I have a weekend project for you guys.  One of our long-time customers – who needs to remain anonymous and you’ll see why – has a situation.

She lives in another state – let’s say Nevada except it’s not Nevada.  We’re gonna call her Mary.  Mary’s elementary age daughter attends public school there.  I’ll let her talk a minute …

The school district I’m in has a release time bible education program, which I know is constitutional (depending on implementation), but it goes well beyond what I think should be acceptable in terms of operation.

They don’t have classes on school grounds, but own buildings next to each elementary school. The school lets them have a table at the school orientation day (!), the employees of the bible school come in to the building to get students who come to their classes, the bible school gives candy rewards to students who recruit classmates to come, and in the past (although I don’t know if this is still happening), they’ve had access to complete class lists.

I don’t think that’s constitutional, but that’s not what is bothering Mary.

What is not okay to Mary is that “the district has a (what appears to be unwritten) policy that teachers can’t introduce new material while some of the students are away at bible.”  About half the class goes to bible.

That sucks.

Mary is a very well educated and gifted musician.  She volunteered to come in during that time and do something fun and educational with the kids who don’t go to bible so they aren’t just sitting there with a coloring book.

Mary again —-

Well, last week I was working with them on making soda straw horns, and one of the kids who went to Bible came back and saw that and was inconsolable. And this is somehow my freaking fault. (I wasn’t blamed for it, but a concern was raised about children feeling like they’re ‘missing out’ while they’re at Bible).

I feel like it can’t possibly be legal (which is probably why there’s no published policy), but I don’t know how best to express that.

And to be clear, I made a case for what *I’m* doing that the principal decided she could defend. Because my kiddo is in 3rd grade, I’m picking 1st and 2nd grade standards to hit with my projects. So if it’s not review, it really should be.

But I guess what I want to convey to the school district is that:
* my kid has a right to education during that time, and I shouldn’t have to come in and do it
* it shouldn’t just be in her class. The district needs to educate all the kids that don’t go.

Mary needs arguments to take to the principal – who appears to be on Mary’s side – and Mary thinks we know some good ideas to help her and then the principal can use them, too.

Jump in with anything you got.

If Trump refuses to concede the election, as he has threatened to do, can he be President long enough for us to impeach him?

(KUTV) Researchers at the University of Utah say there’s a strong case to impeach Donald Trump, should he be elected as president.

Law professor Christopher Peterson said he found ample evidence to charge the Republican candidate with fraud and racketeering, both of which are considered felonies within state and federal law.

And the government has more lawyers the Trump does.  Downside:  terminal whining.

Legal Dawgs can read it here.

I think if we were to make a list of the worst political teevee commercials, this would certainly make the list.

John Kennedy is running for Senate in Louisiana.  His commercial is getting lots of attention but not the good kind.

At about 18 seconds of the ad, photos of Kennedy and his wife — from their wedding and with their son — are shown on-screen, and Kennedy says, “I believe that love is the answer…”

As the camera goes back to Kennedy, he concludes: “…but you ought to own a handgun just in case.”

Click here to see it.

Thanks to everyone for the heads up.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

And you can see it for yourself right here.

Frankly, I am shocked that Sarah has $20,000 left in her PAC, what with those legal and hospital bills.

Come to find out, Donald Trump’s bankruptcy lawyers met with him in pairs because … he lies so much.

BuzzFeed did a doc dump from Trump’s public records.  The search was on and someone found the priceless sworn testimony of the two lawyers.

In one document, bankruptcy attorney George Miller reveals that when meeting with Trump, “it’s always been our practice to make sure that two people are present, and we don’t have a problem with people lying.”

Miller calls Trump “an expert at interpreting things. Let’s put it that way.”

“We tried to [meet in pairs] with Donald always if we could because Donald says certain things and then has a lack of memory,” he says in the deposition.

Not that we didn’t already know that.  That’s why we always have to meet with him in groups of two or three million.

Thanks to Kyle for the heads up.