From The Daily Show with Trevor Noah…

Fred Kaplan watched the hearings and, like me, couldn't help but compare them to the Watergate proceedings.

One key difference for me is that I think a lot of people watched the Watergate hearings because they wanted the answer to the question, "Is our President a crook?" I tend to think most people who are capable of having a firm opinion about Donald Trump on that question have already answered it and a pretty large percentage of them are prepared to live forever with that answer. In some cases, it's "Yeah, he's a crook and I'm fine with that."

One of my closest friends before Watergate got increasingly less close as the scandal traipsed onward. He had sided with Nixon and was never going to say, "I was wrong about the man." I was reminded of that intransigence when I heard Trump brag about how he could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any supporters.

But my friend was capable of deciding eventually that Nixon was damaged goods; that he could no longer govern effectively and would just bring down his party and lead to increasing Democratic rule so he had to go. This friend told me that in the next presidential election, he did not vote for Gerald Ford. He wrote in "Richard Nixon" as a kind of self-satisfying protest vote. He's probably still writing him in.

No, I didn't watch the hearings live last evening but I'm watching replays and online clips and I've probably seen…well, as much as I could take. Maybe two-thirds of it. I'll probably eventually see it all but in small doses. It's pretty grim stuff and I'm sure at times, my face looked like I was seated in the audience for the opening number of Springtime for Hitler. That show turned out to be funny but this can never be.

We wish the folks who run the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood would reopen that fine movie theater and we further wish they would resume their occasional screenings there of my favorite movie, It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World. That theater was literally built to show that film and seeing it there is the best way to see it.

There is no news about the Dome reopening…just a few rumors that aren't worth raising one's hopes for. But it is a fact that the Aero Theater in Santa Monica is showing my fave film in 70mm on Saturday, July 30 at 7:30 PM. Details and tickets are here. I have not been in a theater of any sort since The Pandemic descended upon us. This may be when I break my fast.

This will interest a few folks I know who read this site…folks who are fascinated with the original Broadway production of the show Company. As the tale is told, it opened with Dean Jones in the role of Bobby. Everyone was very happy with the role except Mr. Jones who, owing to some personal matters in his life, was uncomfortable with the theme of the show or his role…or something.

His unhappiness had been evident to others in the company of Company during rehearsals and tryouts. Not long before they opened, Hal Prince (who directed, among his other duties) went to Jones and promised to replace him soon after they opened. That lifted a personal burden off the star who managed to get through opening night, which was on April 26, 1970. One month later — on May 29 — Larry Kert officially took over the role. The press was told that Jones left because of Hepatitis but in later years, he was quite candid about the real reasons.

The video below in the episode of What's My Line? for December 30, 1970 and the Mystery Guest is Larry Kert. Kinda interesting to hear him tell the "official" version of how he replaced Dean Jones in the show. It may or may not at odds with what is in the above paragraph. I've configured the video clip so that it should start playing at the Mystery Guest segment. If it starts at the beginning of the episode and you don't want to watch the whole show, zip ahead to 20:49…

A little while ago, Breitbart News tweeted…

Matthew McConaughey, who delivered a passionate plea for new gun control legislation in an address at the White House briefing room on Tuesday, has used 19 guns in 11 movies over 25 years, according to the Internet Movie Firearms Database.

Shortly after that, Lynda Carter — yes, the lady who played Wonder Woman — tweeted…

Yes, and I flew an invisible plane on screen but still support abiding by the laws of air traffic (and physics). Do people really not understand reality vs. fiction?

A couple of different folks, starting with Scott Marinoff, have suggested I alert you that the full video record of the Watergate Hearings can be enjoyed (that may not be the right word) at this link. I watched them at the time with way too much fascination.

I couldn't help but thinking as I watched that if I were a Republican serving on that committee, I would have had three conflicting thoughts throughout…

• Nixon and his cronies definitely did some very unethical and illegal things, many of which were also pretty damned foolish…
• If a Democratic administration had done these things, I would be eager to use this opportunity to oust many of them from office and send some of them to prison but…
• A lot of voters in my district want Nixon to remain in office, even if he is a crook. Some love him. Some don't but they don't want the Democrats to have a "win." So I have to defend him at all costs or I will have a primary challenger who will seriously threaten my chances of getting re-elected or ever having a role in my party. I could also lose vital financial support from a lot of wealthy donors who love the guy.

Eventually, the steady drip-drip-drip of revelations of wrongdoing budged Nixon's poll numbers with his supporters…and I like to think that if I were one of those G.O.P. Congressfolks who finally switched and voted against Nixon, it would have been because he was guilty and not just because his popularity was dropping and I felt it was safe to do the right thing.

I have no idea if that will happen this year. Maybe it's no longer possible. All I know is I'm not going to pay as much attention to these hearings as I did to the Watergate ones. I didn't have better things to do with my life in 1973 but I'd like to think I do now.

This is for my friend Shelly Goldstein. Shelly, here is what I'm sure you will decide is your all-time favorite video clip ever. And as you may remember, I have an entire suit made out of the same material as the boy singers' pants. This is, as you might imagine, from The Red Skelton Show…

Brian Dreger sends me a lot of interesting questions. Here's one…

I've been meaning to ask this for quite some time, and I apologize if it is rude or unprofessional, or something "that is just not done!"

When you're writing things that prevent you from blogging because of a looming deadline, is there some reason why you never — after the fact — mention what it is you've been working on? Is it contractually not allowed? Or for writers is it considered a "jinx move" that might put "the whammy" on the project? Just curious…

I think I have mentioned what I was working on occasionally but I don't do it often. There are a few reasons and the first one that comes to mind is that I think the Internet has too much self-promotion on it with people trying to sell you their current projects. If I have genuine news about something coming out and people are asking me about it, I'll address it here. But really, I like blogging better when I don't feel it's heavily-linked to my current income. I like this to be a place where I get away from that.

Also, writing is for me a very solitary experience and I like to keep it that way. I rarely discuss the content of what I'm writing with friends because I really don't want their input. If I do, I ask for it…but I rarely ask for it.

And I guess the main thing is that a lot of things I write — including some for which I am paid — never come out. I wrote a spec TV pilot which has been optioned twice now and may get a third "buy"…but I don't want to spend the rest of my life answering questions about what's up with it and what happened with it. When it's not an active project for me, I put it out of my mind and I don't want others putting it back in there.

And of course, I have a story. When do I not have a story?

Back in the seventies, a syndicated comic strip artist asked me to write gags for a new newspaper strip he wanted to do. This was in addition to the one he already had running in newspapers across the land. I wrote a batch and he decided I should not only be the sole writer of this new strip he'd conceived but also have my name on it. Well, that was nice. I wrote and he and his assistant drew about eight weeks of it and he sent those weeks to his syndicate, where it got a highly favorable response.

Note that I did not say they agreed to syndicate it. I just said that it got a highly favorable response. They loved the premise and they loved the name…but apparently not enough to immediately draw up a contract.

I was relatively new at the writing game and I made what turned out to be a mistake. I told my father about it and showed him the eight weeks. Perhaps in your life you have had a moment where a parent or someone else close to you way overreacted positively to something you did. When I was about eight, I could do a couple of celebrity impressions that probably weren't even good for a kid that age but my Aunt Dot thought I was ready for The Ed Sullivan Show and inevitable stardom.

Anyway, my father thought the eight weeks of this strip were genius, brilliant, fabulous…insert the synonym of your choice. Any day now, he was sure, newspapers would be axing Charlie Brown and that mutt of his to make room for our new strip, and my father could see my name (our name) every time he opened the L.A. Times.

For at least six months, he asked me every day if I had any news on the strip's certain sale and success. The truth was that the syndicate waffled and balked and at one point, a guy there who'd said "This is perfect just the way it is" sent us a passel of notes, asking us to redo the eight weeks and take out this character and change that character and add a new kind of character.

They wanted to change the whole premise (i.e., the premise they'd loved) and finally, they said the name of the strip — the one they'd loved — "has to go." And there was still no indication that they were serious about actually trying to sell it to client newspapers.

By that time, the cartoonist had decided he really didn't need the hassles of a second strip; not even if his assistant and I did 90% of the work on it. I had plenty of other things to do then so we jointly decided to just drop the project…and no, I will not run any samples here nor I will I divulge the name of the cartoonist. (But it was not Jim Davis. This was more than a decade before I met Jim.)

In the writing game, you have to do that all the time. You work on a lot of different projects. Some go forward, some don't…and sometimes, the ones that don't will disappear for reasons that have nothing to do with the merits of the material. An amazing number of projects vanish because there's some shakeup in a company's hierarchy and the new folks in charge reflexively don't want to go where their predecessors were heading.

You have to just file that one away and work on one of the others you have on your plate. I generally don't find that difficult to do…

…but with that proposed newspaper strip, it was tough. My father kept asking me about it and asking me about it and asking me about it…and I don't mean for weeks. I mean for years. No matter what else I accomplished, no matter how busy I got, he kept telling me, "You've gotta take that strip and send it around to newspapers. I'm sure they'd all start bidding for it!"

My father was a very nice man without a speck of malice, especially towards me. He was giving me what he thought was good advice…and he had his heart set on opening the paper every morning and being reassured that his kid had a job. But he just wouldn't listen to me explaining I was no longer interested in it…or that I didn't own the strip and the guy who did didn't want to pursue it any longer.

I never — well, rarely — made that mistake again. When I teamed up with Dennis Palumbo and we began selling scripts and ideas to television, our first few sales did not get made. We got paid but our scripts were not produced. I didn't tell my parents I was writing for TV until I could also tell them that a show I worked on, which would have my name in the credits, was on TV the following Wednesday. And by a fluke of timing, Dennis and I would get getting our second screen credit on a show that aired the day after. My father was real happy that week.

What I was writing the last few days here which distracted me from blogging was an assignment that may never go the distance. We all work on things like that. I have a friend who has made a very good living writing screenplays for which he is paid handsomely but which, for one reason or another, never get in front of a camera. I think he's done at least twelve of them. He doesn't tell people about them because he doesn't want people to keep asking him about each of them…or thinking he's a failure because for reasons that had nothing to do with the quality of what he wrote, they didn't get made. I think that's a very wise way to operate.

From the musical Sunset Boulevard, Glenn Close performs "With One Look." I saw this show twice — once in L.A. and then a few months later in New York. I wasn't fond of the show itself — nor am I of the movie on which it was based — but her performance gave you chills…of the good kind…

Hello. Still working hard on a script but I should be back to normal posting in the next day or three.

The House's Jan. 6 hearings commence Thursday night and I'm sure glad we now have an Internet. When Watergate occurred back in the Pleistocene Era, we pretty much had to be parked in front of our TV sets as they were transpiring if we wanted to watch…and of course, you could watch for a very long time when nothing was happening, or at least nothing of great interest. For these hearings, we can watch when we want to — on our computers if not on our TV sets. Or we can not watch and just let someone cut out all the procedural fluff and isolate the highlights. That's how I'll most likely watch whatever I watch.

42 days until Comic-Con commences.

Tomorrow! Tuesday! At a computer screen or iPad near you, master cartoonist Sergio Aragonés will be doing what he does best…drawing! More specifically, he'll be online drawing commissions to benefit the the National Cartoonists Society's charitable causes like the Milt Gross Fund, the Jay Kennedy Memorial Scholarship and the Cartooning for Kids program.

The ink begins flying at 4 PM West Coast Time and 7 PM East Coast Time. Here's the link to click in and watch him doing real cartooning in real time, all presented through the good offices of 4C Comics. Watch! Buy! But be there!

My longtime amigo Joe Brancatelli sent me this message. It's in two parts so I'll respond to it in two parts…

I was one of the "lucky" few to see the '96 Inherit the Wind revival with both Scott and Durning performing. It was not great. Lots of scenery-chewing by the actors and very little chemistry. And, honestly, I thought Scott was horribly miscast.

Just as with that Klugman-Randall production of The Odd Couple I mentioned not liking, I've received a number of e-mails from folks who saw it — presumably not on the night I did — and loved it. That's kind of how Show Business works. I also heard from others who saw George C. Scott and Charles Durning in Inherit the Wind and thought I missed out on something wonderful. You're the first person to tell me it wasn't wonderful…and again, that's how Show Business works.

I'm remembering, Joe, that a long, long time ago, you saw Lena Horne doing a one-woman show on Broadway. I just looked it up and it was there May 12, 1981 through June 30, 1982 with one hiatus in the middle. You thought it was one of the best things you'd ever seen and later, when you were in Los Angeles and she was doing it here, we went to see it. You wanted to see it again and you wanted me to see it and I wanted to see it…

…and we both liked it but afterwards, you said to me, "It was much better in New York." We then had a long discussion wondering if it you liked it more on Broadway because of the geography or subtle differences in the production or if Ms. Horne simply was better then and there than she was here and now. I believe we arrived at the conclusion that you could never say why for sure because — say it with me, everyone — "That's how Show Business works!"

George C. Scott sounds to me like ideal casting to play Henry Drummond but maybe I'm thinking of a younger, more energetic Scott than could possibly have been on that stage in 1996. I'm also thinking that it would have been fascinating to see Scott, even grossly miscast.

On to the second part of Joe's e-mail…

I read your Sid Caesar thing and, of course, could only shake my head. But there is one redeeming moment for him that you might have charitably mentioned. Revered as it is today and the ratings juggernaut that it became notwithstanding, Cheers in its first year wasn't great and was almost cancelled. I'm sure nothing Caesar wanted to add to the pilot was right, but his judgment about the quality of the show as he saw it in the early stage pilot might not have been totally wrong.

Quite right. But I did mention that maybe the script he read wasn't even as good as what finally aired. And I should have also noted that based on what I've heard from others since that piece first ran here, Sid probably wouldn't have gotten the part even if he'd loved the pilot script. I'm told that the Charles Brothers only auditioned him because someone upstairs at Paramount insisted, probably because the movie Grease had been such a moneymaker for the studio and Sid had played a "Coach" in that film. That's how executives think sometimes; like Sid Caesar playing a guy called that was guaranteed moola-in-the-bank.

The point remains that Caesar didn't demonstrate a willingness to work with younger people, nor was there the necessary recognition that times and tastes change. That's how Show Business works, too…and the longer you're in it, the more you'll encounter folks with hiring power who are younger than you. When I worked with Mr. Caesar, everything had to be done his way and his way was the way it was done in 1955 when he was the star of the show and calling the shots. It's a shame because he was so, so talented and his later years were so, so devoid of the kind of good work and recognition that others in his age group somehow managed. Thanks for the note, Joe.

If you didn't like the way Rod Stewart sang "Sweet Caroline" at that Platinum Jubilee concert, you're not alone. A lot of people didn't like it including — according to this — Rod Stewart…

Rod Stewart candidly revealed the BBC had made him sing football anthem "Sweet Caroline" seconds before he performed the tune at the Platinum Jubilee concert. The iconic singer, 77, left fans unimpressed on Saturday with his raspy rendition of the Neil Diamond track — with BBC viewers claiming he had "butchered" the famous karaoke song.

Finishing up a jaunty rendition of "Baby Jane," a relaxed Rod then spoke to the crowd: "This is a fun one for me to sing, the BBC made me sing it. Join in, make it comfortable for me."

When I worked on variety shows, I'd sometimes find myself in a meeting where a producer or a network guy would say of a guest star we'd signed, "What shall we have him [or her] sing?" And names of songs might be tossed around before someone (often, me) said, "Why don't we let him [or her] sing whatever he [or she] wants?" Sometimes, that settled the issue. Sometimes, not…because people who are in charge sometimes like to be in charge.

Here's our current favorite song here at newsfromme.com…and don't bother telling me Rod Stewart doesn't sing it as well as Neil Diamond. Nobody sings it as well as Neil Diamond. But here's Rod singing it at the Platinum Party at the Palace, a concert held the other night outside Buckingham Palace in celebration of Queen Elizabeth II being Queen as long as the mineral platinum. Thanks to buddy Tom Galloway for alerting me to this. Some members of the royal family don't seem to be too enthused about it all…