Now CNN and Fox News like to attack each other. You know, they both talked about the bad behavior of the other. And Chris Cuomo and Don Lemon were talking about how on Fox News the story of the caravan suddenly went from this dangerous invasion to not even a story. And well, they do have sort of a point there, don't they? But I would add a few things to that. Number one, as I've said from the beginning, nobody on either side of the discussion believed that the caravan was a big problem. Nobody at Fox News thought it was a big problem. Everybody understands that if the caravan did whatever it wanted to do and got its way, no matter what that looked like to you, but if the caravan got its way and most of those people got into the country, the real question is what happens next? Well the next thing that happens is more caravans, right?

So when CNN talks about, oh Fox News, you're making a bigger deal about this, it's no invasion, it's just a few hundred people, that's falling apart, there are hundreds of miles from our border and all that, that's all totally valid. But it's also not the right point. The point has nothing to do with this caravan because this caravan is not really a big deal when you look at the whole world, the whole country. It's what happens next. So we'll see what happens next. I would say that the president has done a good job of making sure that what happens next turns into a non-issue because he moved the military down there. He's making whatever changes he needs to. He has threatened them sufficiently that apparently they've backed off. He's also worked with Mexico to make accommodations within Mexico. So I think the president has carved away on the caravan in all the right ways, psychologically, legally, militarily, security-wise, to make it a non-issue. Which also pretty much guarantees that there won't be another string of caravans coming through as long as there's a President Trump. Because whatever happened this time is going to inform them what the next one looks like.

So it's not a coincidence the caravan left the news because once the election is over it actually is less important. And it also has been largely dealt with. So it did shrink from big and scary to nothing we should worry about at the moment. But it does have to be dealt with.

I love watching CNN when they label Fox News a wholly owned subsidiary of the Trump administration. So the CNN framing of their competitor, their mortal enemy Fox News, is that Fox News is just in the pocket of Trump and the Trump administration. Now if you watch the news you would know that clearly Fox News is a pro-Trump, pro-conservative editorial slant. And CNN consistently is sort of a Clinton Democrat kind of a slant. So as either of them accused the other, they're both largely right.

But I've said this before and I'm going to say it again. There does seem to me a difference in how Fox labels its opinion versus its news. When you're watching, you know, Shepard Smith for example, if you're watching him it looks like news and he does not seem to be in the pocket of Trump, right? If you watch, why am I blanking on his name, Neil Cavuto, he sometimes loves what Trump is doing, sometimes he doesn't. And that feels fair. You don't really see that on CNN, right? You don't see anybody on CNN who's an on-air personality who sometimes agrees with the president and sometimes doesn't on a fairly regular basis. Bret Baier is another one. You know, he's hard news, seems to stick to the facts. It does not look like opinion when he presents it. But then you take Hannity. Hannity is just clearly an opinion show and he labels it as clearly as you would ever want it labeled. He says it as clearly as you want him to say it, as often as he wants to say it. At the end he tells you he's personal friends with the president. So when I watch Hannity I can put that in the right context.

But here's where it gets dicey. When I'm watching, let's say, Anderson Cooper's show, Anderson Cooper is most well known for being a hard news guy. Most of his career he was the guy in the hurricane, the disaster, the war zone. You know, and when he was reporting you weren't getting opinion. He was telling you there's a flood here, this is happening. I mean he did the hard work of real journalism. But at the moment his current job is sort of this weird hybrid where he's sort of the serious moderator and the pundits are doing the job of the opinion. And because it's him I think our minds give it more weight as being news. Because when you see Anderson Cooper you say, well that's a news guy. And then you hear one of his pundits say the president's obviously a white supremacist or whatever they say on CNN, and you won't see anybody disagree with it. So you process it as though you heard news when in fact it was opinion. I think that's a difference. But I'd be open to a counter-argument on that.

So the only point is that Fox News seems to label its opinion more clearly than CNN. And I don't know if any of that's intentional. It just could be the way things rolled out.