regardless of his appeals process." Reid also added that the matter was "not a partisan issue."
Now, according to Politico, Democrats aren't so sure they wouldn't keep Menendez around - at least for a time - if he were convicted.
"I don't know if we'd be in a hurry to get rid of Bob," a Senate Democrat told the site. "It would be a tough vote for folks like me (who are up for re-election in 2018), but I think the rest of the caucus would stick with him."
It might, at least, for a while. The rub is that the current governor of New Jersey is Republican Chris Christie, who could name Menendez's replacement before January. However, since a Democratic was elected to replace the term-limited Christie, he would name the replacement if Menendez could hold on until 2018.
You gotta love the hypocrisy.
Rather ironic
Officials with NBC's "Today" show must believe its viewers have short memories or are just in lockstep with the network's leftist views.
Last week, the network brought in former CBS news anchor Dan Rather to discuss, we assume seriously, fake news.
The former news reader, of course, had to step down after using fake documents to try discredit then-President George W. Bush during his 2004 re-election bid. The documents alleged Bush went AWOL during his service more than 30 years earlier in the Texas National Guard.
An independent investigation concluded Rather disregarded "fundamental journalistic principles" in running with the story.
Asked by host Savannah Guthrie about a recent Politico survey that found almost half the people believe the media peddle fake news, he said, apparently with a straight face, "Well, first, those of us who are in the media we need to do a better job, we need to do our job. Our job is to bear witness, to be honest brokers of information. To be as accurate and fair as we possibly can. So we need to do a better job.
"I think most of the public understands that we're under attack by very powerful people, including the president, for their own partisan, political, and ideological reasons," he added. "They want people - they're basically saying, 'Believe us, believe only your president and believe only the people who are in power. Don't believe these people out in the press.'"
It seems Rather hasn't learned much from his embarrassing public comeuppance.
Liberal bosom buddies
Remember when late-night talk shows were about comedy and good entertainment? Yeah, it's been awhile.
If viewers already hadn't had enough of the talk-shows-turned-Republican-bashing hours, they could have been treated to "Late Night With Seth Meyers" host Seth Meyers toasting Democratic victories in Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections last week with former Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton.
"Now there's a little bit of hope," the host said, apparently unaware that if Republicans won either seat it would have been a major upset. "Because there's a little bit of hope, I thought we'd have a drink and some champagne. ... So cheers."
Clinton, whose campaign is under scrutiny for its attempts to smear her opponent with false information, said, "Oh my gosh, I was thrilled. I mean look, I think we're seeing the first signs ... You know, I think the fever is finally breaking."
We hope they'll continue with those thoughts. It's how they lost the presidency in 2016.
Anthem anathema
Members of the California chapter of the NAACP said last week they want to ditch "The Star Spangled Banner" as the nation's national anthem because it is "anti-black people" and "racist."
Their seeming objection comes from a line in the rarely sung third verse of the anthem, which reads, "no refuge could save the hireling and slave from the terror of the flight or the gloom of the grave."
Two members of the Congressional Black Caucus gave the idea tacit approval.
"Intellectually," said U.S. Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill., "if people continue to pursue this nation to become perfected, then I see nothing wrong with [changing the anthem]. I mean it was designed, I think they said, to form a more perfect union.
"They didn't say that it was perfect at the time," he went on, "but they did say that we could continue to pursue perfection, and if they're individuals who think that we can make the national anthem more perfect in terms of the goals and objectives of this country then I say so be it."
U.S. Rep. Lacy Clay, D-Mo., said he would need to examine the verse, but he endorsed the NAACP's thought.
"They have a right to object to any stances in the national anthem they find objectionable and racist," he said.