And on January the 20th, what happened?

1 月 20 日發生了什麼？

Joe Biden became the president.

喬-拜登成為總統

Donald Trump left the White House.

唐納德-特朗普離開白宮

It's really rich for Democratic leaders to say that Donald Trump is a unique threat to democracy when he peacefully gave over power on January the 20th, as we have done for 250 years in this country.

民主黨領導人說唐納德-特朗普是對民主的獨特威脅，而他是在 1 月 20 日和平交出權力的，就像我們在這個國家 250 年來所做的那樣。

Did he lose the 2020 election?

他是否輸掉了 2020 年大選？

Tim, I'm focused on the future.

蒂姆，我著眼於未來。

Did Kamala Harris censor Americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 COVID situation?

在 2020 年 COVID 事件之後，卡馬拉-哈里斯是否審查了美國人的言論？

That is a damning non-answer.

這是一個令人震驚的不回答。

Yikes.

呀

While you were probably sleeping last night, the highly anticipated vice presidential debate happened.

當你們昨晚還在睡夢中時，萬眾矚目的副總統辯論就已經開始了。

And while usually VP debates are pretty inconsequential, when you have an election like this one, which feels existential, even the usually mundane things become very high stakes.

雖然副總統辯論通常都無關緊要，但當你遇到像這次這樣的大選時，即使是通常平淡無奇的事情也會變得事關重大。

And if one person understood the high stakes of last night, it was clearly Governor Walz, who was fitzing in his dungarees up there.

如果說有一個人瞭解昨晚的重大利害關係，那顯然就是州長沃爾茲了，他正穿著他的連褲襪在那裡愜意地享受著。

But we'll get into each candidate's performance.

不過，我們會討論每位候選人的表現。

Plus we'll check their facts and unpack what last night's performance means for November.

此外，我們還將核實他們的事實，並解讀昨晚的表現對 11 月份意味著什麼。

Let's get into it.

讓我們開始吧。

Presidential debates always generate a ton of buzz and media coverage, and with them a lot of opportunity for misinformation.

總統辯論總是會引發大量的討論和媒體報道，同時也會帶來很多錯誤信息。

In a world where the media landscape is increasingly divided, it's important to stay informed and get context into how the media is covering important issues.

在媒體格局日益分化的今天，瞭解媒體是如何報道重要問題的，並掌握其來龍去脈非常重要。

For example, news outlets dissecting the key takeaways from last night's debate are a great example of how different the media reports on stories depending on their bias.

例如，新聞機構剖析昨晚辯論的主要收穫就是一個很好的例子，說明了媒體報道的不同取決於其偏見。

You can see that the left is highlighting

您可以看到左側突出顯示

Vance's defensiveness and emotional reactions during the debate, portraying him as condescending and resistant to facts, while the right critiques the moderators for bias against Vance and focuses on Vance's criticisms of Harris's record on immigration.

右派責備主持人對萬斯有偏見，並把焦點放在萬斯對哈里斯移民記錄的責備上。

For example, leftist publication,

例如，左派出版品

The New Republic's headline says,

新共和》的標題是

J.D. Vance lashes out after the smallest fact check in VP debate.

J.D.萬斯在副總統辯論中對最小的事實核查進行了抨擊。

Meanwhile, right-leaning publication, The Blaze, published the headline, J.D. Vance hammers Tim Walz on immigration, energy policy, and the economy in lively but civil VP debate.

與此同時，右傾刊物《The Blaze》發表了這樣的標題：J.D. Vance 在生動而文明的 VP 辯論中，就移民、能源政策和經濟問題向 Tim Walz 發起了猛烈的攻擊。

Very different takes.

截然不同。

And that's where ground news comes in and why I've been using them for a year.

這就是地面新聞的作用所在，也是我使用它們一年來的原因。

Today's partner, Ground News, is a great tool for understanding the news.

今天的合作伙伴 Ground News 是瞭解新聞的好工具。

They provide helpful context for these starkly different headlines about the same story.

它們為這些關於同一事件的截然不同的標題提供了有益的背景。

You can see the overall bias distribution of the news sources covering this story.

您可以看到報道這一事件的新聞來源的總體偏見分佈。

Only 13% of the coverage is right-wing news sources, which is similar to the presidential debate and tells me maybe their readers just don't really care, I guess.

只有 13% 的報道來自右翼新聞來源，這與總統辯論的情況類似，這告訴我也許他們的讀者並不真正關心這個問題。

On the right-hand side, you can see the overall factuality rating of the sources, with most sources receiving a high factuality rating so you know who you can trust.

在右側，您可以看到資訊來源的總體事實性評級，大多數資訊來源的事實性評級都很高，是以您知道誰值得信賴。

Seeing factuality ratings like this, along with who owns the source, can be really helpful to provide more context to your own echo chamber.

看到這樣的事實評級，以及消息來源的所有者，對於為自己的迴音室提供更多背景資訊非常有幫助。

You and your social media may have had one reaction to something J.D. Vance said, but it's important to understand the larger picture and what people outside your bubble are saying.

您和您的社交媒體可能會對 J.D. Vance 的言論做出某種反應，但重要的是要了解更廣闊的視野以及您的 "保麗龍 "之外的人在說什麼。

And I'm able to get all this context and information thanks to Ground News.

我能瞭解到這些背景和資訊，都要感謝《地面新聞》。

And with the US election fast approaching, my favorite Ground News feature at the moment is their 2024 US election focused blind spot feed.

隨著美國大選的臨近，我目前最喜歡的地面新聞功能是他們的 2024 年美國大選聚焦盲點推送。

With a bird's eye view of issues that tend to get more attention from the left or right than others, I can easily step out of my echo chamber and understand how partisan narratives shape reality and votes.

通過鳥瞰往往比其他問題更受左翼或右翼關注的問題，我可以輕鬆走出我的迴音室，瞭解黨派敘事是如何塑造現實和選票的。

I'm always really impressed with Ground News and I genuinely think they're a great resource for identifying biases in the media.

地面新聞》一直給我留下深刻印象，我真心認為他們是識別媒體偏見的絕佳資源。

So scan my QR code, click the link in the description, or go to ground.news.legia to get 40% off the same vantage plan I use to stay informed, which comes to about $5 a month.

掃描我的二維碼，點擊描述中的鏈接，或者訪問 ground.news.legia，就可以享受與我用來保持資訊暢通的 vantage 計劃相同的四折優惠，每月約 5 美元。

You get unlimited access to all Ground News has to offer while helping an independent team keep the media transparent.

您可以無限制地訪問 Ground News 提供的所有內容，同時幫助獨立團隊保持媒體的透明度。

Thanks, Ground News.

謝謝，地面新聞。

First, the performance.

首先是表演。

Because debates are, after all, a show, a charade for the American people to see the candidates perform under pressure and answer key questions about policy to get a better feel for what it would be like for them to be in power.

因為辯論畢竟是一場表演，是讓美國人民看到候選人在壓力下的表現，回答有關政策的關鍵問題，以便更好地瞭解他們執政的情況。

Which is why the VP debate is usually small potatoes because let's face it,

這就是為什麼副總統辯論通常都是小打小鬧，因為讓我們面對現實吧、

VPs don't really actually have that much power.

副總裁實際上並沒有那麼大的權力。

A key thing to remember, as we discuss Vance's accusations of all the things Harris hasn't managed to do while wielding the great and terrible power that comes with being a VP, such as photo ops and press conferences.

在我們討論萬斯對哈里斯在行使副總統的巨大而可怕的權力時沒有做到的所有事情（如拍照和新聞發佈會）的指責時，有一件關鍵的事情要記住。

I already made an episode about how little power a VP actually has.

我已經做了一集介紹副總統的權力有多小。

You can check that out after this.

您可以在此之後查看。

Anyway, so when we tune into a debate, we're looking for a performance.

總之，當我們收聽辯論時，我們在尋找一種表現。

And there was a clear winner in last night's performance.

在昨晚的表演中，有一個明顯的贏家。

And it wasn't the bumbling Minnesotan governor,

而不是那個笨手笨腳的明尼蘇達州州長、

I'm so sorry to say.

我很遺憾地說

I was rooting for him.

我支持他。

He is so great at talking face-to-face with people.

他非常擅長與人面對面交談。

And even his stump speeches on the campaign trail have been smart, down to earth and folksy.

就連他在競選活動中的演說也是精明、樸實、親切的。

But at the debate, Walls struggled.

但在辯論會上，華爾斯卻很掙扎。

He had clearly been heavily prepped, but it was too much information.

他顯然做了大量準備工作，但信息量太大了。

Instead of saying, here are the three things you need to talk about for each topic, he clearly tried to internalize a wide range of talking points for each topic, and then tried to very quickly and somewhat incoherently string all of the ideas together in each of his answers as though he were checking the words off a mental list, but forgetting the other words that have to go in between the buzzwords to make coherent points.

他沒有說 "每個話題你需要談的三件事是這樣的"，而是很明顯地試圖將每個話題的各種談話要點內化，然後試圖非常快速地、有點語無倫次地將所有觀點串聯在他的每一個答案中，就好像他在核對腦中清單上的單詞，卻忘記了在這些流行語之間必須有其他單詞才能構成連貫的觀點。

He was so focused on hitting those points that not only did he speak way too quickly, and listen, I'm a fast talker, okay?

他太專注於這些要點了，不僅語速太快，聽著，我是個快嘴，好嗎？

That's probably the number one complaint

這可能是第一大投訴

I get on these videos, is people want me to slow down, to which I say, no.

在這些視頻中，人們希望我慢下來，對此我說，不。

I watch and listen to literally everything at 1.5 to two times speed.

我用 1.5 到 2 倍的速度觀看和收聽所有內容。

Now it's your turn to listen at 0.5 speed, okay?

現在輪到你用 0.5 的速度聽了，好嗎？

This is for all the 1.5 to two times speed watchers and listeners out there who are able to listen to my shit at regular speed.

這是為所有能以正常速度收聽我的節目的 1.5 倍速到 2 倍速的觀眾和聽眾準備的。

You're welcome.

不客氣。

Also, I'm not giving a speech or participating in a debate where the rules are vastly different.

另外，我不是在演講，也不是在參加辯論，辯論的規則大不相同。

I'm doing a song and dance on social media where attention spans are 0.5 seconds, so I gotta move fast.

我在社交媒體上載歌載舞，而人們的注意力只有 0.5 秒，所以我必須快速行動。

Unfortunately for Walls, he was in a debate where speaking at a measured, smooth, articulate pace is an asset that he did not possess, but J.D. Vance did.

不幸的是，華爾斯在辯論中發言時語速勻稱、流暢、口齒清晰，這是他所不具備的優點，而 J.D. Vance 卻具備。

And I think that surprised a lot of people, myself included, for a number of reasons.

我想這讓很多人感到驚訝，包括我自己，原因有很多。

First, the hype over Harris and the clear and easy victory she had against Trump in their debate put our expectations of Walls very, very high.

首先，對哈里斯的炒作以及她在與特朗普的辯論中明顯輕鬆地戰勝了特朗普，讓我們對沃爾斯的期望非常非常高。

Though I will say I don't appreciate the media's reporting on him as a typical simpleton folksy Minnesotan as though we're all out here just fumbling around flyover country with our dumb, simple minds that can't think too fast or speak too good.

不過我還是要說，我不喜歡媒體把他報道成一個典型的憨厚的明尼蘇達鄉下人，好像我們都是在天橋之國摸爬滾打，頭腦簡單、思維敏捷、能說會道。

As a Minnesotan, I resent that.

作為明尼蘇達人，我對此深惡痛絕。

As a governor of Minnesota and VP running mate, however, that is the caricature that has been painted of Walls, and that is one of his selling points, that he is down to earth and doesn't speak like a politician but instead like your friend's dad who helps you fix your carburetor.

然而，作為明尼蘇達州州長和副總統競選夥伴，華爾斯被描繪成了一幅漫畫，而這正是他的賣點之一，即他腳踏實地，說話不像政客，而像你朋友的父親，幫你修理化油器。

And I think outside of the debate stage last night, he's done a fantastic job of selling that caricature in a way that's endearing to the American people, but it did not serve him well last night.

我認為，在昨晚的辯論舞臺之外，他以一種讓美國人民喜愛的方式推銷這種漫畫形象的工作做得非常出色，但這對他昨晚的表現並不有利。

Another thing that surprised me and a lot of people was how smooth and articulate Vance was because he has also been painted by the left as a caricature, a weirdo who doesn't know how to speak like a human and who says horrible things about immigrants and women with impunity.

另一件讓我和很多人都感到驚訝的事情是，萬斯的語言表達是如此的流暢和清晰，因為他也曾被左翼人士描繪成一個漫畫形象，一個不知道如何像人一樣說話的怪人，而且肆無忌憚地對移民和婦女說著可怕的話。

And I think his strengths are directly opposite Tim Walls'.

我認為他的優勢與蒂姆-沃爾斯的優勢正好相反。

When he tries to talk to people out and about in a community and when he's asked direct and challenging questions by reporters who don't let him get away with things, he looks like a fool.

當他試圖在社區中與人們交談時，當記者向他提出直接而具有挑戰性的問題時，他就會像個傻瓜一樣。

But when given free reign on a debate stage with an opponent who isn't as slick as him, he was able to make his lies sound believable and coherent.

但是，當他在辯論臺上與不像他那麼狡猾的對手自由辯論時，他卻能讓自己的謊言聽起來可信而連貫。

And we'll get into why I think this is the most insidious and important takeaway of the night, but let's get into those lies because unlike the presidential debate, this VP debate was actually incredibly substantive and got into the weeds on a lot of issues which opened the door for a lot of lies, mostly from Vance.

我們將討論為什麼我認為這是當晚最陰險、最重要的收穫，但讓我們討論一下這些謊言，因為與總統辯論不同，這場副總統辯論實際上非常實質性，在很多問題上都深入淺出，這為很多謊言打開了方便之門，其中大部分來自萬斯。

Lie number one, Vance claimed the U.S.

謊言一，萬斯聲稱美國

is the cleanest economy in the entire world and argued that if Harris really cared about climate change, which Vance refused to confirm was a real thing, then she would bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.

她認為，如果哈里斯真的關心氣候變化（萬斯拒絕證實氣候變化的真實性），那麼她就會把製造業工作崗位帶回美國。

instead of outsourcing them to dirty, dirty China.

而不是外包給骯髒的中國。

While that's an interesting spin on climate denial that I think plays well into the Republican rhetoric that it doesn't exist, it is not true that the U.S. is the cleanest economy in the world.

雖然這種否認氣候的說法很有趣，我認為它很好地迎合了共和黨關於氣候不存在的言論，但美國是世界上最清潔的經濟體並不屬實。

The most widely cited measure of a country's green level is the Environmental Performance Index.

衡量一個國家綠色水準的最廣泛引用的標準是環境績效指數。

That score includes more than just the economy, but is a good measure of how green a country is generally.

這一分數不僅包括經濟，也是衡量一個國家總體綠色程度的良好標準。

The U.S. ranks 34 on that list behind all of Western Europe, most of Eastern Europe, as well as Japan, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand.

美國在該榜單中排名 34，落後於整個西歐、大部分東歐以及日本、加拿大、澳洲和紐西蘭。

So I'm not sure where he's getting the cleanest economy in the entire world talking point.

所以，我不知道他從哪裡聽來的 "全世界最清潔的經濟體 "的說法。

China does rank far below us at 154th, but to say that bringing manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.

中國的排名確實遠遠低於我們，排在第 154 位，但如果說將製造業工作崗位帶回美國

would improve clean air and water is disingenuous at best because we still have huge problems in this country with too much emissions, and it removes the blame from the shoulders of the companies doing the polluting, whether that's here or in China or anywhere.

這種說法充其量只是虛情假意，因為我們國家仍然存在排放過多的巨大問題，而且這種說法把責任推卸給了造成汙染的公司，無論是在國內還是在中國或其他地方。

We all have to breathe that air.

我們都必須呼吸這種空氣。

There is no our air versus China's air.

沒有我們的空氣和中國的空氣之分。

We're all trapped in the same bubble.

我們都被困在同一個保麗龍中。

Also, companies tied to J.D. Vance, either from when he was a venture capitalist or from the billionaires who have funded his career, were actively moving manufacturing jobs abroad.

此外，與J.D. Vance有聯繫的公司，無論是他擔任風險投資人時的公司，還是資助他職業生涯的億萬富翁的公司，都在積極地將製造業的工作崗位轉移到國外。

So this is, once again, an example of J.D. Vance saying and believing whatever will get him what he wants at any given moment.

所以，這又是一個例子，J.D. Vance 在任何時候都會說和相信任何能讓他如願以償的話。

There are 25 million illegal aliens in the U.S., and they're stealing our housing and our jobs.

美國有 2500 萬非法移民，他們偷走了我們的住房和工作。

When asked to explain how he plans to implement the largest mass deportation in history, as Trump has promised, Vance made the claim that there are 20 to 25 million illegal aliens in the country.

當被要求解釋他計劃如何按照特朗普的承諾，實施史上最大規模的大規模驅逐時，萬斯聲稱該國有 2,000 萬至 2,500 萬非法移民。

That is false.

這是錯誤的。

It's impossible to know the numbers, but several studies estimate it to be around 11 million people, half of what Vance claimed.

我們不可能知道具體數字，但有幾項研究估計大約有 1100 萬人，是萬斯所說數字的一半。

The Office of Homeland Security report says it.

國土安全辦公室的報告如是說。

The Pew Research Center says it.

皮尤研究中心如是說。

The Nonpartisan Migration Policy Institute says it.

無黨派移民政策研究所如是說。

And even the conservative think tank,

甚至還有保守派智囊團、

Center for Immigration Studies, has estimated 12 million.

移民研究中心估計有 1 200 萬人。

So this is patently false.

是以，這顯然是錯誤的。

Vance repeatedly throughout the night blamed all of the problems in America on either immigrants or manufacturing jobs outsourced overseas.

萬斯在整個晚上反覆將美國的所有問題歸咎於移民或外包給海外的製造業工作。

He blamed our housing shortage on too many immigrants.

他把我們的住房短缺歸咎於移民太多。

And while it is absolutely true that there are many cities in this country struggling with homelessness epidemics and don't have additional shelters and housing for the migrants arriving from the border, that shortage is not because of immigrants.

雖然這個國家有許多城市都在與無家可歸者的流行病作鬥爭，沒有為從邊境來的移民提供更多的庇護所和住房，但這種短缺並不是因為移民，這是千真萬確的。

Immigrants are being affected by it, but placing the blame on the shoulders of some of the most vulnerable people on the planet, many of whom are seeking asylum or simply to be able to provide a roof and food for their families, that is letting major corporations off the hook for the way they have absolutely destroyed the housing stock in this country.

移民受到了影響，但把責任推到地球上最脆弱的人群身上，他們中的許多人正在尋求庇護，或者僅僅是為了給家人提供一個棲身之所和食物。

People are struggling to find housing because wealth inequality is the highest it's ever been, because BlackRock owns all of our houses and landlords are price-fixing, and we've let free enterprise run amok with one of the things necessary for sustaining human life, shelter.

人們苦於找不到住房，因為財富不平等達到了有史以來的最高點，因為貝萊德擁有我們所有的房子，房東操縱價格，我們讓自由企業在維持人類生活的必需品之一--住房上肆意妄為。

There is enough wealth in this country that everyone should be housed and fed, including the influx of immigrants at our borders.

這個國家有足夠的財富，每個人都應該有房住、有飯吃，包括湧入我們邊境的移民。

We have enough wealth to support them.

我們有足夠的財富來養活他們。

It's just being hoarded by billionaires who buy out our politicians so they don't have to pay their fair share thanks to handy tax loopholes.

這些錢只是被那些收買政客的億萬富翁們囤積起來，這樣他們就不必支付他們應得的那份錢了，這要歸功於方便的稅收漏洞。

Politicians around the world who benefit from provoking fear in their base of supporters want everyone to think that the wealth is scarce and must be protected from those violent barbaric immigrants.

世界各地的政客們通過在其支持者群體中引發恐懼而獲益，他們希望每個人都認為財富是稀缺的，必須保護財富不受那些暴力野蠻移民的侵害。

But the only reason the wealth is scarce is because the people in power and their billionaire benefactors have made it so.

但是，財富稀缺的唯一原因是當權者和他們的億萬富翁恩人造成的。

But to distract us from noticing that and banding together in class solidarity, they villainize immigrants and sit back while we all fight over the scraps they've thrown to us.

但是，為了轉移我們的注意力，讓我們不注意到這一點，不團結起來進行階級團結，他們就把移民說成是惡棍，坐視我們為他們扔給我們的殘羹剩飯而爭鬥。

It's truly some Mad Max dystopian shit, but people who aren't taught to see the bigger picture of how fucked we all are by this system because they come from a failing education system that is also being torn apart by politicians and their billionaire benefactors, they don't know to look at the bigger picture, and instead, when Vance and Trump say, hey, look, there's so many impoverished immigrants here struggling to find housing along with you.

這確實是 "瘋狂的麥克斯"（Mad Max）式的烏托邦，但那些沒有被教導過的人，因為他們來自一個失敗的教育系統，而這個系統也被政客和他們的億萬富翁恩人搞得支離破碎，所以他們不知道要看大局，相反，當萬斯和特朗普說，嘿，看，這裡有這麼多貧困的移民在和你們一起掙扎著找房子。

No, no, no, don't look at the man behind the curtain.

不不不，別看幕後黑手。

It's actually those very immigrants who are stealing your affordable housing and murdering everyone on site while they're at it.

實際上，正是這些移民在偷竊你們的經濟適用房，並在偷竊的同時殺害現場的所有人。

So the problem must be solved by closing down the borders and being very, very afraid of brown people.

是以，必須通過關閉邊境和非常非常害怕棕色人種來解決問題。

Last night, J.D. Vance also blamed unemployment on immigrants in what was truly such a fucking twisted argument,

昨晚，萬斯（J.D. Vance）還把失業問題歸咎於移民，真是他媽的歪理邪說、

I would be remiss not to point it out here.

如果不在這裡指出來，我就太失職了。

He said that the reason why wages are depressed is because immigrants are coming in undercutting our wages and taking our jobs from us, as though it is the immigrants' fault that they're being paid $3 an hour to pick our strawberries, as though if those manual labor jobs in the fields were available,

他說，工資之所以不景氣，是因為移民的到來壓低了我們的工資，搶走了我們的工作，好像他們拿著每小時 3 美元的工資來摘我們的草莓是移民的錯，好像那些田裡的體力活都是他們的錯、

Americans would be flocking to them, as though the owners of those farms who are paying immigrants $3 an hour under the table would happily and readily hire Americans and pay them federal minimum wage, which would more than double their labor costs, if only these deviant migrant workers didn't keep coming and demanding to be paid $3 an hour, or as though we have an absolute surplus of red-blooded American construction workers desperate for jobs, but all these immigrants keep coming in and demanding to work long hours for criminally little pay while ruining their bodies.

美國人將蜂擁而至，就好像那些在桌子底下支付移民每小時 3 美元工資的農場主，如果不是這些離經叛道的移民工人不斷湧入並要求每小時 3 美元的工資，他們會很樂意僱傭美國人並支付聯邦最低工資，這將使他們的勞動力成本增加一倍以上；又好像我們有絕對過剩的熱血沸騰的美國建築工人急需工作，但所有這些移民不斷湧入，要求長時間工作，領取低得令人髮指的工資，同時毀掉他們的身體。

All of these arguments demonizing immigrants bet on Americans' short-sighted inability to connect the dots, and that's why they work, because a lot of us aren't very good at connecting the dots.

所有這些妖魔化移民的論點都是在利用美國人目光短淺、無法將各種問題聯繫起來的弱點，而這正是這些論點奏效的原因，因為我們中的很多人都不善於將各種問題聯繫起來。

I don't have job, immigrant has job, therefore immigrant take my job.

我沒有工作，移民有工作，所以移民搶走了我的工作。

Again, manufacturing scarcity so billionaires can continue to profit while the rest of us fight amongst each other like ants trying to grab up the scraps they're throwing us.

再次，製造稀缺，讓億萬富翁們繼續牟利，而我們其他人卻像螞蟻一樣互相爭鬥，試圖搶奪他們扔給我們的殘羹剩飯。

You are far closer to homelessness and starvation wages than you are to being a millionaire, but the brainwashing of the American condition has you identifying with and empathizing with and humanizing businesses and billionaires more readily than humans crossing the border in search of safety and stability, because we've been conditioned to believe that we're all temporarily embarrassed millionaires, and that scarcity is caused by the most vulnerable among us, and J.D. Vance and Trump did not invent this, but they are capitalizing on it in a moment when the entire world is turning nationalistic and demonizing migrants in order to protect their billionaire benefactors from having to answer to the angry mobs they should be answering to.

比起成為百萬富翁，你更接近無家可歸和飢餓的工資，但美國人的洗腦卻讓你更容易認同、同情和人性化企業和億萬富翁，而不是穿越邊境尋求安全和穩定的人，因為我們已經習慣於相信我們都是暫時陷入窘境的百萬富翁，而匱乏是由我們中最脆弱的人造成的，J. D. 萬斯和特朗普並沒有發明這一點，但他們卻在整個世界轉向民族主義和妖魔化移民的時刻利用了這一點，以保護他們的億萬富翁受益人不必對他們的行為負責。J.D.萬斯和特朗普並沒有發明這一點，但他們卻在全世界都轉向民族主義和妖魔化移民的時候利用了這一點，以保護他們的億萬富翁受益人，

Also, 90% of fentanyl in the U.S.

此外，美國 90% 的芬太尼

is brought in through legal ports of entry by U.S. citizens.

由美國公民通過合法入境口岸帶入。

I am so sick of this lie that illegals are using children as drug mules and smuggling them across the border in the night, and that's why we're all dying of drug overdoses.

我已經受夠了這種謊言，說什麼非法移民利用兒童作為毒品騾子，趁著夜色偷運他們越過邊境，所以我們才會死於吸毒過量。

It once again blames immigrants for the problems caused by U.S. citizens and U.S. companies.

它再次將美國公民和美國公司造成的問題歸咎於移民。

Moving on.

繼續前進。

Next lie, is Trump planning on registering pregnancies?