From the Archives.  The contestant is Andrew Conkling from Kalamazoo, Michigan.  I was right about one thing:  when I saw that the Puzzler was almost 18 minutes, I knew that I wouldn’t stand a chance.   And I was right!  Even composer Bruce Adolph, after the piece finished said, “I think this is really hard.”  And it was.  The composer style is guessable, and the contestant did get it, though only after a wrong guess and directional hint.  But even host Fred Child was stumped with the hidden song and only later thought he finally figured it out.  (We don’t find out if he was right, since the contestant – with a hint – makes a correct guess.)

The guest on this week’s Al Franken podcast is a repeat of his conversation with Jimmy Kimmel.  As the show writes, “In this Best Of episode, we revisit our 2020 conversation with Jimmy Kimmel! We go through his long career, beginning with his start in radio and his transition to television.
 
“We discuss the birth of Jimmy’s late night show back in 2003 and how, in his own words, the show was ‘genuinely terrible.’ With time, Jimmy figured it out and established a template for what makes a good show and learned what makes a good guest versus a bad guest.
 
“A major turning point for Jimmy was when his son battled health challenges. He became more vocal on issues like healthcare, which led to him butting heads with the GOP over their attempts at repealing the Affordable Care Act.

“While this interview was in 2020, Jimmy continues to butt heads with the GOP, which resulted in his censorship battle with ABC and the Trump administration earlier this year.”
 

I love this great, satirical campaign ad from Kat Abughazaleh.  It’s extremely clever, while getting across her agenda.  As it happens, I’ve made a couple of small donations to her campaign previously, and only came across the ad because someone else loved it and posted it on Twitter.  She’s running for the IL-9 district, which is currently represented by the wonderful Jan Schakowsky who is retiring – and whose district my folks were in.

Interestingly, I actually have had dinner with who I just found out is her Democratic opponent in the race -- and even wrote about him here a while back.  Daniel Biss, who has served in the Illinois statehouse and currently is the mayor of Evanston, where the beloved Northwestern is.  He's the grandson of a great "grande dame" I adored, who lived on the same floor as my folks in their independent living residence -- and lived until about 105, Adeline Cohen.
 
So, I like both candidates.  But I love this ad.

I completely understand why the MAGOP-led House Oversight Committee so dearly wanted Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton to be deposed about the Epstein files.  And how they were almost bursting with unadulterated joy when it finally came to pass.  Their wish come true!  It’s quite a “get” for them – a former U.S. President and his wife, herself a former Senator and Secretary of the State who MAGOPs both hate with a driving passion.  And Bill Clinton doesn’t have a squeaky clean past and was on about 20 flights of Epstein’s plane.
 
That said, I think that it is bizarre and so almost unimaginably wrong-headed and counter-productive for MAGOPs that they wanted Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton to be deposed about the Epstein files.
 
First, Hillary Clinton has said she never met Jeffrey Epstein.  And there’s no record of it.  She’s mentioned in the files about 600 times – but almost all of them are references to her in articles.  She’s said she has casually met Ghislaine Maxwell, so that’s “something”, but it’s never been the standard on who the Committee thus far has been questioning people about.  Further, House MAGOPs know from painful experience what it’s like questioning Hillary Clinton when they don’t have what they only hope they have.  They tried with Benghazi, and after 11 hours came away looking bloodied.  Having her testify about someone she didn't know could only end up being empty and make MAGOPs look like they don’t care in the slightest about getting any actual information about the Epstein files, but only want to embarrass someone they hate.  Especially since Secretary Clinton wanted to testify in public.  And especially since zero MAGOP members of the committee showed up to depose Les Wexner, the man who was basically Jeffrey Epstein’s financier, which is what made all of Epstein's efforts possible.
 
Second, while Bill Clinton did know Jeff Epstein well, and took around 20 flights on his plane – and for all we know might have slept around with women (or not) – he too offered to testify under oath in public.  Something that would seem to suggest that whatever he did or didn’t do, he is very confident that nothing he did was  reprehensible, slimy or illegal.  He may have, but (again) he offered to testify in publc.  That should have been the first yellow caution light to MAGOPs that they won’t get much of any value (or at all) to do with investigating Epstein’s crimes and getting justice for the victims.  And will show that they have no interest in investigating Epstein’s crimes and getting justice for the victims.  Most especially since zero MAGOP members of the committee showed up to depose Les Wexner, who was basically Jeffrey Epstein’s financier, if not his partner.  At worst, it will only serve to embarrass Bill Clinton – and, for the sake of argument, perhaps disgrace him -- which, considering that he is 80 years old and hasn’t been in public office for a quarter-century, before 50 million Americans were even born, is without almost any impact on the political landscape and only about personal legacy.  If they even do embarrass him, considering that he openly offered to testify publicly.  
 
But worse for MAGOPs is that whatever tiny benefit they think they might possibly gain by having President Clinton to testify – and Secretary Clinton to testify -- is microscopic compared to what they lose.
 
And that’s the most disastrous, bizarre and so almost unimaginably wrong-headed and counter-productive thing for MAGOPs.
 
Because having President Clinton and Secretary Clinton deposed shines a bright klieg light on the two empty seats in the hearing room.  Raising the obvious, blatant question – so self-evident it’s impossible to miss unless you have your eyes closed, and even then your brain is presumably still working – if a former President and his wife, a Senator and Secretary of State herself, agreed to testify, why haven’t Trump and his wife Melania testified, and when will the committee subpoena them?

It’s an inescapable question.  And making the question worse for MAGOPs – and even worse in that it’s impossible for their Committee not to have seen this from the first – is that we know (absolutely know) from what Trump has long said and from what photos have long shown that both Trump and Melania not only actually knew Jeffrey Epstein -- and Ghislaine Maxell -- but knew them closely.  Trump most especially, indeed knew Epstein intimately, since he’s said so himself, and since Epstein said they were best friends.
 
And Trump can’t claim executive privilege since his dealings with Epstein occurred decades before he was in the White House, before he was in politics.  And even if chairman James Comer (MAGOP-KY) and the Oversight Committee refuse to subpoena a sitting president (though Bill Clinton testified in court when he was in office), there’s zero excuse for Melania not to testify.
 
But of course neither Trump nor Melania will testify, nor called to, not with MAGOPs in control.  And it will only serve to keep shining the intensely bright light on those two empty chairs. Daily raising the question, “What do they have to hide?”
 
And we haven’t even touched on those members of Trump’s cabinet and administration who knew Epstein and haven’t been subpoenaed.  Notably Howard Lutnick, Robert Kennedy Jr., Mehmet Oz, Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Feinberg, Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, and others in the Trump circle like Steve Bannon and Elon Musk.

And, for that matter, Trump's second wife, Marla Maples.  Whose wedding Epstein attended.  And who told staff at Mar-a-Lago that she felt something was "off" and "wrong" about Jeffrey Epstein, and suggested not to spend time with him.  So, she would seem someone with personal knowledge of Epstein who the Committee should want to call.  Even if it means bringing a third empty chair.
 
And the light will keep glaring.  And the question will keep swirling.  Every day that those two chairs remain empty.  And (worse for MAGOPs) arguably those most angered will be so many in the Trump base – because they were the ones riled up by Trump and his party during the 2024 campaign, relentlessly pounded about how damning the Epstein files are for Democrats alone and how Trump promised to be open and transparent and release everything.  And so that MAGA base lay in wait, in near-delirious expectation for Trump to unleash the dogs of hell and get the traffickers and predators.  And now, with Trump and his administration blocking the files and investigation every way they can, so many in that base feel lied to, deceived.  And all the more so now that President Clinton and Secretary Clinton agreed to be deposed – and Trump and Melania refuse to.
 
And MAGOPs did this to themselves.  It was impossible for them, for almost anyone to not see this as the result of subpoenaing the Clintons.  Trump alone is mentioned almost a million times in the Epstein files, more than anyone than perhaps Ghislaine Maxwell.
 
They did this to themselves.  And it was impossible not to have known that this would be the result.
 
But they so deeply wanted to get The Clintons.  The burning wish drove them.  And in the end, their blind fury hatred most probably only helped to get themselves.

This is the second of the Amy Poehler SNL sketches I’ve found which are my favorite of hers.  As I mentioned before, she plays a little girl named Kaitlin, filled with almost unimaginable energy who gets taken to places with her stepfather “Rick,” played wonderfully-patiently by a profoundly low-key Horatio Sanz.  (In fact, this is one where you can see him fighting to keep from cracking up – which almost gets Amy Poehler to start laughing.  In fact, she almost cracks him up twice.)
 
In this sketch, Kaitlin is especially excited than usual because her Uncle Scott is getting married, and she can waaaaaaait for the wedding.  And making the sketch all the more fun is because her uncle is played by that week’s host, Tom Brady.

 
I didn’t write about the State of the Union Address yesterday (other than an off-handed comment) because...well, I didn’t watch it.  Watch it??  For starters, I figured that most everyone would have a spot-on idea of exactly what he’d be saying (when you have dementia,  you tend to focus on the same things), that almost all of it would be lies, and that it would last a soul-numbing hour-and-20-minutes.  The only thing I got wrong is being short by a half hour.  So, why watch?  Any important moments would be shown afterwards on TV, and it would be discussed what was said.  Which turns out to have been pretty much what most everyone would have guessed and that almost all of it was lies.

(By the way, the ratings were four million fewer viewers than last year's speech.  So, between this and him hosting the lowest-rated Kennedy Centers Honors, he's on a roll.  Considering that yesterday he called for Robert DeNiro to be deported -- yes, really -- he may hate the Oscars so much that he'll ask to host them, ruin their viewership and go for the Trifecta.)
 
Three things stood out to me, though, worth mentioning.  One was more thematic, so nothing specific.  Another was small, but still has me shaking my head.  The other was basically (almost literally) nothing – but massive, I think.
 
First, the thematic thing is that a State of the Union Address is generally used by the president to set his agenda for the year ahead, so the American people can hear what he wants to do for the year ahead.  And most especially in an election year, this is a major deal for his party, because the president can set the agenda for all the races.  And as far as I can tell, though Trump spoke for an hour-and-47-minutes, he mostly talked about himself and all the great things he believes he did during the past year, and laid out almost no new programs ahead.  Which is really weird, and I’m sure it galled most MAGOPs running for re-election as a massive waste of the greatest bully pulpit evening a president has.
 
Second, the small but bizarre thing is that among the very few new programs Trump did announce, one was putting “JD Vance” in charge of a new “war on fraud.”  I mean, my god, of all things.  After all, if "JD Vance" really, truly wanted to find fraud, this is like the easiest job in the world.  The only thing he has to do is walk over to Trump’s office and knock.  For goodness sake, Trump was literally found guilty of business fraud. And further, he not only had his "charity" foundation shut down, but the reason given was for "a shocking pattern of illegality."  Besides which, we know about so many other situations where Trump was sued for fraudulent business practices and settled out of court, most notably by plaintiffs who claimed to have been defrauded by Trump “University”.  So…yeah, Trump is on the warpath against fraud.  The only reason I can see Trump being interested in find out about fraud is if it’s to give him new ideas what to do when he leaves office.
 
And finally, there’s the third thing.  It’s was very small – literally – as part of the State of the Union Address, but massive (I believe) for what it says about Trump and the Mid-Terms.  There are several topics that Trump campaigned on in 2024, some major to him, but I think he only had one signature issue.  Immigration.  That’s the foundation of everything Trump ran on.  Open borders.  Illegals.  Mass deportation.  And moreover, that’s been signature to his actions since taking office.  Sending ICE and the Border Patrol and federalize the National Guard and even sending the Marines to Los Angeles.  And sending ICE and the Border Patrol and federalizing the National Guard to Portland – lying (of course) that the city was burning down.  Sending them to Chicago.  Arresting legal citizens.  Deporting people without due process.  Using brutality against neighborhoods.  Trump and MAGOPs in their vaunted “Big Beautiful Bill” a gargantuan budget for the Department of Homeland Security of $350 billion.  And a massive budget for ICE, making the most highly-funded military organization in the United States.  And Trump sent these federal agents into Minneapolis for 2-1/2 months – brutalizing the city, using teargas and pepper balls, injuring legal citizen, breaking apart families, sending people to detention centers without due process, and killing two innocent citizens.  And more.
 
This is Trump’s signature issue.  And its center of it -- his signature issue -- Minneapolis has been the core of daily headline news for the past 2-1/2 months.  And…and Trump did not mention one word about it!  His signature issue.  Battleground Minneapolis.  Operation Metro Storm.  Something that since last December, Trump, “JD Vance,” DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, Border Patrol Commander Gregory Bovino, ICE public relations, administration officials, MAGOPs in Congress and more have been lauding and defending vociferously and relentlessly daily, up until when they at last declared victory (!), that their mission had been accomplished a mere two weeks ago.  And in the State of the Union speech --- nothing??  Nothing???  Not one single word about what an amazing, tremendous, the best job ever that our troops did attacking our citizens.  If the speech's theme was "Winning!!", after 2-1/2 months, we were told two weeks ago that this was "winning" at its pinnacle.  And on Tuesday, with almost two hours of rambling to fill, Trump didn't say one word about Minneapolis.

Silence.  Crickets.
 
There’s only one reason I can think of why Trump wouldn’t mention one single word about Minneapolis, core to his signature issue.  And that’s because his whole staff was able to convince Trump that his actions in Minneapolis and on immigration are so deeply hated by the American public that it shouldn’t even be brought up.  His signature issue!  And so deeply hated that even Trump understood how disastrous it would be to say anything.  Which also means that -- if even Trump knew he couldn't even mention ICE and Minneapolis -- it will be incredibly difficult for MAGOPs to run on Trump and the party’s signature issue in the Mid-Terms.
 
Now, of course, that might not be the reason it wasn’t mentioned at all.  But any other reason I can think of doesn’t make the slightest sense.  This also doesn’t mean that Trump won’t send ICE and other federal agents into attacking other U.S. cities, and continuing his programs.  Just that within the party, they know that this is a horrible issue for MAGOPs, and if they do continue it (which I suspect they will), it will drive down Trump’s approval even more.
 
There is so much else to talk about with Trump’s speech, but…why?  It was what he talks about all the time anyway, and mostly lies.  But these three things – and most especially his not even mentioning his 2-1/2 month war against Minneapolis (!) – strike me as by far the most significant tent poles in his one hour-and-47-minute blather.
 
And again, above all, that Trump wouldn’t even say one word about a 2-1/2 month attack central to his signature issue.  In an election year.
 
He and those around him know they’re in deep trouble.
 
And this was driven home even deeper that very same night.  Because when the White House and MAGOPs began shouting his line about how his administration is winning!  Winning, winning, winning!! – there was something else taking place at the same time.
That something else has gotten little coverage, but while Trump was blathering for almost two hours, Democrats won three statehouse Special Elections.  And the one that is most stunning came in Pennsylvania.  Where in the previous race in 2024, it was a Blue district and the Democrat won by 31 points, but on Tuesday, as Trump went on and on about him winning, the Democrat won by 67 points!!!!!!  Getting 81% of the vote.

That can only happen because of three things – more Democrats were motivated enough to come out to vote, more Republicans were depressed enough and stayed home and – mostly –Independent voters swamped the polls.
 
That’s winning.