Something That Just Doesn’t Add Up

Yesterday PJ Media posted an article titled, “If New COVID-19 Variants Need to Be Taken Very Seriously, Why Isn’t Biden Closing the Border?” That is a very good question.

The article notes:

Last week, it was all about the Delta variant of COVID-19. Health experts tell us this variant is more transmissible than other variants, but vaccines still appear to prevent severe disease and death effectively. It also does not appear to be causing severe illness in children any more than the other variants have, which is excellent news. Researchers earlier in the pandemic felt exposure to COVID-19 in childhood could help build long-term immune responses, making the virus far less virulent over time.

Currently, the Delta variant is raging in the UK. Yet Prime Minister Boris Johnson has announced that all COVID-19 restrictions will be lifted in the country on July 19, including masks, social distancing, and smartphone apps. The government will make the final decision on July 12, but Johnson said the country needs to move to a philosophy of personal responsibility and learn to live with the virus. It seems even he is not held captive by rising case numbers anymore in the absence of significant severe illness.

New information from Israel could be why. Israel, which has been dealing with the Delta variant for a while, indicates that the new COVID-19 variant is not making people seriously ill as often as previous waves…

The article continues:

And a new variant, lambda, is on the horizon. We seem to have skipped quite a few Greek letters here, but this is another COVID-19 “variant of interest.” Jairo Mendez-Rico, a WHO virologist, told the German outlet Deutsche Welle the following about the new variant:

“So far we have seen no indication that the lambda variant is more aggressive,” the WHO virologist Jairo Mendez-Rico told DW. “It is possible that it may exhibit higher infection rates, but we don’t yet have enough reliable data to compare it to gamma or delta.”

“Although it is possible, currently there is no indication that variants are more dangerous and lead to increased mortality,” Mendez-Rico said. “It is likely that SARS-CoV-2 will become more transmissible throughout the course of its evolution but not necessarily more damaging to the host.”

Lambda originated in Peru and now accounts for 82% of cases in the country. It is present as far north as Mexico.

Meanwhile our southern border is wide open.

The article concludes:

However, they can’t have it both ways. Because of a more contagious virus that appears to be less virulent, according to Israeli data, Los Angeles residents are required to mask again. Dr. Fauci is telling vaccinated people to mask again because of the Delta variant of COVID-19. All the while, illegal immigrants from Latin America pour over our southern border, potentially bringing new variants with them. The administration is giving some wildly mixed messages on how seriously we should take variants with the lax border policies. It is no small wonder many Americans are no longer listening.

When Americans Won’t Vote For You, Simply Import New Americans

Yesterday Trending Politics posted an article about how the Biden administration is handling to flood of illegal immigrants currently pouring into America. The crisis at the border is rapidly spreading to all areas of the country. There is no way the number of people crossing into our country illegally are going to remain in one small area.

The article reports:

Biden’s border crisis is spreading nationwide, according to a new report from the Center for Immigration Studies. The new administration is pursuing an immigration policy dubbed “catch-and-bus” with the aim of establishing undocumented immigrants in states in the interior of the United States.

The Biden “smuggling routes” have gone largely unreported by media outlets that are fixated on the disastrous border crisis, where children are being kept in unsanitary conditions within detention facilities that violate COVID protocols.

According to an original investigation by CIS, a veritable “conveyor belt” of busesfrom Texas, Arizona and California are transporting “thousands” of undocumented immigrants into America’s heartland.

…“As best as the Center for Immigration Studies can determine from interviews and scattered media reporting, the buses are leaving regularly from Del Rio, the Texas Rio Grande Valley communities, and Laredo, but the busing also appears to be going on in Arizona, as well as in California,” the report continued.

“Where are the buses going?” the CIS rhetorically asked. “They often drop their Haitian, Venezuelan, and Cuban passengers in Florida and New Jersey. Those from Nicaragua and other Central American nations have been delivered to Tennessee, Massachusetts, Indiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Georgia, Kentucky, and to large cities in Texas such as Dallas and Houston.”

The estimates square with other Border Patrol estimates, The Blaze corroborates.

The article concludes:

“One Nicaraguan migrant showed CIS a DHS document titled ‘Interim Notice Authorizing Parole’, which grants him a renewable one-year term to live legally inside the country,” the report went on, adding, “Most will likely use their time to apply for asylum, a lengthy, back-logged process that allows for work authorization and Social Security cards during an adjudication process that can drag on for years.”

The Biden “catch-and-bus” policy is an escalation of the Democratic Party’s open borders policy. Even if a state is not on the southern border, an illegal migrant can walk across it and get a free bus ride from the Biden administration to any place it chooses.

Has anyone given any thought to the people who have been waiting in line to come to America legally? Admittedly our immigration policies need to change to eliminate a lot of the expense and red tape, but open borders are not the answer!

Let’s project this a year or two down the road. The people who came here illegally are given a renewable one-year term to live in America. Some of the immigrants will renew; others will simply vanish somewhere inside the country. Eventually a Democrat congressman will say that like the dreamers, they have been here long enough so that they should automatically be given citizenship. At that point they should be allowed to vote. Voila! You have changed to voting demographic of America. Do you think the Democrats would close the borders if they thought the people coming across would eventually become Republican voters?

A Different Perspective On The Riots

Many of us have looked at the Marxist roots of Black Lives Matter (as well as the fact that they freely funnel money into Democrat coffers) and considered the current riots as a push toward social disruption that will usher in socialism as a means of equity. What is not mentioned by those who espouse socialism is that it totally eliminates the middle class and leaves two classes–the elites in charge and the equally poverty stricken. Unfortunately our schools are not teaching the lessons of history regarding socialism. However, there is another take on the current unrest that is very interesting.

On July 1st, Sohrab Ahmari posted an article at The Spectator about the current riots.

The article notes:

America is not in the middle of a revolution — it is a reactionary putsch. About four years ago, the sort of people who had acquired position and influence as a result of globalization were turfed out of power for the first time in decades. They watched in horror as voters across the world chose Brexit, Donald Trump and other populist and conservative-nationalist options.

This deposition explains the storm of unrest battering American cities from coast to coast and making waves in Europe as well. The storm’s ferocity — the looting, the mobs, the mass lawlessness, the zealous iconoclasm, the deranged slogans like #DefundPolice — terrifies ordinary Americans. Many conservatives, especially, believe they are facing a revolution targeting the very foundations of American order.

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Maoist or Marxist revolt, even if some protagonists spout hard-leftish rhetoric. Rather, what’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class — academe, media, large corporations, ‘experts’, Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.

I believe the following is the most important paragraph in the article:

They do not seek a radically new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump, pre-Brexit status quo ante which was working out very well for them. It was, of course, working out less well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, an aggressive cultural liberalism that corroded tradition and community, technocratic ‘global governance’ that neutered democracy and politics as such.

The rioters do not understand that they are being used by the very people who choose to keep them in poverty by shipping jobs overseas and undercutting wages by opening  borders.

The article continues:

Does anyone seriously believe the American establishment — Walmart, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, the trustees of Ivy League universities, the major sports leagues, even Brooks Brothers, for God’s sake — would sign on to a movement that genuinely threatened its material interests? And yet these and many other firms and institutions are falling over themselves to express solidarity with the ‘uprising’, some going so far as to donate millions of dollars to Black Lives Matter, an outfit that lists among its objectives the abolition of the nuclear family.

Over the past four years, every trick in the book has been used to end the ‘nightmare’ of national conservatism and populism. The methods deployed by the elite reflect its tendencies and preferences as a class. Just think of recent skirmishes. A decisive majority of British voters resolved to leave the EU and then had to spend three years fighting a political establishment that marshaled all its vast resources to thwart Brexit. It failed. In America the liberal establishment tried harder, failed harder, but learned more. From the minute Trump won the presidential election, Democrats, elements of the security apparatus, and their media allies set out to undo the result. The marquee events were the ‘collusion’ probe and an impeachment push that was perhaps the single biggest insult ever to the intelligence of the American people. There were also countless smaller attempts to unseat Trump and destroy his entourage.

The article concludes:

Which social class most excels at politically correct manners? That would be the professional-managerial class, the laptop class. Its children learn the patois for discussing ‘issues of race, gender and sexuality’ from an early age. They’re expected to have mastered it by the time they take their entry-level jobs. It’s a skill that private schools are doubtless teaching already.

Working-class people, meanwhile, are most likely to struggle with this language. Even when they mean well they don’t always get it right, not least because the rules constantly shift with the vagaries of critical race theory and LGBTQ acronyms. By fortifying the requirements to speak and think correctly — and raising the stakes for failures — the neoliberal class has now built a repressive new mechanism for staying at the top and keeping the oiks down. Especially those who voted the wrong way in 2016.

So whatever you do, don’t call it a leftist revolution. With the flags, the protests, the kneeling and the new language, it’s a counter-revolution. The outcome remains uncertain, but the class war is well and truly under way.

This is a very interesting perspective.

The New Way Forward Act

The Daily Caller posted an article yesterday about The New Way Forward Act which was referred to the Subcommittee on Immigration and Citizenship on January 30, 2020.

The article lists some of the highlights of the bill:

The bill, among many things, calls for the decriminalization of illegal immigration, would make it more difficult to deport convicted criminal aliens, empower immigration judges to nullify deportation orders, and also calls for the return of previously deported illegal aliens.

…The decriminalization of illegal immigration was already becoming a more mainstream position with the Democratic Party. In fact, before the introduction of the bill, Democratic presidential candidates Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren both came out in support of the proposal. Sanders, a clear frontrunner in the nomination contest, has also voiced support for virtually ceasing all deportations.

The New Way Forward, however, takes these positions even farther.

Under the auspices of the bill, minimum prison sentences that require deportation would rise from one year to five years. This could mean that illegal aliens who are convicted of crimes such as car theft, weapons offenses and fraud — all crimes that carry average sentences of less than five years, according to Bureau of Justice Statistics — would not be required to be removed from the country.

The article concludes:

The president, during his address, also touted a GOP bill in the Senate that would allow victims of illegal alien crime to sue states that released the alien in defiance of an ICE detainer.

“Democrats in the House have prioritized open borders over the safety of citizens and legal law abiding immigrants,” Marguerite Telford, a spokeswoman for the Center for Immigration Studies, a Washington, D.C.-based immigration think tank, said in a statement to the DCNF.

Like the president, Telford also compared Democratic immigration priories with that of GOP lawmakers

“Contrast that with most Republicans who are worried about safety and focus on sanctuary jurisdictions, driver’s license laws, knowing who is crossing our border … and the rule of law in general,” she continued. “For example, Rep. Gosar has the Criminal Alien Removal Clarification Act which stands in stark contrast to the New Way bill.”

I guess the question is whether it is more important to protect the rights of American citizens or the ‘rights’ of those who are here illegally.

When You Are Totally Out Of Step With The Voters

Yesterday The Washington Examiner posted an article about the current Democrat primary campaign for President. The writer refers to a New York Times article noting that the ideas the candidates are espousing are not popular with voters.

The article reports:

Here’s a hot new tip for Democrats wanting to win the presidency next year: Lie about what you believe!

That piece of advice comes from liberal New York Times columnist David Leonhardt, who on Sunday warned Democrats that they have lately been professing policy views that “alienate most American voters.”

It turns out that eliminating private health insurance and opening up the southern border to all of the world’s poor aren’t home runs with the electorate. But these are precise examples of what the 2020 Democratic field has been pushing.

In each of the Democratic debates and in media interviews, the leading candidates have said they support decriminalizing illegal immigration and replacing all private insurance with one government-run plan.

Observing that public opinion on those proposals isn’t rocking through the stratosphere, Leonhardt wrote that Democrats need to stop talking about what they truly believe and do the opposite: “The best strategy for Democrats,” he said, “is a populist one that speaks to voters of all races.”

That is actually really good advice for the candidates. I am hoping that they won’t take it.

The article concludes:

That sounds nice, but it would require that Democrats shut up about reparations, abandon their immigration fetish, and discontinue their climate change fearmongering.

There’s absolutely no chance any of them will do that. Democrats may routinely lie about the chaos at the border and about the cost of their healthcare plans but they’re being completely honest when they say they want open borders. They’re telling the truth when they call for government-run healthcare.

Those may not be winning positions in the general election but at least they’re honest ones.

In this case, I am not sure honesty will win the nomination or the election.

A Wall For Thee But Not For Me

Hot Air posted an article yesterday about some recent comments by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer. It seems that walls work in other places, but they don’t work in America when President Trump wants them.

The article reports:

Baier (Bret Baier of Fox News)pressed on this point, asking Hoyer about border barriers that have already been built: “Would you remove those existing barriers because you say they don’t work?”

“No, no,” Hoyer replied.

“So they work there?” Baier asked. Hoyer rambled for a bit about people living along the Rio Grande and eventually, Baier asked him again, “So they work some places.”

“Obviously they work some places,” Hoyer said as if it hadn’t taken three minutes of concerted effort to get him to admit the obvious.

Not only do they work in some places, America has helped finance them in some places.

Some places in the world where border walls are used for security:

India and Pakistan

Morocco and Algeria

Israel and the West Bank

Cyprus

Northern Ireland

Saudi Arabia and Yemen

Saudi Arabia and Iraq

Turkey and Syria

Kenya and Somalia

The list is courtesy of The Washington Examiner.

So even some Democrats know that walls work, and the amount of money requested to build a wall is a totally insignificant part of the budget, so what is this about? Do not be fooled. The establishment Republicans do not want the wall any more than the Democrats do. To the Democrats, open borders represent future voters. To the Republicans, open borders represent cheap labor for their corporate sponsors who belong to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. There is also the added aspect of the Washington establishment finally getting a victory over President Trump. The only way Americans are going to ever have a voice in Washington is if they clear out ALL of the establishment politicians in both parties. Term limits might be a really good place to start.

I Will Just Leave This Here

On Tuesday wdef.com reported that the U.S. Attorney in Atlanta has just convicted a fourth suspect of sex trafficking.

The article reports:

Prosecutors say the ring compelled young women from Mexico and Central America to engage in commercial sex.

Severiano Martinez-Rojas of Mexico was sentenced to 24 years in prison.

Two co-defendants pleaded guilty to sex trafficking while a third admitted to harboring aliens.

“Sex trafficking is a form of modern-day slavery that exploits and traumatizes some of the most vulnerable members of our society,” said U.S. Attorney Byung J. “BJay” Pak.

The prosecution alleged that the ring lured the girls to the U.S. with faked romantic relationships, promising love, marriage and work.

They smuggled them into the country illegally, then used violence and threats to put them to work in a brothel.

A person who is here legally has the protection of the law. A person who is not here illegally may fear the law because they are here illegally. This is one aspect of the human cost of open borders. Making it harder to enter America illegally is one small step in fighting the battle against human trafficking.

The article concludes:

“Human trafficking is disgraceful and unacceptable. The sentence demonstrates the Department of Justice’s unwavering commitment to combatting these crimes,” said Assistant Attorney General Eric Dreiband.

“This sex trafficking enterprise was extensive and resulted in the abuse of young women and girls.”

A District Court Is Not More Powerful Than The President

A District Court does not have authority over the President. However, that doesn’t stop some judges from trying to exercise that authority. Part of the President’s job is to defend the country. The courts do not have the right to interfere with that defense. However, one court is doing just that.

The Conservative Treehouse is reporting today that U.S. District Judge Jon Steven Tigar in San Francisco has issued a temporary restraining order against the Trump administration’s modified emergency asylum policy which barred asylum for aliens who enter the country illegally. Note that the President’s modified policy only applies to those who enter the country illegally. Since when did people breaking the law to come here have rights?

The article reports:

While a challenge was predictable, frustrating and likely to be spun up by media, the ruling only applies to aliens who gain illegal entry and request asylum.

Nothing in the ruling stops the hardened border enforcement and/or current expedited review and deportation program. In essence, keep the illegal aliens out and the judicial ruling is moot (until defeated in higher courts).

Though it might frustrate the left-wing media and the open borders crowd, no court can successfully demand the President of the United States to stop border enforcement.  This is why it is critical to have a strong DHS Secretary focused on stopping illegal entry.

This ruling will obviously be appealed by the DOJ; and politically the Democrats realize, in the bigger picture, this ‘open-border’ narrative is not good for them.  On its face this ruling is ridiculous as it eliminates/undermines the legal process for asylum requests by removing the distinction of illegal or unlawful conduct in the application process.

Yesterday Fox News reported:

More than 500 criminals are traveling with the migrant caravan that’s massed on the other side of a San Diego border crossing, homeland security officials said Monday afternoon.

The revelation was made during a conference call with reporters, with officials asserting that “most of the caravan members are not women and children”. They claimed the group is mostly made up of single adult or teen males and that the women and children have been pushed to the front of the line in a bid to garner sympathetic media coverage.

I am sorry that conditions in the home countries of the migrants are so awful, but why don’t the young men in the caravan stay behind and attempt to change things? I am reminded that many Americans lost their lives in the Eighteenth Century fighting for the freedom of America. Where is that spirit among the migrants in the caravan? Do they love their homeland enough to fight for it?

 

Information About The Caravan

Today Diane Rufino posted an article at her For Love of God and Country Blog about the caravan making its way to America from Central America. The article quotes filmmaker Ami Horowitz who traveled to Mexico to report of the caravan.

Mr. Horowitz observed:

“Despite the framing of the caravan as being full of woman and children, the reality on the ground is quite different. Approximately 90-95% of the migrants are male. The major narrative being pushed by the press is that the migrants are fleeing Honduras because they are escaping extreme violence and that their lives are under a constant threat of it, setting up the strategy that they will be able to enter the US by asking for asylum.  So I began by asking the men a simple question:  ‘Why are you coming to America?’

Answers (all in Spanish):  Man #1:  ‘For a better life. Economic.’

Man #2:  “For a job, because in Honduras there are no jobs.’

There is a massive logistical effort underway (Ami shows footage of several large carrier trucks), akin to moving an army, that is clearly costing someone millions of dollars for the transportation, food, water, medicine, supplies, and services that are being provided for the members of the caravan.

Mr. Horowitz notes a darker aspect of the caravan:

Ever present among the thousands of migrants are workers from Pueblo Sin Fronteras, clad in black tee shirts and colored vests. ‘Pueblo Sin Fronteras’ means ‘People without borders.’ They are the ones who seem to be most involved in organizing and mobilizing this caravan. The organization, as the name implies, is looking to create a world without borders, which seems to be one of the reasons why they organized this caravan in the first place. It’s looking to challenge American sovereignty. While it does seem that the majority of the migrants are friendly and simply want a better life for themselves and their families, there’s an undeniable element among the migrants that is violent and dangerous. The migrants know this and some have even experienced their violence firsthand.

So what might be some of the motives behind this caravan? First of all, the Democrats will score political points against President Trump if there is any sort of incident at the border, and it is quite likely there will be something for the biased cameras of the mainstream media to focus on. Second of all, the Democrats hope that these ‘migrants’ will be future Democratic voters.

However, there are some behaviors going on in this caravan that are not typical of people seeking asylum.

The article reports:

Looking at the videos and looking at the thousands and thousands in this caravan, it can’t be over-stated that almost the entire migrant population is comprised of males. They leave a huge mess wherever they stay and in many cases, you see them carrying the flag of their countries. You also see them burning the American flag and shouting insults and obscenities at our president. People seeking asylum don’t come here with flags from their country; invaders do. People who want to become Americans don’t show hatred for us.

The article concludes:

One final thought: How do you make America great again?? You have a country full of those who love her and want to contribute to her success, who reflect her values in the way they conduct themselves and live their lives, who support the president and government when they take measures to improve her situation, reputation, and standing, and who are patriotic. You do NOT make America great by allowing unchecked immigration of those who fly the flag of other countries, who burn our flag or otherwise desecrate it, who carry signs “America is evil” or “America is the great Satan” or “F*** Trump,” who are criminals or have criminal tendencies, who are engaged in the South American drug rings or Mexican drug cartels, who seek to drive trucks into crowds of innocent people, plant bombs at a marathon, blow up community centers, nightclubs, or other buildings, or shoot up our citizens or members of our military at their bases.

In order to Keep America Great, the federal government (in concert with the states) need to fix our broken immigration system, set limits on immigration, set limits on the numbers coming from various parts of the world (as we have done throughout our entire history), and refuse – absolutely refuse – to give in whenever shenanigans like this caravan threaten to cross our border. After all, it is an express Constitutional responsibility of government and was a condition of our joining into this union known as the United States. If the government doesn’t have to exercise its responsibilities, then we shouldn’t have to as citizens. That’s the nature of a Constitution.

We need to remember that those supporting the idea of open borders do not have the best interests of the American people in mind. We need to reform our immigration policies, but not under threat of invasion.

Note The Lack Of Women And Children

Yesterday Breitbart posted a picture of a group of illegal immigrants headed for Spain.

This is the picture:

At first glance, these seem to be all young men who should be capable of working to change things in their home countries. They do not look like starving, desperate immigrants.

The article reports:

Footage shared by Diario de Cádiz on Twitter shows an entire boatload of migrants landing in the middle of the packed tourist beach of Zahora on Saturday, July 28th, and disgorging onto the sand, before scattering into the interior unregistered and unvetted.

…Moroccan-dominated gangs running arms, drugs, and unlicensed tobacco products between North Africa and Spain have long been an issue for the Southern European country’s authorities, who recently told the El Pais newspaper: “We are in a state of war… And we are losing.”

The recent installation of a new Socialist government, which has made a show of being in favour of more open borders at a time when Italy’s new populist coalition is cracking down on illegal sea crossings, appears to have left them having to cope with an increased number of migrants as well as conventional criminals.

European security services are concerned that travel of this kind could be used to execute a deadly terror attack, with armed jihadists landing on a beach like the one at Zahora and opening fire on sunbathers in a seaborne version of the Tunisia attack which left 38 mostly British tourists dead in 2017.

A country without secured borders is not a country. Europe is rapidly learning that lesson the hard way. Hopefully America will learn from their example.

Look! A Shiny Object!

The mainstream media is all abuzz about comments made by Donald Trump in 2005. The comments were horrible, but I suspect many who are totally shocked might, in the course of their lifetime, have heard similar comments. I also would be willing to make a small wager that in the next month, any time information comes out about Hillary’s emails, speeches, mistakes as Secretary of State, etc., we will see some sort of leaked audio of Donald Trump acting like a fraternity boy in a locker room. That’s how the media is working this campaign. The media cannot list Hillary Clinton’s accomplishments as Secretary of State–the world was better off before she took office. The media cannot afford to delve too deeply into her husband’s term as President–he engaged in some pretty lewd behavior, and there are few indications that his behavior has changed. Hillary’s record as a Senator is not really impressive either.

There are two articles at Breitbart that might explain why the tape of Donald Trump showed up after eleven years. The first article includes the following:

One email, which provided partial transcripts of some of Clinton’s speeches, reads in part:

*Hillary Clinton Said Her Dream Is A Hemispheric Common Market, With Open Trade And Open Markets. *

“My dream is a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders, some time in the future with energy that is as green and sustainable as we can get it, powering growth and opportunity for every person in the hemisphere.” [05162013 Remarks to Banco Itau.doc, p. 28]

In her remarks to Banco Itau, Clinton also denounced the idea of putting up barriers to global trade, a statement which will likely raise concerns with grassroots and working-class voters in her own party. “We have to resist protectionism, other kinds of barriers to market access and to trade,” Clinton said.

Even though it has gone virtually unreported by corporate media, Breitbart News has extensively documented the Clintons’ longstanding support for “open borders.” Interestingly, as the Los Angeles Times observed in 2007, the Clinton’s praise for globalization and open borders frequently comes when they are speaking before a wealthy foreign audiences and donors.

The second article includes the following:

The batch of emails released by Wikileaks on October 7 includes one in which Hillary Clinton press secretary Brian Fallon explained that Clinton “would support…closing the gun show loophole by executive order.”

Fallon also highlighted Clinton’s support of universal background checks–which have already failed in California, Colorado, Washington state, and Paris–and her support for a scenario wherein victims of crime would be able to sue gun manufacturers.

First of all–there is no gun show loophole–you need a gun permit to buy a gun at a gun show. The idea that anyone can buy a gun at a gun show is an idea perpetrated by the press for the purpose of deceiving that part of the public that is uninformed about gun laws already in existence. What Hillary Clinton supports is a spied-upon public with no access to self-defense and an over reaching government. That is why the media is waving a shiny object in front of you–they are hoping you won’t notice what Hillary stands for or the actions of Bill Clinton vs. the words of Donald Trump.