To the editor:

In reading Mr. Sisett鈥檚 letter in the November 18 edition of this paper [Media Complicit in Trump's 'Big Lie']

, and watching the one sided coverage on almost all US mainstream media, you could easily replace 鈥淭rump鈥� with 鈥淐linton鈥� in reading his letter, and probably added a lot more.

Ask yourself,:

Who makes millions of dollars from private speeches to big banks and big business on Wall Street, and foreign governments?

Who was behind the attack that destroyed Libya, then opened the door to hundreds of thousands of refugees fleeing Africa and into Europe and destabilizing those countries?

Who preferred to get their beauty sleep when four Americans died in the raid on the Benghazi compound in 2012 rather than order military help to get them out of harm鈥檚 way?

Who has  a foundation that accepts 'bribes' for favours from the US government?

Who facilitates these million-dollar donations from countries that are actively involved in human rights abuses?

And who destroys evidence, despite an FBI subpoena to produce same evidence, relative to an ongoing investigation?

Who lies under oath before congressional hearings?

Donald is a choir boy compared to what Hillary has done, or not done.

Granted, the choice was not optimal, and I would suggest that most were voting for the lesser of two evils.

So who does the American voter choose: Someone who has had 30 years experience as a politician to get it right, and never has, or a newbie with no political experience, an unknown? An interesting choice.

I can think of two important reasons why HRC did not win the election. First, her lack of a clear platform on most issues. Second, her constant negative focus on her opposition in order to deflect any negative focus away from her. And third, her inability to really connect with the voters.

Americans had a difficult choice, and they now have to live with that choice for the next four years.

Grant Baudais, 琉璃神社