Monday, October 24, 2022

Christian Values Matter: How Candace Cameron Bure Became the Conservative Queen of Christmas

 



Long article, but a good read: https://variety.com/2022/tv/news/christmas-movies-tv-candace-cameron-bure-gac-1235376278/

Candace Cameron Bure was the undisputed queen of Hallmark Channel’s slate of popular holiday fare, with more than 30 credits to her name. Who could forget her work as a high-strung doctor who moves to Alaska in “Christmas Under Wraps”? OK, just because you haven’t heard of it, doesn’t mean it wasn’t a huge hit. The 2014 made-for-TV movie has the distinction of being the most watched Hallmark Christmas special ever, landing almost 6 million viewers on its debut airing. (In fact, she stars in four of Hallmark’s top 10 most-watched Christmas premieres.) So, when Bure, 46, split with Hallmark to join rival upstart cable network GAC (now Great American Family) earlier this year, not even Santa himself could cheer up Hallmark. 

The brains behind this Christmas steal wasn’t the Grinch. Instead, it was Great American Media president and CEO Bill Abbott, the former chief of Hallmark Channel’s parent company, who stepped down from his previous post in 2020 after he faced backlash for yanking a commercial featuring a same-sex couple. How did Abbott pull off such a big hire? By showing her the money. Sources tell Variety that Bure, whose contract ended around the time Great American Family was launching, was making around $1 million a year for her exclusive Hallmark deal, which, at one point, included at least two movies a year. Great American Family was able to nearly double that.

“The biggest thing about Christmas movies in general is that people make fun of them — and yet people love them,” Bure says. “It’s because they’re predictable: You know that someone’s going to fall in love. You know it’s just going to be happy and warm. And people run to that, especially at the holidays.” 

Bure’s role isn’t just starring in new projects, but also now as an executive at the company, tasked with producing her own empire of Christmas movies. The first project on her slate is “A Christmas … Present,” where Bure will play a real estate agent who is celebrating the holidays with her recently widowed brother. According to Abbott, she “understands what the audience likes and what the audience doesn’t like, and that understanding for us is so critical to our success.” 

Candace Cameron Bure and David O’Donnell in ‘Christmas Under Wraps’©Hallmark Entertainment/Courtesy Everett Collection

Abbott didn’t originally think the movie was a fit. “It’s not the typical Christmas movie that we would do that is necessarily what has been successful, even for her, in the past. Yet, I have a lot of confidence in her,” he says. “It is life-affirming and makes you appreciate what you have and will give people great hope in really viewing what they have in a little bit of a different way through a different lens. She was 100% right. I was way off.”

Bure grew up in a conservative household in Panorama City, the daughter of a talent manager and a gym teacher. Her brother, Kirk Cameron, an outspoken Evangelical Christian, starred in “Growing Pains” as a teenager, but abandoned a traditional Hollywood career trajectory to star in the faith-based “Left Behind” movies. He stoked controversy in 2012 for saying being gay is “unnatural.” On the other hand, Bure, who is a devout Christian and a conservative, hasn’t waded into politics as much, despite her stint as a co-host on “The View.” She’s close to her children — Natasha, 24; Lev, 22; and Maksim, 20 — and has said in the past that she’s attracted to telling the faith-based stories she shares with them. It’s not surprising, then, that Bure understands Great American Media’s audience.

Things have changed in the holiday programming world in the past few years. While red-and-green decor signals to all that the Christmas season is here, if you’re in this business, you’re seeing only green. In 2021 alone, there were 144 TV movies in the months leading up to the holiday, with Netflix, CBS, ION, UPtv and OWN all throwing their Santa hats into the ring. This year, Great American Family is preparing to roll out 17 originals. UPtv also has 17, Hallmark will be producing 40 and Lifetime has 26.

And this comeback for the genre is no longer just on cable networks; every network has its own strategy. CBS, for example, has three original movies coming this season highlighting the network’s talent as Amanda Kloots (“The Talk”) and Liza Lapira (“The Equalizer), star opposite Paul Greene and Neal Bledsoe, respectively, men who’ve led holiday movies for Hallmark Channel. (Bledsoe and Greene will both also appear on Great American Family as well this year, pulling double duty.) Meanwhile, Lifetime is bringing in legends this year, with movies starring Rita Moreno, Patti LaBelle and Jane Seymour.

Made-for-TV holiday movies have become a pop-culture punchline, but for actors, they’re a way to make relatively fast money. A female lead actor can make up to $300,000 per movie that takes three weeks to film, while a male lead can make close to $200,000. For years, Hallmark was the top payer for holiday programming, but that’s changed.

Netflix’s “The Princess Switch”©Netflix/Courtesy Everett Collection

When Netflix came into the game, it was willing to up the ante. Since its overall budgets are more than double what cable networks have, it’s able to land stars like Dolly Parton, Goldie Hawn, Vanessa Hudgens, Kurt Russell and Rob Lowe. One source tells Variety that while some of those movies were pitched elsewhere, Netflix was the only place able to pay bigger leading stars, often shelling out paychecks of more than $1 million per film.

“Over the past five years, we’ve built a sizable library of Netflix holiday shows and films and a proven dedicated audience who return year after year to watch both our new holiday offerings — as well as revisit their past favorites like ‘The Princess Switch’ and ‘Christmas Chronicles’ franchises,” says Christina Rogers, director of independent film at Netflix.

This year, the streamer has six original holiday movies in the pipeline, all with big stars attached, including Lindsay Lohan, Emma Thompson, Olivia Colman and Justin Hartley — all talent that doesn’t come cheap.

And the business of Christmas movies can lead to other sources of income. Now, much like Comic-Con and other fan conventions, the actors can earn money by signing autographs and taking photos with fans. Christmas Con launched in 2019, with 20 celebrity guests and 9,000 attendees; in 2021, attendees went up to 12,000. In addition to pricy day passes, fans can take part in a professional photo opps with stars like Lacey Chabert, Danica McKellar or Jesse Metcalfe, or buy an autograph for $80. Plus, each actor is paid a guaranteed rate to attend for the weekend — which can be anywhere from $10,000 to $75,000.

RomaDrama, which launched in 2021, is an exclusive fan experience that features actors of Christmas movies, flies talent first class and gives fans the opportunity to pay $400 for a five-minute sit-down chat with their favorite stars. Plus, fans have the chance to speak with award-winning authors and screenwriters with experience in the rom-com world.

Wes Brown, Jesse Hutch, Andrew Walker (back) Colin Egglesfield, Trevor Donovan, Neal Bledsoe at RomaDramaRyan Waneka

But in the Christmas game, no one is bigger than Bure. Of course, she got her start as the beloved DJ Tanner on “Full House” at 11 — a role she played until she was 18. She then took a break from acting and, at 20, married former Russian NHL hockey player Valeri Bure and started a family. Ten years later, she “came back with a vengeance.” That comeback began at the Hallmark Channel. 

“Bill gave me my first shot after taking a very long hiatus from work,” says Bure, who made her Hallmark debut in “Moonlight and Mistletoe” in 2008. “I will always be grateful to him for that.” But her return from full-time motherhood was just the start for Bure at Hallmark Media. In total, she appeared in 30 movies and hosted the annual “Countdown to Christmas” specials. 

Though she eventually began producing on the network, she took on some meaty side gigs, including “Dancing With the Stars” and “The View,” where she sat on the Hot Topics table from 2015 to 2016. Though she loved being a talk show host, she didn’t like dishing about politics in public. On ABC’s “Behind the Table” podcast, in 2021, she said, “I didn’t want to be the punching bag for the next four years in that conservative seat.” Still, she can imagine going back. “I would love to do a talk show again,” she says. “But I don’t want to do a political talk show. That wasn’t that fun.” 

“The View” was an opportunity she jumped at after saying “a lot of nos.” She says she booked another TV show that aired for “many, many years,” but changed her mind last minute since it’d be too tough to balance filming with her family time.  

Unlike most child stars, Bure has found ways to continue to keep her brand relevant. She has written 11 books, launched her own clothing line, has partnered with Dr. Lancer Skincare and with Christian gifts company DaySpring to stay connected to her faith. Yet, Christmas movies are what she’s best known for now — which is why her departure from Hallmark was met with such interest. It comes after Abbott left the channel in a hail of controversy. 

Within a year of exiting Hallmark, Abbott had set up a more conservative competitor — in June 2021, he partnered with Hicks Equity Partners on GAC Media, a new company that had acquired Great American Family. (The firm’s founder, Thomas Hicks, is a close friend of Donald Trump and co-chair of the Republican National Committee.)

Bure isn’t the only Hallmark staple who Abbott has brought with him to the new company. In 2014, he launched the “Kitten Bowl” on Hallmark, working closely with animal-rights activist Beth Stern, who is married to Howard Stern, to help find cats and kittens their forever homes. While the network discontinued the special, which has facilitated more than 75,000 shelter pet adoptions since its launch, it will move to Great American Family in February 2023, and has been renamed as the “Great American Rescue Bowl.”   

Abbott and Bure hope to bring “The Aurora Teagarden Mysteries” film series, a franchise Bure has led since its 2015 debut, to their new home. “The world that she created around Aurora Teagarden was something very special, and certainly something we would love nothing more than to do more of,” he says. Bure adds, “It’s about putting puzzle pieces together, but it’s very possible.”  

The cast of ‘Full House.’©Warner Bros/Courtesy Everett Collection

Bure may also reunite with a familiar face on the network: Her “Full House” aunt, Lori Loughlin. A special last Christmas marked Loughlin’s return to acting following her 2019 arrest and subsequent incarceration in the college admissions scandal. She also has a long-standing relationship with Abbott, having appeared in 16 “Garage Sale Mystery” films for Hallmark Movies & Mysteries before the network cut ties with her amid the scandal. Now, Abbott hopes to rebuild that relationship and eventually have Loughlin as one of the faces of Great American Family. They talk three times a week, he says, and are currently looking for the perfect script for her to lead. 

“She’s America’s sweetheart, regardless of whatever happened,” Abbott says. “At the end of the day, she represents all that is positive about entertainment, and has had a stellar career — not only on screen, but also the way she’s conducted herself personally, in terms of being someone who has a track record of doing the right thing in the world at large, aside from whatever happened. She’s beloved and for good reason. We’re very proud of our association with her and want to make her part of the fabric.” 

As it turns out, that fabric isn’t so different from the one that he championed at Hallmark before he left in a cloud of controversy. 

Bure says that while there are similarities, Great American Family’s content will more strongly represent faith and pride in country. But so far, the network hasn’t followed the industry trends of hiring talent from diverse backgrounds. At Lifetime, 60% of the original 2022 movies are written by women, and people of color make up 54% of the channel’s leading cast members. Sixty-seven percent of its holiday movie originals feature people of color and/or LGBTQ ( 🤮🤮🤮🤮)leads. Meanwhile, Hallmark Movies & Mysteries has adapted the company’s Mahogany card brand into TV movies, telling stories through the lens of Black culture. 

“People feel like we are now a home where they can bring projects to us, and that’s huge,” says Wonya Lucas, Hallmark CEO and president. “All you have to do is look at our audience composition of African American women prior to my getting there. African American women watch 50% more television than any other demographic, and we were largely missing out on that.”   (AND NOBODY REALLY GIVES A DAMN BECAUSE THOSE MOVIES GET THE LOWEST RATINGS IN THE WHOLE LINEUP WHEN THEY FIRST AIR!!!! 🔥🔥)

Still, while Abbott may be manufacturing the kind of Christmas his viewers are clinging to, he says he believes that diversity and inclusion are important for Great American Family. “Sometimes we’re not thought of by people who are really good at those storylines and so we have to go seek them… In growing this business, it’s much a much heavier lift than I ever thought. I knew it was going to be hard, but not this hard. And so, we’ll get there, but it’s not an overnight thing.”

Abbott says that Great American Family is focusing on Christmas for now because he isn’t being pitched stories that celebrate other faiths. “Over time, I think we have the opportunity to do that,” he says. “We don’t have the luxury of having 30 people in development being able to take meetings with a lot of different people. We take as many as we can, but time is limited in the day.”  

Bure adds, “I think we know the core audience and what they love is exactly how Bill originally built the Hallmark Channel. That was Christmas and those traditional holidays, so that’s what the focus is going to be. You’ve got to start somewhere. You can’t do everything at once.”  

Crime and the Border

We should not be introducing into our society criminals or deadbeats, legal or illegal. Someone introduced into our society should make it better, and certainly not worse.


In a return to the issues of yesteryear, once again crime is a major concern of voters. It’s like 1988 all over, complete with references to Willie Horton. Joe Biden’s indifference to the border and his contribution to the recent flood of immigrants—illegal and dubious asylum seekers alike—is also a major gripe of voters, reminiscent of 2016. Rather than being separate issues, rising crime and the border crisis are related.

That crime and border security have some relationship is common sense. Most obviously, illegal aliens have no vetting to speak of and begin their sojourn through our country as fugitives. At least some are returning convicted felons, who had earlier been deported from our country. Further, the widespread poverty, skew towards younger men, and major cultural differences with source countries enhance the likelihood of criminality. 

There is, of course, a significant and growing amount of crime among native-born Americans. This crime is made worse by “no bail” policies, lax prosecutors, and various species of idiotic “criminal justice reforms” after the summer of riots in 2020. 

But these domestic issues are made worse still by the introduction of even more criminals among illegal aliens, a result guaranteed by our lax border enforcement, coupled with the newcomers’ economic, demographic, and cultural differences from the median American. 

The Under-Studied Problem of Immigrant Crime

The prevailing counterargument is that most of these illegal immigrants are good people, here to work. As Jeb Bush infamously said, “Illegal immigration is an act of love.” There is some truth to all of that. Most are not arch-criminals. And almost all of us have some experience with this population, if only through observing the armies of mostly unassuming illegal immigrants working in restaurants, the landscaping and construction trades, and in agriculture. 

That said, their crime rates have not been studied very thoroughly. And, there is little reason to buy the argument that they make up a smaller portion of criminals compared to average Americans. In a manner similar to global warming skepticism, there is no money or incentive in looking at the true state of affairs

For those who enter the country illegally to work, their intrinsic law-abidingness is in doubt. After all, by definition, they have broken our immigration laws. Further, they almost all commit trespassing, identity theftregular theft, and a variety of other problems, particularly for communities on the border. 

Illegal immigrants and visa holders are easily exploited, as their status prevents them from seeking the usual wage and hour protections, guarantees of worker safety, and the like. The same thing that makes them attractive to employers makes them less likely to report crimes in which they are victims. This also distorts crime statistics, as most crime involving illegal immigrants occurs among people living in the same communities, whether domestic violence, theft, rape, or even murder

The right rate of immigrant crime should be zero. We should not be introducing criminals or deadbeats, legal or illegal. If someone is being introduced into our society, they should make it better and certainly not worse. Saying they’re about the same as the American average, even if true, does not enhance the pro-immigration case. 

Do We Believe Our Country Should Benefit Its People?

We know we cannot be a country with an unregulated border or unlimited immigration. The largest frontier on earth joining a First and Third World country is the southern U.S. border. It is natural that the flow goes almost entirely in one direction. Lately, the border has become a portal not merely for illegal aliens from Mexico, but for dubious asylum claimants from all over the world, as well as drug smugglers, human traffickers, and suspected terrorists

This is a shameful situation. 

The longstanding hesitation to address illegal immigration and the self-righteousness of our political class suggests they do not understand what a country is. A nation is not merely its political structure and creed, but a group of people, who form a large extended family, share a common history, and constitute a community of interest.  

The idea that we are a nation of immigrants is a meaningless collision of concepts and a false consciousness used to justify our erasure as a people. Our country can no more be a nation of immigrants than fire can be cold. Whether in the United States, Sweden, Great Britain, or Argentina, immigrants join an existing, fully formed nation, and they either become a part of it or remain permanent aliens. 

The first step to becoming an American is to respect our laws, identify with our interests, and to make that a primary loyalty, replacing vestigial loyalty to one’s origin group. The recent retreat of many Hispanic Americans, including Mexican Americans, from the Democrats and their divisive gospel of ethnic solidary suggests that this shift may be taking place in a manner similar to the mass defection of ethnic white “Reagan Democrats” from the Democratic Party’s first flirtation with hardcore leftism in the 1960s. 

Democrats had hoped they would get Hispanics to prioritize their political interests as an ethnic bloc rather than their economic interests or concerns for practical issues such as law and order. If this occurred, the Democrats’ coalition would be large and growing. Party leaders hoped the various constituent parts would remain stable and mimic the voting behavior of black Americans and American Jews, whose voting patterns do not vary as dramatically based on economic status as those of the average white voter. 

But it turns out, the “coalition of the ascendent” is fractured, because of the massive gap between leftist policies and the direct, tangible interests of these new Americans and their children. 

Many Hispanic Americans have more in common with other Americans, rather than their coethnics, who make up the illegal immigrant population. Illegal immigrants are not American by definition, and their presence often undercuts the economic and social advancement of the immigrants who have already become citizens. Recent controversies among Hispanic Los Angeles politicians suggest the Democrats’ attempted marriage of black and brown voters is not a natural or happy one, and each group views politics, the country, and each other very differently.

Avoiding the Point of No Return

Every immigrant wave has permanently changed America and its political culture. The New Deal would not have happened without the earlier waves of Southern and Eastern European immigrants, who were not attached to America’s limited government traditions and often gravitated to radical politics, including socialism and anarchism. These newcomers formed the core of the longstanding Democratic coalition, which held strong until 1980.  

Multiculturalism and identity politics flowed from the post-1965 immigration wave, augmented by the massive self-flagellation of WASP America following the civil rights movement. Continuing the post-1965 policies into the future spells trouble, especially for those of us already here, whether we trace our roots to the Mayflower or arrived more recently. 

In many ways, the rise of a hypertrophied political identity is a product not merely of the Left’s aggressiveness, but of our disappearing common culture. We no longer worship the same God, eat the same food, learn the same stories, honor the same heroes, and, in many cases, do not even speak the same language. Without these ties, political disagreements become sharper as the opportunity for consensus and peacemaking is reduced. The whole country is now like Martin Scorsese’s “Gangs of New York, and is barely less violent. 

Change the people, change the country. Following the addition of tens of millions of very diverse newcomers to the country over the last 50 years, a permanent change in our trajectory is guaranteed, as European Americans begin to become a minority within the country. 

Judging by political currents in countries as diverse as Brazil, Hungary, and the U.K., a broad-based rejection of fashionable leftism and its managerial class overseers is becoming a worldwide phenomenon. While the country will not return to its pre-1960s internal cohesion, it can choose paths of greater or lesser degradation and disunity. 

Controlling the border is the first step.  Massively reducing immigration for some reasonable interval, at least 20 years, is the next step. From there, we can begin to reconstitute ourselves as a single people and control our common destiny. 




X22, And we Know, and more- Oct 24

 



Got nothing interesting to say. Other then 'Yo'. Here's tonight's news:



Will ‘Democracy Die in Darkness’ After November? ~ VDH

The Democrats will soon chant democracy is dying because they are terrified it is thriving as never before.


The Republicans were always going to win big in November, regardless of what biased pundits professed. 

There was likely never a sudden “blue resurgence” or “red collapse” of late summer. 

Those fantasies were mostly Democratic Party talking points. They were readily regurgitated by the fusion media and biased pollsters. The ruse was transparently designed to dampen conservative turnout and fundraising, while fueling interparty squabbling over supposedly “unelectable MAGA candidates.”

As it turns out, all the late infusions of millions of dollars of Silicon Valley dark “cabal” money will be to no avail.  

All the last-minute Joe Biden giveaways like student-loan forgiveness, marijuana pardons, and COVID relief checks will be too little, too late.  

All the Trump-derangement syndrome psychodramatic distractions from the January 6 committee to the Mar-a-Lago raid will be too transparently desperate. 

And all the shrill 11th-hour warnings of a new variant of racism from the multimillionaire Obamas on the stump will be just that—shrill.

Yes, the Democrats will soon chant democracy is dying because they are terrified it is thriving as never before. And that grass-roots resurgence is mostly because Republicans are no longer so easily stereotyped as the out-of-touch party of aristocratic Mitt Romneys and condescending Bill Kristols.  

Instead, supposedly “racist” conservatives are now empowered by minority voters worried more about shared class concerns than skin color. They are concluding that if there are American racists, they are most likely the rich bicoastal elites, never subject to the consequences of their selfish agendas, and their own self-appointed, self-interested, and ossified diversity industry.

So as the election nears, to save reputations, pollsters will now become just a bit more honest. Thus, they will be off on the final tally by only 2-3 percentage points rather than midsummer’s 5-8. That way, they save their eroding reputations by claiming post facto that at least their final polls “were within the margin of error.” 

In the last few days, pundits will cease talk of an unappreciated “real” Democratic late surge. Instead they will turn on the electorate for its “stupidity.” 

We will read all sorts of “What’s the Matter with Kansas?”-like screeds against those who voted  “against their interests,” with ample fillips of “whitelash,” “voter suppression,” and Stacey Abramsesque denialism—even as Republicans win record numbers of minority voters. 

(Remember, minorities who vote conservative are excommunicated from the Left and no longer considered genuine minorities, as adjudicated by wealthy white professionals).

History Was Always Obvious

We always knew that any president in his first midterm historically loses about 28 seats in the House and four Senate seats. Voters realize the prior promises of a presidential candidate are not the same as the actual policies of a president. It is one thing for a loud candidate to point out that an incumbent president is responsible for all that goes bad. But it is quite another two years later to be that “bad” president who bears out that truism. 

Hubris also plays a role for cocky majorities—whether Democrats printing $4 trillion to spread around even as the economy faced a dearth of supply and near-record labor nonparticipation, or Republicans in 2017 ending the state and local tax exemption that enraged independent swing voters in purple states.

When the generic party ballot favors the out party in a president’s first term and his polls hover at or below 40 percent, then a normal 20-30 seat loss can become a 40-60 seat tsunami. 

Moreover, in 2022, the Republicans start dead even in the Senate. They are only eight down in the House. So, their natural pickup will be force multiplied by the fact they will surge way ahead rather than coming from way back to achieve a modest majority.

Joe Biden is not just an obnoxious, off-putting, snarly, and enfeebled president. He is also captive of the most radically destructive, left-wing agenda in the White House since 1933. On energy, inflation, the border, debt, crime, racial relations, and foreign policy, the Left’s project has proven an utter disaster that has hollowed out the middle class and embarrassed the nation in under two years. 

Leftists Will Be Leftists

Yet, there will not even be a futile, last-minute progressive attempt at correction.

Leftist ideologues never backtrack from their long-march agendas. Instead, as religious nihilists they would rather be purist in their destructive policies that alienate the voters—rather than win them over as apostates by moderating their views. 

However, do not even expect the Left to brag on their “successes.” For example:  

  • “We gave you a wonderful, welcoming open border and 3 million new Americans!” 
  • “We worked to get gas up to $5 a gallon in a way Barack Obama only dreamed!” 
  • “We finally have fewer felons in jail and prisons than ever before!” 
  • “We ended the war in Afghanistan and on our terms!” 
  • “We really spread the wealth with an 8 percent plus annual inflation rate!” 

Instead, they will fall silent on the very policies they enacted on their age-old principle that the opiated masses never know what is good for them.

Given these realities, expect the Republicans to end up with a near historical majority in the House and firm control of the Senate. 

What then should we expect after the midterms?

Again, we will be told that democracy is now in its final stages. Voter “suppression” was rampant, even as turnout hit near record levels. 

When those leftist talking points don’t convince voters, pundits will lament the stupidity of the American people, the malevolent MAGA surge, the racist nature of the country—any excuse other than the new Democratic Party is the domain of the hyper-rich, the bicoastal white professional elites, the subsidized poor, and affluent and privileged minorities. And it is increasingly despised by the white working class, by nearly half of the Hispanic population, by more and more independents, and by a growing minority of African American males. 

Why? Because on issues that count, the Left insults middle-class critics as it destroys them, pushing green, inflationary, open-borders, racially obsessed, and elitist agendas without voter support. 

In pathetic attempts to distract the electorate to support policies contrary to their interests, it grows hysterical in demanding late-term abortion, mainstreaming transgenderism in all its drag manifestations, and racialist indoctrination, insulting all who demur as bigots and racists.

Democrats Fear Republicans Might 

Do What They Would Do

But there are other reasons the Left will become livid and terrified when they lose the Congress. 

They fear not what Republican majorities may actually do, but what they would do if they were Republicans and suddenly gained the Congress after being smeared by the party in power.

That is, the Democrats fear that the Republicans might remember what the Left did while in legislative control and would see that as the new model for an incoming majority. 

Consequently, will a Republican Senate simply refuse to confirm Biden’s ultra-left appointments and judges, on the theory they will inevitably do the damage of a Merrick Garland or Alejandro Mayorkas or prove sanctimonious nincompoops like a Pete Buttigieg or Xavier Becerra?

Will the Republicans subpoena an array of left-wing activists and Democratic functionaries? Will jail sentences await any who retry the Eric Holder gambit of congressional defiance?

Will they adopt the January 6 committee protocols? 

That is, will Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) announce he is following the precedents of Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and therefore reluctantly must: 

  • Automatically deny “extremists,” such as members of “the squad,” from any congressional committee appointments; 
  • Sometimes veto any Democrat minority leader’s recommendations for House committee assignments; 
  • Run simultaneous congressional investigations of 1) politicized leadership at the wayward FBI and Department of Justice; 2) the labyrinth of conflicts of interest within our federal health bureaucracy, starting with National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Anthony Fauci; 3) the tax liabilities, false statements, and sources of income of the Biden family; 4) “insurrections,” starting with the role of social media, Antifa, and Black Lives Matter during the 120 days in 2020 of uninterrupted rioting, looting, and arson. 

Undertake a real probe of the entire January 6 riot and its aftermath, using newly inherited operating procedures to subpoena high-ranking bureaucrats, left-wing pundits, Democratic National Committee operatives and elected officials to discover: 1) why the breakdown in Capitol Hill police security; 2) why the suppression of information about the officer killing of Ashli Babbitt, and the death from natural causes of Officer Brian Sicknick; 3) why all videos, emails, and communications concerning the riot have not been released; 4) what was the role, if any, of FBI informants; 5) why were dozens of the accused held without bail, without charges filed, and subject to nonstop jail harassment?

Would Democrats—if they were Republicans in January 2023—vote to end the filibuster? 

Will Joe Biden, who all summer long blasted the filibuster as a racist relic, flip in 2023 and claim it is the bastion of the republic when the Democrats are in the senate minority?

Will Democrats object if the Republican House becomes impeachment-hungry, following the 2019-2021 precedent? 

Is the rule now established that an unpopular president should face first-term impeachment when he loses the House? 

Or is the new legacy automatic impeachment when a president clearly warps the national interest to further his own political viability—such as ruining relations with Saudi Arabia while draining the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in a last-ditch effort to avoid a midterm wipeout? 

Or is impeachment warranted when a president does not faithfully execute the laws, such as destroying the entire corpus of federal immigration law to enhance a future political constituency?

Does impeachment now extend to former presidents as private citizens? Should Joe Biden expect an impeachment writ while retired to his Delaware retreat?

Will impeachment include cabinet officials such as Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas for his open border, or Attorney General Merrick Garland for unleashing the FBI against political enemies? Will the petty become institutionalized, such as Kevin McCarthy scowling and tearing up one of Biden’s rambling and incoherent State of the Union addresses in front of cameras on national television?

Will the Congress call in Ivy-League mental health professionals to tele-diagnose Joe Biden as they clamor for 25th-Amendment investigations and demand a presidential Montreal Cognitive Assessment?

Will Biden be subpoenaed to testify before a House congressional committee investigating the Biden quid pro quos and his own former brag about getting a Ukrainian prosecutor fired who apparently got too rambunctious in investigating Burisma?

A Final Question

It should be a fascinating post-midterm fall and winter. 

But one question remains: will the Left now blame Biden as the perfect scapegoat for its midterm implosion—even after using him as the reputable empty vessel to carry through an otherwise disreputable agenda? 

If so, expect plenty of leaks, but arising from the Justice Department, the FBI, and the Democratic National Committee—and spread by the left-wing network news and mainstream media. 

The subtext will be “Good ol’ Joe from Scranton dutifully played the useful idiot, but now is to be properly scapegoated and sent packing, given what lost the election was not our extremist agenda but the doddering fool who was identified with it.” 

As hard as it will be to believe, after all the excuses are exhausted (voter suppression, racism, MAGA extremism, right-wing news, etc.) the Left will blame their erstwhile savior Biden for sullying their message. That way they can conclude they lost only because of the inept messenger and so can escalate their revolutionary but otherwise toxic agendas.