Given a document, generate a short title of the document. The title should convey the main idea/event/topic about which the document is being written. Note that URLs in the text have been replaced with [Link].

Example Input: Hillary Clinton . (Brendan Smialowski/AFP via Getty Images)
Thereâs not much to do when youâre home for the holidays  so this season some have decided to fill up their free time by melting down over  a video that snipes at Hillary Clinton .
âTake up a hobby in the new year â a young writer holding a glass of champagne says to  Clinton  in the short  which Vanity Fair magazineâs âHiveâ vertical produced as part of a series proposing âresolutionsâ to various political figures. âVolunteer work  knitting  improv comedy â literally anything that will keep you from running again.â
Well  no.  The video  had sexist overtones  and the lameness of the jokes made them all the more offensive.  It âs harder to plead comedic license when your comedy isnât funny. But  Clinton  occupies an odd place in the political sphere:  She  was so close to the Oval Office for so long leading up to 2016 that  her  heir apparentness discouraged potential challengers. A career candidate from a Democratic dynasty held little appeal for anyone dissatisfied with the party status quo then  and will hold even less in 2020. Itâs not surprising that some cringe to think  Clinton âs shadow could still loom over races to come.
So then why resurrect  her ?
Although ride-or-die  Clinton  supporters werenât they only ones who took umbrage at the knitting comment  it was that cohort who turned particularly hysterical. These all-in  Clinton  fans seem determined to keep their candidate relevant: Even if they arenât calling on  her  to run again  they want  her  at the center of the political conversation. Every faux pas of President Trumpâs becomes an opportunity for Clinton-would-have-been-bettering. No kidding  she  would  yet thatâs neither here nor there when it comes to countering the damage Trump does every day  or to cultivating a roster of candidates who will win the seats to turn things around.
[Vanity Fair staffers provide snotty  condescending life tips for  Hillary Clinton ]
But more perplexing than the multitude of Clinton crusaders who are still crusading are the  Clinton  critics who continue to place the defeated candidate center-stage in their narratives even as they shriek that they want  her  out. This  besides its blatant unfunniness  may be the greatest failing of Vanity Fairâs ill-advised advice video. The staffers have devoted one minute and three seconds to telling  Clinton  to go away  and all theyâve succeeding in doing is bringing  her  right back.
This is âWhat Happened?â week on repeat. Journalists lambasted  Clinton  for re-litigating the 2016 primary in writing  and then they did the exact same thing. Over and over. They rolled their eyes at  her  play for attention  cash  catharsis or whatever else it was â and then they helped  her  find all of the above.
And itâs not only professional pundits who canât seem to give  Clinton  up. For every amateur commentator or plain old civilian re-upping a  Clinton  campaign talking point on Twitter  thereâs someone ready to fire back with an explanation of why  Clinton  is the worst politician of all time. This goes on  every day  more than a year after the election and almost a year after the man who beat  Clinton  walked into the White House.
Hours before the Vanity Fair outrage  Trump sent a Boxing Day Twitter missive from Mar-a-Lago in his usual style: âThey used this Crooked Hillary pile of garbage as the basis for going after the Trump Campaign!â he concluded  harping on his beef with  Clinton  yet again. Which prompted all his critics  left  very left and right alike  to tell him to get over it. Perhaps they should  too.
Example Output: The Vanity Fair Hillary Clinton video isn't worth the fuss

Example Input: Cook County Sheriff Tom Dart  is going to court to unmask the person who alleged in emails to politicians  Chicago police investigators and journalists that  Dart  attacked  his  wife at their South Side home.
 Dart  filed the legal papers Wednesday in his personal capacity  not as sheriff  and hired lawyer John F. Winters Jr.  who specializes in defamation cases. Such court filings are often a prelude to a defamation lawsuit filed against the person behind anonymous emails or web postings.
“ Tom  has been subjected to sustained attacks on  his  integrity  and even threats to  his  life  during  his  tenure as sheriff ” said Dennis Culloton  who is acting as  Dart ’s personal spokesman  in a statement. “Over the past several months  these attacks have escalated to include false and vicious rumors involving his wife and family  perpetuated by cowards who hide behind fake email addresses and anonymous blogs. Through this filing we hope to hold those people accountable.”
The first of two October emails cited in the filing allege  Dart  “committed a Domestic Battery” on his wife “causing visible injuries to her face” that were observed by responding Chicago and Cook County sheriff’s police on either Oct. 11 or 12. They allege a police report was taken but that the attacker was listed as “unknown” and that a 911 call was placed to  Dart ’s home.
“This incident is being attempted to be swept under the rug ” the email’s author  who describes himself as a “Cook County taxpayer” named “Dan ” writes.  “Tom Dart  should not be able to get away with this!”
Records show a complaint was also made to a Chicago police oversight agency in October alleging that police refused to act or take reports “in regards to an incident that occurred at  Sheriff Tom Dart’s  home that involved  his  wife and  his  girlfriend.”
RELATED: Sheriff Tom Dart’s personnel board halts firings  suspensions amid legal questions »
Example Output: Cook County sheriff sues to unmask ' Dan ' an anonymous person accusing him of domestic abuse

Example Input: Strict gun control advocate  Sen. Chris Murphy  said Sunday  he ’s “willing to move forward” with Republicans to ban the bump-stock devices that were used in the nation’s worst mass shooting.
“The NRA at least in the time I have been in Congress has never been willing to change U.S. gun laws ”  Murphy  said. “I think they see that they were likely going to lose this fight in Congress  and so now they’re trying to get it done through administrative action. But this is the first time that the gun lobby has shown willingness to come to the table.”
 Murphy  said  however  Congress should mandate background checks for all gun purchases.
"That would be the clear next step "  he  said. "That should be our North Star."
Also in the interview   Murphy  said the Democratic Party should give back donations received from the Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein  who’s embroiled in a sex harassment scandal.
"I think that probably makes sense "  he  said. "I mean this is a pretty bad guy  who did some really awful things."
"I don't require a background check to contribute to my campaign "  he  added. "And so there are probably lots of people with unsavory backgrounds and pasts who have given to both Democrats and Republicans."
Example Output:
Chris Murphy on Guns Control: 'Have To Walk Before You Run'