The so-called ‘front runners’ for their party’s presidential nominations - Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton - have just run into bad events that imperil their candidacies. Let us examine:

Late on Wednesday,, which is filled with major league, credible political reporters, broke a sensational, well-documented story which shows that Rudy Giuliani and his staff purposely hid the expenses of his tax-payer funded trips to see his mistress at that time, Judy Nathan. He has since divorced his wife - perhaps that was why he wanted it hidden so she couldn’t use these trysts against him in the divorce.

But the issue here is not the affair; the real issue is why he chose to hide these costs - estimated to be over $500,000 - from New York City taxpayers? What Rudy and his staff did was a deliberate effort to hide - or cover-up - these out-of-town trips. How? By allocating these costs to obscure NY City agencies, such as one called the Loft Board, which regulated the rents and conditions of loft apartments.

Haven’t we all learned this lesson repeatedly: the cover-up is worse than the crime itself?

This issue is a window into the attitude and thinking of Rudy Giuliani. For those of us who have lived here in New York, we have seen this thuggish, bullying, arrogant side to him that makes us not want him in the White House. His out-and-out lies about these costs and his knowledge of them is yet another example of his denials and evasions.

Let’s put it another way: if the facts were exactly the same but a Democrat did this, what would we GOPers and we conservatives say? We would be aghast that a leading presidential candidate was exposed as having hidden taxpayer funds from those very same taxpayers!

Hillary’s Bad Day yesterday comes from her hubby, Bill, who all of a sudden has announced that all along he was actually against the invasion of Iraq.

Oh really?

That is not how anyone remembers it. In 2003, when we invaded, both Hillary and Bill were all for it. But now that the war has been judged by Democrat primary voters and caucus-goers as a complete failure, the Clintons want to adjust their position. Just as she tried to ‘adjust’ her position on drivers-licenses-for-illegal-aliens.

The Clintons think they are so clever because the so-called mainstream media has always allowed them to get away with running this kind of jive by us.

But that isn’t working anymore.

Bill Clinton’s attempt to bail out Hillary’s suddenly-faltering campaign has only compounded the problem. Team Clinton looks desperate.

Barack Obama has the Clintons on the run - and Bill, ever the campaign strategist, has yet to get a handle on how to slow Obama down.

You can feel it slipping away from Hillary. She is in real trouble in Iowa - and a loss there would cascade over to New Hampshire five days later where already her Iowa slippage has already reduced her New Hampshire lead.

Last night’s GOP/YouTube debate: what a total disaster the GOP’s leading candidates are! Looking at Romney and Rudy blast each other into oblivion - when they are both total poseurs - is just either laughable or sad. How could the GOP - the party of conservatives - be choosing among these total frauds?

Yes, Ron Paul is a man of conviction and is doing well online and raising money. But he isn’t going to win the nomination.

Huckabee is hot right now - without anyone knowing anything about him!

He isn’t the answer at all. He is a Big Government liberal posing as a conservative. He is also a nasty man who treats people like dirt. The press hasn’t seen this side of him - and may never as the Huckabees and McCains of this world have many faces.

When you look at the 15 or so people running for president, not one jumps out at you and says “I am the person to lead this country.”

Not one.

Maybe we need another candidate to get into this race at some point.


With 39 days to go until the Iowa Caucuses, a new tactic of media coverage of the campaign begins this week: The Times of London - a Rupert Murdoch-owned paper - headlined an article Monday about how nasty the US Presidential race is getting. The accompanying picture is of Senator Hillary Clinton walking along with her “body person” - an aide who always travels with a candidate.

In this case, however, this aide, Huma Abedin, is an attractive half-Saudi, half-Pakistani woman who has worked for Hillary for more than seven years. The Times’ story states that the American political “blogs” have been rife with rumors of a lesbian relationship between Hillary and Huma.

Is this a way for the Times of London to “bleed the rumor” into the mainstream media - and all the while hiding behind and blaming the blogs?

Will the US political media now do the same thing - citing the Times of London as a safe way to talk about this?

Will Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post and Fox News Channel report or ignore this story by their sister publication - especially in light of the fact that Murdoch himself hosted a fund raiser for Hillary’s Senate re-election campaign and has forged a friendly relationship with former President Bill Clinton? (Murdoch also donated to and participated in the Clinton Global Initiative.)

Did Murdoch - a total hands-on manager - clear the Times of London story in advance?

Would the London editor dare run this story, picture and rumor without Rupert’s approval - especially knowing of Murdoch’s political support for Hillary?

Let us make no mistake about this: from a political point of view, the last thing the Hillary Campaign wants right now is stories of her alleged lesbianism to crop up. Such reports and speculation would be devastating to her already-in-trouble campaign in Iowa. And nationally the last thing the Democrats want is Hillary seen as a lesbian - when the country wants to get away from scandals and messes and move into a new political era.

Barack Obama and his troops must be exultant today over this.

One of the things to watch early this week is how does the American political media address this burgeoning story? Do they en masse ignore it? Or do they feel compelled to ask Hillary and Huma about it if only to get their denial on the record?

Certainly if this type of story applied to a Republican candidate, the media would be all over it. But there has always been a clear double-standard with the Clintons and especially with Hillary.

Fox News should be “fair and balanced” on this. But their odd relationship with Hillary makes us all wonder. Fox News chief Roger Ailes happily and proudly calls Hillary “a friend” and says, “I like her.” So how objective about this are Murdoch and Ailes going to be - even when their own News Corporation newspaper breaks the story?

Meanwhile, out on the trail, the race develops day by day. Columnist Robert Novak is now attacking Mike Huckabee for being a “phony conservative.” Well, guess what, Bob? All the GOP top-tier candidates are “phony conservatives”!!!

Fed Thompson is melting away - as predicted here last spring.

Rudy, too, is scrambling to get back into the Iowa race as he sees his original strategy of ignoring Iowa is not working.

Romney will spend an unlimited amount of his own money to hold on in Iowa as that victory is a key for his Big Mo -Domino Theory of winning the first four GOP contests.

And Ron Paul is H-O-T on the internet, raising tons of cash and trying to get a RonPaul Blimp up in the air in the next month. But he will not win the GOP nomination; his vote is growing and in New Hampshire he may get 10%. But this is just a sign of how divided the GOP is.

39 days left.

And the surprises haven’t even begun yet.


Last week’s Democratic debate in Las Vegas - aired on CNN - proved one thing: for the second consecutive decade C.N.N. actually stands for the Clinton News Network.

What a sham that performance was! Beginning several days before the debate, the Clinton forces fired a shot across debate moderator Wolf Blitzer’s bow through Matt Drudge: a warning that he better be fair and not pull “a Russert,” referring to NBC News’ Tim Russert, who had hosted the MSNBC debate and asked Hillary the drivers-licenses-for-illegals question that drove Hillary into despair.

Never - EVER - has a campaign tried to intimidate the host and the questioners in advance. EVER!!! And in public no less!

But Team Clinton is now in Full Panic Mode as they can see a scenario developing: they lose Iowa to Obama, who then surges into New Hampshire five days later where 44% of the voters are registered as Independents and are thus eligible to vote in the Democratic Primary. If Obama should win these first two contests then Hillary’s dream is toast. The Democrats would begin looking to Obama or to Edwards; Hillary would be deemed a ‘loser’ and no longer the heroine many see her as today.

So CNN went into the tank at that debate for Hillary. They asked her easy questions and no tough follow-ups, especially about her 180 degree flip-flop reversal on drivers licenses for illegals. Within 16 days she went from wanting to give them to illegals to saying as President she would not allow it. And CNN never even asked her about this reversal!!!

Two weeks ago Team Hillary got caught planting softball questions in her town hall audiences. Last week CNN planted them for her. For example, how tough is this one: “Senator Clinton, which do you like more: pearls or diamonds?”

A really tough question to test a future president, eh?

Then, on the panel afterwards to analyze the debate, James Carville appeared and of course praised Hillary’s performance. But no one bothered to mention that Carville is an advisor to Hillary’s campaign!

Back in the 1990's, under the stewardship of Rick Kaplan - who now runs Katie Courics’ left-leaning and ratings-challenged CBS evening new show - CNN indeed became the Clinton News Network. The obvious bias there in fact opened the way for Fox News Channel to come into existence and find an audience of viewers who were aghast at CNN’s bias. Thus the ‘Fair and Balanced’ moniker.

And to cap the week off, Team Clinton went back to DRUDGE and praised Wolf Blitzer’s performance! Can you imagine this? The gaul of these Clintonistas to try to intimidate and then praise a host of a debate?

In other political developments:

• As predicted in this space, the Fred Thompson Campaign has just drifted into almost-non-existence. A soggy candidate with no hunger or focus isn’t going to get the job done; he has become a joke and an irrelevancy;

• The Hot Buzz on the Internet continues to surround Ron Paul. Why? Because he stands for something!

• Mike Huckabee, too, is hot in Iowa. But he has huge flaws in his record that make him unacceptable to the GOP base, once they learn of these problems.

• Also as predicted here, the Giuliani Campaign has suddenly realized their strategy is ill-conceived. To blow off Iowa is a terrible mistake. And to then lose New Hampshire, Michigan and South Carolina makes the Giuliani Dream of winning Florida and then the February 5 Tsunami Tuesday unrealistic. If Romney sweeps those first four, how can Rudy stop him? The Big Mo is a powerful force. Plus, Rudy does not fit the GOP.

• Usually in these campaigns the hungriest candidate and campaign wins. Usually. But there is also the factor of working smartly. Romney has done this. He has a sound campaign plan and is sticking to it. The others seems to drift along, making up their strategy day-to-day.

• The GOP has all along assumed Hillary will be their 2008 opponent. This space has repeatedly said that may not be the case. Why would an anti-war party choose the only unashamedly pro-war candidate in their field - Hillary? It just makes no sense.

Happy Thanksgiving to you all!!!


The so-called Mainstream Media (MSM) has missed the boat on John McCain for 23 years.

While the Chris Mathews-Tim Russert-Imus Crowd has slobbered all over McCain - mainly out of guilt over their own Vietnam War behavior - many others have known the real truth: the Arizona Senator is a lying, two-faced, sarcastic, mean-spirited, condescending hypocrite who has gotten away with numerous instances of terrible behavior because the MSM won’t take an objective look at him.

Now, however, the US Veteran Dispatch - a highly respected and widely read veterans newspaper from Kinston, North Carolina - has published a riveting new article - BETRAYAL, DECEIT, CORRUPTION AND JOHN MCCAIN - written by former US Army Green Beret and two-tour Vietnam veteran Ted Sampley.

Among the revelations in this fascinating article:

1) When McCain returned to the United States in 1973 after more than five years as a prisoner of war, he found his wife was a different person. Carol McCain, once a model, had been badly injured in a car wreck in 1969. The accident "left her 4 inches shorter and on crutches, and she gained a good deal of weight." Despite her injures, she had refused to allow her POW husband to be notified about her condition, fearing that such news would not be good for him while he was being held prisoner.

But, just a couple years later, McCain, while pondering a future in politics, met Cindy Hensley, an attractive 25-year-old woman from a very wealthy politically-connected Arizona family. While still married to Carol, McCain began an adulterous relationship with Cindy. He married Cindy in May 1980 -- just a month after dumping his crippled wife and securing a divorce.

McCain followed his young, millionairess wife back to Arizona.

2) Reports from a variety of U.S. publications exposed McCain's true scandalous character

The Arizona Republic - October 17, 1989" . . . both in telephone conversations with reporters and on a live radio talk show, the Republican senator was far from calm. He was agitated. Angry. And the way he dealt with unpleasant questions was to bully the questioners . . . 'You're a liar,' McCain snapped Sept. 29 when an Arizona Republic reporter asked him about business ties between his wife, Cindy McCain, and Keating . . . 'That's the spouse's involvement, you idiot,' McCain sneered later in the same conversation. 'You do understand English, don't you?' ". . . Not content with just bullying reporters, McCain tried belittling them: 'It's up to you to find that out, kids.' . . . McCain wasn't talking to liars. He wasn't talking to juveniles. The senator was talking to two reporters."

The Arizona Republic - October 17, 1989 -- "McCain, in a radio talk-show appearance last week condemned disclosures of his family's ties to Keating as 'irresponsible journalism.'"

The Phoenix Gazette, November 13, 1989 -- "Reporters also 'discovered' that the senator's wife and father-in-law invested $359,100.00 in one of Mr. Keating's projects in 1986 . . ."

3) Cindy McCain escaped prosecution for stealing/using drugs

The Arizona Republic, August 24, 1994 -- "Cindy McCain, the wife of U.S. Republican Sen. John McCain of Arizona, admitted in a series of media interviews Monday that she became addicted to the painkillers Percocet and Vicodin. She said that she used the drugs from 1989 to 1992 and acknowledged that she had stolen some pills from the American Voluntary Medical Team, a charitable organization of which she is president . . . at one point, McCain, 40, was ingesting 15 to 20 pills a day . . . the normal dosage for seriously ill patients is 6 to 10 a day for a short period."

4) McCain's Crime family connection

The Arizona Republic Jan. 17, 1995 "About 300 guests turned out Saturday night to celebrate the 90th birthday of Joseph 'Joe Bananas' Bonanno, retired boss of New York's Bonanno crime family. He retired to Tucson in 1968 . . . John McCain, R-Ariz., and Gov. Fife Symington sent their regards by telegram."

All of the above is but the tip of the iceberg on the real John McCain.

While trailing badly now for the GOP presidential nomination - mainly because he has ticked off so many mainstream conservatives over the years - he is a viable vice presidential choice. Thus it is vital that the real John McCain be oxposed - and all GOP voters need to know the truth.

It is highly recommended that you go to the US Veteran Dispatch web site ( and read Ted Sampley’s article ASAP.

And then forward it to everyone you know - before it is too late.

John McCain must be stopped. And Ted Sampley’s well-researched article might just do it.


While the so-called Mainstream Media (MSM) continues to salivate over a potential Hillary-Rudy general election match-up next year, they - as usual - are missing the real story of the race:

It is quite likely neither of them will be their party’s nominee next year.

Let us examine the State of the Race as of today:

1) The Democratic Race: Hillary had nine months of almost-constant positive press. Since she began the campaign in February, the MSM has fawned over this supposedly-smartest woman in the world. While Barack Obama and John Edwards faded away a bit, she was afforded non-stop softball coverage.

But now that has changed; he run of good press has reversed. She is now headed into a vortex of negative stories that feed into one another. First came her inability to take a clear stand on Governor Spitzer’s idiotic plan to give drivers licenses to illegal aliens. (Spitzer, by the way, has come under such attack that he now admits he might withdraw the idea entirely.)

That contretemps morphed into a related problem for Hillary: her constant double-talk, where she takes ambiguous positions on issues - and leaves listeners confused over what she just said. This Clinton-speak is her and Bill’s - trademark - and it is now hurting her Big Time.

The this past weekend came another potentially-defining revelation: the Clinton Campaign has been planting questions in her audiences at her Town Hall forums around Iowa. At least two people have admitted to being approached by Clinton staffers for this purpose.

In Iowa, where the caucus-goers are politically sophisticated, this type of activity could hurt her very badly. It fits into an emerging picture of Hillary as a cold, scripted, unlikeable, manipulative, say-anything candidate. And she is running against two guys - Barack and Edwards - who are all-too-happy to pound her now that she is in trouble.

Hillary’s other problem, as a friend of mine points out, is that she is trying to run a traditional Republican campaign in the Democratic primaries. In other words, a “it’s my turn now” campaign devoid of any substance and resentful of any challenges. And like past GOP candidates who have relied on the incumbent President or a past President to endorse them, Hillary repeatedly runs back to her husband when trouble looms.

The history of Iowa is crucial here. The final few weeks are the whole story. So a campaign wants to be on an upward trend going into the holidays and the January 3rd caucuses.

In 2004, Howard Dean was as far ahead nationally as Hillary is today; and he was substantially ahead in Iowa, too. Then he began to slip in December as voters took a look at his general election viability. Seeing this slippage, Dean got testy at a questioner at a Town Hall forum - and he was finished! He deteriorated almost overnight and lost. In Iowa, what goes on at one campaign stop is reported statewide almost instantly.

That is why this planted-question story may become a huge problem for Hillary in the next weeks to come.

With seven weeks to go, Barack Obama is on the upswing, Edwards is static and Hillary is in trouble.

The Iowa outcome may end up like this (with all three within a few points of each other):

1) Obama

2) Edwards

3) Hillary

If that is how it ends up, she is almost finished before we even get to New Hampshire.

2) The GOP Race: Again, the national polls are totally and completely meaningless. Mitt Romney is - today - in a commanding position to win the GOP nomination going away.

How, you ask?

The same answer every four years: look at the state polls of the first four contests: Iowa, New Hampshire, Michigan and South Carolina.

Guess who is ahead in each and every one of these four states?

Mitt Romney.

And tell me the last time a candidate won both Iowa and New Hampshire and did not go on to win the nomination?

Rudy’s strategy? He doesn’t have one. He is in love with himself and thus can’t see that his plan to have Florida bail him out on January 29th is almost four weeks too late! He will have suffered a string of defeats before then and have zero momentum. He will be toast.

Of course Tim Russert, Chris Mathews and the rest ignore history, ignore the facts on the ground - and thus they are missing the real story here.

Conclusion: Forget Rudy; he isn’t making it. Mitt can already see the finish line but the MSM is so consumed with trivialities like Pat Robertson’s endorsement that they can’t see what is happening. Plus, the Hillary story is so big that Mitt is flying under the radar right now, which he must like as he has a solid lead in Iowa and just wants to keep it and run out the clock.

Hillary is in Big and Growing Trouble.

She may not make it past New Hampshire.

And plenty more surprises await us.


The so-called mainstream media has missed it.

So has the so-called Establishment of both parties.

So have the (Poison) Ivy League intellectuals.

So has the Bush White House - and the Clinton HQ.

And McCain...and Katie Couric....and the Washington Post and all the rest of the very people who have already plunged this country into a downward spiral:

Drivers licenses for illegal aliens is a HUGE ISSUE!!!

It is an issue capable of changing the nomination in each party - beginning in 56 days in Iowa and then five days later in New Hampshire.

It is also an issue that could change the outcome of next year’s general election for President.

In every poll, even a majority of Democrats do not want to give illegal alines drivers licenses.

Yet Hillary Clinton flits across the TV screens doing her usual double-and-triple-talk dance - all the while saying she does indeed favor giving drivers licenses to illegals.

This major miscalculation by Hillary has cost her in New Hampshire where, in just a week, her lead over Barack Obama has shrunk to its lowest level this year.

The same in Iowa: out there many Democrats are apoplectic over the influx into factory-heavy Iowa of thousands of illegals. This issue has to hurt Hillary there, too.

Except the Democrats need a candidate to really go after her on this - not just on her double-speak - but on her position in favor of licenses.

And the GOP - down in the mouth after 6 years of Bush failures and betrayals - needs a new candidate who has been consistently against illegal immigration. Unfortunately, Rudy and Romney are major flip-floppers on illegal immigration. Rudy the Liar now claims he’ll stop it. Oh, really? He defended and protected illegals as Mayor of New York! We can’t trust a word he says about this - or anything! Rudy and Romney are shameless in how they will say anything to get nominated. Neither of them believes in anything - other than getting their greedy hands on power.

And this single issue - drivers licenses for illegal immigrants - brought again to the forefront by another out-of-touch incompetent Ivy League lefty, NY Governor Eliot Spitzer - is a potential radioactive bomb certain to doom anyone on the wrong side of this issue.

Spitzer’s own ratings in New York have declined since unilaterally deciding to give out licenses to illegals. Even a majority of New York City residents - perhaps one of the most liberal demographics in the nation - oppose giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens.

This issue is explosive.

It can also morph a bit into “Hillary and Spitzer are giving illegal drivers licenses so as to allow illegals to vote.”

As the economy deteriorates and the public sense of confidence declines, this issue will only become more central to the essence of the 2008 election.

Watch it; it is going to be HUGE.

And do not trust Rudy or Romney when they suddenly re-create themselves into opponents of illegal immigration.


It is exactly one year before the 2008 Presidential and Congressional elections - November 4, 2008.

On another November 4th - twenty eight years ago - November 4, 1979 - the so-called “students” seized the US Embassy in Tehran and held our diplomats and Marines for 444 days.

That single incident cost Jimmy Carter his presidency, launched the Reagan Revolution - and began the War Against Fundamentalist Islam.

This past weekend - November 3-4, 2007 - Pakistan imposed a State of Emergency following a recent spate of violence and several assassination attempts on President Pervez Musharraf, whose dismissal of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court smacks of the extra-legal act of a dictator (which he is).

Could it be that this action - exactly one year before the crucial 2008 American election - will have the same impact on our 2008 elections as the seizure of our embassy did 28 years ago?

Let us look at a few items:

• Pakistan is a nuclear power. If the Musharraf Regime collapses - which is inevitable - what will happen to these weapons? Will they fall into the hand of Al Qaeda?

• Al Qaeda and the Taliban are now based in northwestern Pakistan. Many believe that the Pak CIA - known as the ISS - actually created The Taliban so as to keep control of neighboring Afghanistan;

• Osama Bin Laden is the single most popular man in Pakistan; his fundamentalist philosophy is the dominant way of thinking throughout Pakistan. Their madrassas churn out thousand of students steeped in this radical, hate-filled philosophy - with the ‘best’ channeled into suicide bombing and martyrdom;

• Osama is porbably in Pakistan - and the ISS knows it and is protecting him;

• Dr. A. Q. Kahn - the father of the Pak nuke - has systematically sold and spread his nuclear formulas to other enemies of the USA: North Korea, Syria, Lybia and Iran;

• All of this makes it clear that Pakistan is the epicenter of the world’s ongoing difficulties.

Here are a few key questions that might influence our 2008 election:

• If and when the Musharraf Government falls, what comes next? Does Osama do what he did twice before - in Sudan and Afghanistan: become the guru/power-behind-the-throne for a ‘front’ government?

• What happens to the substantial nuclear arsenal? Does Al Qaeda get control of it?

• Does India - the Pakis’ main enemy - move in and try to neutralize these weapons?

• Does the US military have a plan to go in during the inevitable chaos and ‘secure’ these weapons and prevent them from falling into the wrong hands?

• What government replaces Musharraf? What happens to Benazir Bhutto? Does the next assassination attempt prove to be - sadly - successful?

In these question may lie the key to the US elections in exactly one year.


Hillary’s major stumble Tuesday night on the issue of giving illegal aliens New York State drivers licenses could very well be the beginning of the end of her campaign - if not in the primaries then in the general election.

No issue strikes a cord like this issue. Period.

Here in New York, Governor Eliot Spitzer has imploded over this issue - and his political career is already in tatters. (Yes, he was already on Life Support for his criminal behavior in a NY State scandal nicknamed Troopergate, but this license plan was the coup de grace.) He is being attacked from all sides for taking multiple positions on this issue - and now Hillary has jumped into this cauldron with him.

It will cost her Big Time.

1) First, she refused to take a stand in the debate. She pulled one of her normal Hillaryisms where she said absolutely nothing of substance.

2) Then her pathetic opponents jumped all over her for taking no position - or for ‘sounding’ like she was waffling. Of course, their problem is they all favor giving drivers licenses to illegals so they can’t attack her on the substance of the issue.

3) Then, the day after this disastrous debate for the prohibitive front-runner, she comes out for Spitzer’s plan. So she has now decided to take a position that may be popular among liberal, Iowa caucus-goers (may be, maybe not) but will be political suicide next year if she makes it into the general election.

4) Even here in liberal, blue state New York, this plan is wildly unpopular - even among New York Democrats statewide, among New York City citizens and among every single demographic group in all polls. A majority of every group opposes it!

5) But we Republicans have a bit of a problem: our two front-runners, Rudy and Romney, have also flip-flopped all over the place on the illegal immigration issue. Their records are abominable. True, they didn’t give licenses to them, but Rudy protected them as NY City mayor for 8 years. So we can’t be sure if these two candidates are the right men to exploit Hillary’s major mistake.

6) Back to the Democrats: they are going to seize this Hillary Stumble and try to pound her with it. The news media - bored with her ‘inevitability’ - is going to help stir things up. Even her buddy, the almost-forgotten and already-irrelevant Katie Couric, was skeptical of Hillary on the CBS News last night.

7) Look for increasing pressure on Hillary from here on out.

8) Barak Obama has proven to be a complete empty suit lightweight. He can’t handle big time politics and is actually a bit of a dim bulb. John Edwards is a killer - from his past court-room days - but he has little credibility. He is also a total fraud and phony. The Democrats really are pathetic, aren’t they?

9) But so too are the GOP candidates. The ones who are ahead are not the answer.

Still, it will be fun to watch Hillary as she now is under the gun and no longer afforded “she can’t lose” status but the so-called Mainstream Media.