Shorten some texts to try to pass the automated tests that are failing on CircleCI, although the test script doesn't fail locally

Author: JoshData

misconduct.yaml

@@ -4742,11 +4742,10 @@
   tags: ethics resolved
 - person: 402990
   name: Alan Cranston
-  text: In 1989, Sen. Cranston (along with Sens. DeConcini, Glenn, McCain and Riegle)
-    was accused of improperly intervening with federal banking regulators on behalf
-    of Charles Keating, Jr. and his savings and loan business. Because Keating's campaign
+  text: In 1989, Sen. Cranston improperly intervened with federal banking regulators on behalf
+    of Charles Keating, Jr., a campaign donor, and his savings and loan business. Because Keating's campaign
     contributions came so close in time to Cranston's actions, he was [reprimanded
-    by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics in front of the full Senate](https://alamedamgr.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/cq-almanac-online-edition-keating-five.pdf).
+    by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics](https://alamedamgr.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/cq-almanac-online-edition-keating-five.pdf).
     An odd aspect of Cranston's "punishment" was that he was allowed to rebut his
     reprimand on the floor of the Senate. To his colleagues' displeasure, he declared
     that [if he was guilty of wrongdoing, then so was the entire Senate](https://alamedamgr.files.wordpress.com/2018/04/cq-almanac-online-edition-keating-five.pdf).
@@ -7628,10 +7627,10 @@
   allegation: disloyalty to the Union
   text: Stark faced an allegation of disloyalty to the Union. On Feb. 27, 1862, the
     Senate voted to seat him 26-19 since his public statements came before he was
-    in the Senate. On Feb. 28, 1862, Stark requested another investigation, presumably
-    to more fully exonerate him. On Apr. 22, 1862, the committee reported that based
-    on Stark's public statements, he supported the rebellion and Charles Sumner introduced
-    a resolution to expel him. On Jun. 6, 1862, the Senate expulsion vote was defeated
+    in the Senate. Stark requested another investigation, presumably
+    to more fully exonerate him, and on Apr. 22, a committee reported that based
+    on his public statements, he supported the rebellion, and Charles Sumner introduced
+    a resolution to expel him. On Jun. 6, the expulsion resolution was defeated
     21-16, apparently because Stark had only a few more months to serve.
   consequences:
   - date: 1862-02-27