November 1-3, 2019

Nov 01 03:25 Schiff's impeachment power grab
Nov 01 04:09 Corruption within Human Services
Nov 01 23:42 Democrats already getting targeted

Nov 02 08:48 MN Human Services' problem
Nov 02 12:32 Democrats' impeachment dilemma
Nov 02 18:58 Elizabeth Warren's oops moment

Nov 03 00:02 Liz Cheney vs. Nancy Pelosi
Nov 03 18:40 Rep. Jim Himes joins Carl Bernstein

Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct

Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018

Schiff's impeachment power grab

Anyone that thinks that Adam Schiff was telling the truth when he said that he enters the 'new' impeachment phase with an open mind isn't paying attention. House Democrats didn't vote 232-196 just to start "Phase 2" of impeachment. The rules haven't really changed. Adam Schiff is still in charge of impeaching President Trump. In fact, I can make an argument that the rules that the House just passed have the potential of giving Schiff additional authority in that he now officially has veto authority on who Republicans can call as witnesses and whether he'll allow Republicans can ask certain questions.

Schiff isn't strong in the integrity ratings. What he's missing in terms of integrity, he makes up for in terms of dictatorial enthusiasm. He's got all the traits needed to be a dictator or tyrant.

In this video, Schiff says "We have been compelled by the circumstances to move forward. When a president abuses his or her office, when the president sacrifices the national interest, when the president refuses to defend the Constitution, and does so to advance a personal or political agenda, the Founders provided a remedy. I make no prejudgment as to whether that remedy will be warranted when we finish these hearings."
[Video no longer available]
With this morning's vote, the Democrats have turned the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence into the Adam Schiff Impeachment Committee. The House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence shouldn't be distracted from reviewing intelligence from the world's most dangerous places. It's the committee that should be the least partisan of all of the House's committees. Thursday, virtually every Democrat voted to turn the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence into the home of partisanship. That's proof to me that Democrats aren't serious about governing. Frankly, I haven't seen proof that they're interested in governing.

Adam Schiff tried his best to act somber after the vote. Let's just say that, though he's from Burbank, he'll never be an actor.

Posted Friday, November 1, 2019 3:25 AM

No comments.

Corruption within Human Services

Jim Nobles' special investigation report highlights how lax the oversight of the Department of Human Services has been. It also highlights the corruption within the Department:

Over a decade ago, and without authority, DHS officials decided that it would pay opioid treatment providers when their clients took medication at home .

A few years later, and again without authority, DHS officials decided it would pay tribal opioid treatment providers the Indian Health Service (IHS) encounter rate when their clients took medication at home. That's just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Here's more:

Who made the decisions, why, and when is not clear because DHS officials never documented their decisions. Even during the interviews we conducted, DHS officials could not recall who was responsible. In addition, none of the DHS officials we interviewed could offer a credible rationale for paying health care providers for their clients taking medications at home.

Frankly, all of the people involved with this corruption should be terminated immediately. They've proven that they aren't people of integrity, which is a requisite for the position. If they can't be trusted, they shouldn't be employed. Period.

On February 12, 2019 , a representative of the Red Lake Nation e-mailed a DHS opioid treatment expert to find out if Red Lake's opioid addiction treatment program could receive the IHS encounter rate for days when clients took treatment medications at home. Red Lake already operated an opioid addiction treatment program, but it had not given its clients treatment medication to take at home.

The DHS expert told Red Lake "yes"; Red Lake would be able to receive the encounter rate when clients took treatment medication at home. But another DHS official copied on the e-mail told Red Lake to wait for an official response.

The department did not, however, issue an official response to Red Lake until May 1, 2019 . In a letter to Red Lake, Leech Lake, and White Earth, the DHS commissioner reversed the department's long-standing practice of paying tribes for their clients to self-administer treatment drugs at home. The commissioner told the tribal chairmen that DHS can only pay the IHS encounter rate when there is a face-to-face interaction between a client and a health care professional.

There's no way it should take 11 weeks to respond to a question that simple.

Also on May 1, 2019, the department finally implemented a policy and a payment control that stopped the department from making payments to tribes when clients take medication at home. The department took another three months to inform the White Earth and Leech Lake tribes that they must return all of the payments their tribes received from DHS for clients self-administering medications at home.

Leaders of the White Earth Nation and the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe have expressed frustration with how DHS has communicated with them about the overpayment issue. They have placed responsibility for the overpayments on DHS and questioned their obligation to repay the state. The state could face legal challenges in its efforts to require White Earth and Leech Lake to return the overpayments.

Republicans have ideas to reform Human Services. Unfortunately, the DFL is interested in reforms only if terrible employees are protected. That's because the DFL is owned by the public employee unions. This corruption can't continue.

Posted Friday, November 1, 2019 4:09 AM

No comments.

Democrats already getting targeted

Less than 24 hours after they voted on rules for impeachment, Republicans are targeting vulnerable Democrats . This has the potential to end the Democrats' House majority nd Speaker Pelosi's time with the gavel.

This time, it's like she doesn't have the strength to fend off her AOC + 3 adversaries. There are too many far left leftists in the Democratic Party for her to handle. If she can't herd these cats, and if Collin Peterson is facing a difficult fight in northwest Minnesota, that's proof that the Democrat Party has changed dramatically.

"The Democrats are so blinded by their personal hatred of President Trump that they're willing to sacrifice all work on the issues voters care about, just to have one last shot at removing him from office to avenge their 2016 loss," said CLF President Dan Conston. "Now that they've cast their votes in favor of marching headfirst into impeachment, vulnerable Democrats have shown voters there is zero difference whatsoever between them and the radical leftists fighting tooth and nail to impeach this president."

The Democrats can't relate to blue collar Americans anymore. They've definitely changed their identity. This is one of the ways that vulnerable Democrats are getting hit:



Conor Lamb, D-Pa., who won his seat in a competitive 2018 special election, is one of the higher-profile Democrats targeted by the campaign. On Thursday, he said his vote for the impeachment rules resolution was simply to establish rules for the investigation and that he had not yet made up his mind if he would vote to impeach Trump.

"This resolution sets the rules for the upcoming hearings. I believe everyone benefits from clear rules, so I voted yes. I have not made any decision about impeachment, nor will I until all the evidence is in," he said in a statement. "I do believe that Russia is a major threat to the United States in Ukraine and around the world, and our oath requires us to put our country first, always."

I don't think Lamb is getting helped by this :

Brauer notes that in Lamb's first two victories, he positioned himself as a moderate in an area in which Trump garnered and maintains significant support. 'Lamb avoided running against Trump as much as possible, and he even claimed that he liked Trump. However, since taking office, Lamb's actions and voting record have been to the contrary, as he has been a highly reliable Democratic vote for the House majority ,' Brauer said.

Back in 2010, I said that Tarryl Clark had acquired the worst thing that a DFL moderate could acquire. That thing is called a voting record. Once they've got one, they're never a moderate again.

Posted Friday, November 1, 2019 11:42 PM

No comments.

MN Human Services' problem

Friday night, Legislative Auditor Jim Nobles was interviewed by TPT's David Gillette and Cathy Wurzer. During the interview, Nobles explained what his team had found. After that, he was asked if the department needed to be broken up. What Nobles said next should catch everyone's attention. He said that "there's this picture of me holding this organization chart of this one slice of DHS down to where the decisions seem to be made about this and yet there's layer after layer after layer after layer of supervision and management that let this go on year after year after year until it's been disclosed and we have a huge problem to unravel and resolve."

It appears as though the problem was caused by DHS. Further, it's clear that clearly-written rules weren't followed. Nobles explained that "what we're talking about is paying a very high rate of $455 for somebody to take a pill at home. It's called an encounter rate and it's called an encounter rate -- and this is the DHS policy -- because there's supposed to be an interaction between a health professional and a patient. That doesn't happen when you open your medicine cabinet, pull out the bottle of medicine and take the tablet and yet, they on paying $455 every time a client was doing that. That should have been obvious to many people in that chain of command that that was not a proper payment but it went on for years."

Though you will get upset, it's important for you to watch the entire interview:
[Video no longer available]
It shouldn't require a rocket scientist to figure out whether a patient is taking the medication at home or whether that patient saw a physician. More than anything else, this sounds like a racket. How can a team of supervisors and managers not spot something that noticeable? What's most disturbing is the fact that this isn't the first time that we've detected DHS mismanagement:

Over a decade ago, and without authority, DHS officials decided that it would pay opioid treatment providers when their clients took medication at home. A few years later, and again without authority, DHS officials decided it would pay tribal opioid treatment providers the Indian Health Service (IHS) encounter rate when their clients took medication at home.

The fact that people did the same thing a decade earlier indicates that the problem is more personnel-centric than anything. This sort of thing shouldn't happen. Everyone in that chain of command should be terminated immediately. The definition of supervise is "to oversee (a process, work, workers, etc.) during execution or performance; superintend; have the oversight and direction of." There's no sense in sugarcoating what happened. This group of supervisors and managers didn't do their jobs:

Who made the decisions, why and when is not clear because DHS officials never documented their decisions. Even during the interviews we conducted, DHS officials could not recall who was responsible. In addition, none of the DHS officials we interviewed could offer a credible rationale for paying health care providers for their clients taking medications at home.

This isn't a matter of breaking up DHS. It's a matter of insisting the people doing their jobs. If the employees, at whatever level, won't do their jobs, they need to get terminated.

Splitting up DHS might be needed. It might not. To me, that's a separate issue. If employees don't do their jobs, then it won't matter if DHS is split up. Firing employees who don't do their jobs is essential. If government employees won't do their jobs, then it'll require privatizing the employees.

Posted Saturday, November 2, 2019 8:48 AM

No comments.

Democrats' impeachment dilemma

The Democrats' impeachment dilemma isn't difficult to find. This article definitely doesn't bury the lede:

"Nancy Pelosi's impeachment resolution day turned into a MASSIVE fundraising day for ??@realDonaldTrump?," Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale tweeted Friday morning. According to Parscale, the campaign raised $3 million online in one day , totaling $19 million in funds raised over the course of the month. The $3 million addition came the same day the House passed the resolution, which the campaign called a "sham."

Expect that total to be dwarfed when the Judiciary Committee approves articles of impeachment. The way that I'm choosing to view this is that this is proof of how fired up Republicans are.

This information is miles ahead of the Democrats:

On Friday, a day after the House vote, Facebook ads from the Trump Make America Great Again Committee asked supporters to "add your name" to the people willing to "Stand with President Trump" in the face of the impeachment inquiry.
Supporters then are encouraged to leave their names, email addresses, ZIP codes and mobile numbers.
In a recent conference call with reporters, a Trump official called the reelection effort a "digital first campaign" that can swiftly seize on fast-moving news, such as developments in the impeachment inquiry, to target voters and test and tweak advertising messages on digital platforms.

"They are running a highly sophisticated operation," Reid Vineis, vice president for digital at Republican ad-buying firm Majority Strategies, said of the Trump operation. "The Trump campaign has been essentially building a database for the 2020 general election." Of particular value: The campaign's collection of mobile phone numbers.

"Politics is much more effective at a one-to-one level," Vineis said. "Text messages are read almost 100% of the time. The Trump campaign's accumulation of all this text-messaging data gives them a direct line to voters."

The Trump campaign has already identified tons of voters. That's led to tons of online contributions from new supporters. It's fair to say that the Trump campaign is building out their base. Yes, their 2016 supporters still support him. They aren't the only people supporting him, though.


While Democrats are still picking their nominee, President Trump is growing his base while dirtying up his potential opponents.

Posted Saturday, November 2, 2019 12:32 PM

Comment 1 by eric z at 02-Nov-19 02:19 PM
P. T. Barnum had an aphorism explaining the three million, "There's a sucker born every minute."

Comment 2 by Chad Q at 03-Nov-19 06:18 AM
Who are the suckers? The people who have believed in the progressives message for almost 70 years that "you can't do it on your own, you're a victim, and you need government control of your life"? Or is it the people who voted for Trump when he asked what do you have to lose, is doing exactly what he ran on, and the economy is doing well with all classes improving their status? I think it's the former. Those giving money to any progressive candidate have the cartoon sucker over their heads as they give up their hard earned money.

Elizabeth Warren's oops moment

There's no question whether Elizabeth Warren stirs passion with her followers. Sen. Warren's followers aren't her problem. She's her own worst enemy at times. A perfect example of this happened when Sen. Warren explained her Medicare-for-All plan . There's no doubt about whether she'd like to have this part back:


Saying that you're putting people in the insurance industry through a major transition (that's if you're lucky) in Des Moines, IA, isn't too bright. Sen. Warren's plan includes eliminating private health insurance. Think of that statement to be the equivalent of Hillary making this statement:
[Video no longer available]
Sen. Warren thinks about herself first, last and always. It isn't surprising that she expects health insurance experts to just accept her edict. From a policy standpoint, Sen. Warren's Medicare-for-All plan stinks. There's no way to pay for it. From a political campaign standpoint, Sen. Warren's campaign manager must've cringed when Sen. Warren told people living in the insurance capitol of the United States that they're destined for pink slips if she's elected president.

That's like telling Iowa farmers that you hate corn and pigs. That's like a Wisconsin politician telling tailgaters at Lambeau Field that he/she hates the Packers. It's political suicide.

Recently, Joe Biden has struggled with Iowa. This incident won't put Biden over the top in Iowa but it's a great opportunity for him to sound like the sane candidate in Iowa. Frankly, it's a gift to his campaign. The comparison isn't flattering to Sen. Warren. I'm certain that this isn't a coincidence :

Joe Biden raised $5.3 million through a surge of online contributions in October that rolled in after President Donald Trump launched unfounded attacks against the former vice president over his son's Ukrainian dealings.

The swell of cash came from 182,000 donations, with $28 being the average amount given, according to figures provided to The Associated Press by the campaign, which did not include money that Biden raised through big-dollar fundraisers. It comes after his internet fundraising operation stumbled over the summer, leading critics to suggest he lacked grassroots support.

This helps, too:

Actress Alyssa Milano will co-host a fundraiser next month for former Vice President Joe Biden's 2020 presidential campaign, Variety reported.

Sen. Warren just committed an unforced error. What's still TBD is whether Biden can take advantage of Warren's mistake.

Posted Saturday, November 2, 2019 6:58 PM

Comment 1 by Chad Q at 03-Nov-19 06:09 AM
I've got to give Warren and Bernie credit that they are at least honest that there will be massive tax increase to pay for their government takeover of life. Bernie is the more honest of the two when he says the middle class will be taxed whereas Warren thinks the rich are going to pay for it. No matter which one of the clowns on the progressive side gets the nomination, America is in huge trouble if they get elected.

Liz Cheney vs. Nancy Pelosi

On Friday, Liz Cheney dropped a put-up-or-shut-up bombshell right into Speaker Pelosi's lap that puts Pelosi in an impossible situation. Ms. Cheney made the following demands:

Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyo., on Friday called on House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to release the full transcripts of all depositions in the Trump impeachment inquiry, and demanded the end to what she called 'selective leaking' of documents to the media.

'Despite the vote in the House on October 31, House Democrats continue to conduct the partisan effort to impeach the President in secret,' Cheney wrote in a letter to Pelosi.

'Your duty to the Constitution and the American people, as well as fundamental fairness, requires that you immediately release the full transcripts of all depositions taken since you pronounced the beginning of an impeachment inquiry on September 24, 2019,' the letter says.

During Thursday's impeachment debate, Pelosi indicated that she wants more transparency and accountability:
[Video no longer available]
Ms. Pelosi needs to prove that "transparency and accountability" are more than just pleasing-sounding words. If she wants to give vulnerable freshmen Democrats a shot at re-election, she needs to be sincere. Thus far, she's been the opposite of sincere. That won't convince people that you're fair-minded. It'll convince people that you're playing a game.

Playing a game during something serious like impeachment is the best way to tell people that Democrats aren't serious about making Americans' lives better. That's the fastest ticket to the minority. This gamesmanship won't help Democrats retain their majority, either:

"I get it, my friends across the aisle want to talk about process, process, process," Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., said. 'But it's interesting that not one of them wants to talk about the president's conduct -- and that speaks volumes."

Let's be clear about this. With the transcripts hidden in Schiff's SCIF and the witnesses' testimony, aka the witnesses answers to questions, off-limits to the public, how much substance is available to talk about? Further, with Schiff's interrupting of witnesses and acting like Lt. Col. Vindman's defense attorney, it's impossible to get beyond process.

Mack McLarty nailed it with this :

McLarty said he believes that Trump is trying to do a version of what "President Clinton was able to do pretty successfully with the benefit of history," which is to say he is still "engaged in [fighting] and working for the American people."

"President Clinton was able to compartmentalize that if you will, and he chose to have separate tracks. To date, President Trump has not chosen to have separate tracks," said McLarty. "But, I think it's important that the American people feel that their president is still engaged in working with them and has his eye on the ball of the myriad of issues, challenges and problems."

"I think as Americans we're all concerned about our government, about our country and about the people in our country and how we can make our country better. So, in that regard, no one welcomes this kind of controversy, further division within the country, and an impeachment process," he said.

Each time Schiff, the Democrats' Impeachment Committee Chairman, acts like the Democrats' key witnesses, it's proof that Democrats aren't fair. Then there's this :

' Chairman Schiff has likewise refused to allow any inquiry by Republicans into these material facts which may bear on the credibility and motivation of the whistleblower and perhaps Chairman Schiff ,' Ratcliffe said. 'Republicans have been and continue to be deprived of the ability to investigate these material facts which can only be ascertained from the sworn testimony of Chairman Schiff, his staff and the whistleblower.'

If Schiff and Pelosi don't release the transcripts of the witnesses' testimony, the American people will know that Democrats aren't serious about anything other than shoving impeachment down the American peoples' throats.

Posted Sunday, November 3, 2019 12:02 AM

Comment 1 by Chad Q at 03-Nov-19 06:03 AM
McGovern says the GOP doesn't want to talk about the Presidents conduct, yet to date not one of their cherrypicked "witnesses" has been able to provide any damning evidence he did anything wrong. It's a he said, she said, hearsay farce with pencil neck Schiff as the lead clown.

If the progressives had squat, they'd be leaking it all to the media but they have less than squat so the charade continues.

Comment 2 by eric z at 03-Nov-19 06:01 PM
Cheney? Your best and brightest? Wyoming has few people and they elect fascists. It is where the Cheney family prospered.

Response 2.1 by Gary Gross at 04-Nov-19 02:06 AM
Eric, don't insult my intelligence like that again. Libertarians can't be fascists. They're opposites. Antifa are fascists.

Rep. Jim Himes joins Carl Bernstein

Democrat Rep. Jim Himes was 8-years-old when Richard Nixon resigned as President. Now he's insisting that "Trump's actions worse than what was seen during the Nixon administration." That means he's joined Carl Bernstein in the 'Worse than Watergate' Club.

When Bernstein recites the line that X, Y or Z is "worse than Watergate", he knows that's good for a contract extension with CNN. When Himes says it, he sounds like a wet-behind-the-ears punk. Then there's Himes' flimsy explanation for his belief:

"These are abuses of power by any stretch of the imagination that requires a response,' Himes said, after claiming that "we are looking at abuse of power and a level of corruption here that makes the Nixon impeachment look like child's play." He supported that statement by claiming that Nixon himself did not participate in the Watergate break-in of the Democratic National Committee headquarters, and that "nobody died in Ukraine because Nixon held up aid to a very vulnerable nation."

Anyone that lived through that nightmare knows that breaking into the Watergate Hotel wasn't the thing that sparked the outrage of a nation. Between the antiwar protests and President Nixon telling the FBI that they didn't need a warrant to surveil the protesters, that's what sparked Watergate. That's what constitutes a true abuse of office. That's what constitutes a true constitutional crisis.

The Democrats' insistence that President Trump needed help with dispatching Biden is beyond laughable. Have they seen his campaign of gaffes? Have they seen his flat-footed debate performances? Do Democrats think that President Trump is the least bit worried about 'Sleepy' Joe Biden? That's completely different than Nixon's attitude in 1972.

Nixon was paranoid about whether he'd defeat McGovern. That's why he ordered the break-in of the DNC Headquarters. President Trump doesn't have that worry about Biden. What worried President Trump is the history of corruption in Ukraine. Unlike other presidents, Trump insisted on holding up aid until he was certain that the aid was going to the people who would use it to combat Russians.

By the time President Trump brought up the Bidens, the call was almost over. If he was that worried about Joe Biden, wouldn't he have mentioned it earlier, rather than as an afterthought?


This is very good news if it happens:

Himes said that he predicts public, televised hearings will begin "some time in the next two or three weeks," but said they still need to interview more witnesses behind closed doors before that happens. Himes did say that transcripts of the closed hearings will be released.

The transcripts of the depositions should be interesting. We'll get to see who's been spinning wildly and who's been telling the truth. It's difficult to picture Adam Schiff being truthful. It's easy picturing John Ratcliffe being transparent, though.

I can't wait for this manufactured fiasco to be over. If I don't hear Jim Himes or Carl Bernstein insist that the next scandal is "worse than Watergate", that's just fine with me.

Posted Sunday, November 3, 2019 6:40 PM

Comment 1 by John Palmer at 04-Nov-19 12:16 AM
Which President really withheld lethal military aid from Ukraine?

A. George Bush B. Barack Obama C. Donald Trump D. All of them

If you answered B you would be correct. I guess Rep. Himes must believe the Obama has blood on his hands. Here is another question" Which Vice President used a Quid pro Quo?

Answer Joseph Biden. I wonder why Obama and Biden were not impeached?

I think you know the reason.

Popular posts from this blog

January 19-20, 2012

Image
Jan 19 02:57 Minnesota Majority report an indictment against Minnesota's election integrity Jan 19 03:41 Ron Paul's Logic Jan 19 08:08 Newt thrives despite Mitt's hatchet job efforts Jan 19 09:19 Potential Game-Changer: Perry dropping out this am Jan 20 05:12 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Jan 20 00:56 ABC, CNN, crawl into bed with National Enquirer Jan 20 04:00 Child Care small businesses file federal lawsuit Jan 20 04:41 Mitt's biggest policy blunder Jan 20 18:58 Gingrich, Reagan re-united Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Newt takes Sen. Santorum to proverbial woodshed Rick Santorum was really feeling it Thursday night. Then he said something that's certain to cause him pain this morning. Here's what he said that got him in trouble: SANTORUM: But you also have to admit that this freshman congressman who wasn't supposed to win a race came and did something you never did, which is blew the li...
Read more

March 21-24, 2016

Image
Mar 21 01:28 SCSU's budget cuts? Mar 21 02:29 When will the Range change? Mar 21 08:54 DFL's Marty in charge of environment Mar 21 11:45 OLA report, DFL & Meyer Associates Mar 23 12:48 Liberals' definition of moderate Mar 23 14:37 DFL activists: Government is racist Mar 24 08:59 IRRRB: Revamping vs. scrapping Prior Months: Jan Feb Prior Years: 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 SCSU's budget cuts? Cuts in Athletics at SCSU - Will it Really Save Money? by Silence Dogood With a $6,000,000 "structural deficit" and the need to "rebuild reserves by at least $3 million," SCSU has a $9,000,000 hole in its' FY17 budget. It doesn't take a Noble Prize in economics to figure out that reductions in expenditures (i.e., cuts) are going to be made at SCSU. On the Wednesday before Spring Break, SCSU President Dr. Earl H. Potter sent an email to the campus community announcing cuts to the athlet...
Read more

October 31, 2007

Oct 31 01:01 Media Matter's Alter Ego? Oct 31 03:32 Iraqi Civilian Casualties Dropping Oct 31 10:52 Hillary's Panderfest Blows Up in Her Face Oct 31 13:15 Brod, Emmer Call For Investigation of Mark Ritchie Oct 31 19:43 Ritchie's 'Episode' a Tempest in a Teapot? Prior Months: Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Prior Years: 2006 Media Matter's Alter Ego? One Media Matters-like organization is already too many. It appears as though there's another liberal apologist blog out there. Their name is News Hounds . The post that caught my attention dealt with last weekend's interview of Justin and Darryl Sharraltt on Hannity's America. To say that their post didn't attempt to refute Justin's story is understatement. In fact, they jump right into criticizing Mr. Hannity: Last night's (October 27th) Hannity's America was a strange magazine format which combined stories about mediums and haunted houses...
Read more