"A few bad actors".
Charges of seditious conspiracy have been brought. True, only about 10 people have been charged so far. Do you think these charges are false? Do you think they crime they are accused of is not serious?
I also disagree with blocking access to the Supreme Court, thats also not a good thing to do, but, there's no allegation that anyone there attacked any police.  And we already know the Supreme Court can work remotely.  Broader picture, one guy is charged with planning to assassinate Kavanaugh, but he never attacked his target and didn't attack the cops protecting the target either.
So how can you draw any equivalence? Ethically they are both wrong, but one is much much more serious than the other.

Not attacking cops vs. attacking them
Lone wolf vs. conspiracy
Packing a couple of guns vs. creating multiple armories around town
Deciding abortion law vs deciding who the next CoC of the world's largest military is

This is sawdust vs. planks, man.

I would never call it kayfabe but for the sake of argument.. can't you agree that this type of play acting is extremely inadvisable? That it attracts many people, on both sides, who don't think it's play acting?

Of course, I don't think the feds should've pushed those people to action, but the chance to get the gullible to blame Trump was too much to pass up. As for the 10 people with charges, thats pretty laughable if our Country is so fragile that they present an actual threat. As I said, the lack of guns at the site is the clearest evidence of lack of intent. Had the mob been armed, as they easily could've been, we'd be talking about dead congress critters and cops while patching up bullet holes in the Capital. Instead you have to pretend that an insurrection was planned and executed with flag poles and fire extinguishers as the weapon of choice. Meanwhile you try to downplay what's happening now, days before the actual trigger event will occur, because a guy legitimately trying to kill a Justice over a ruling isn't the same attack on our Sacred Institutions since he's a Lefty attacking a Conservtive.

It was not easy for the mob to be armed.  You can't open carry in DC.  They had to cause general lawlessness first, get the cops distracted, and maybe get some units from DC NG on their side with Trump invoking the Insurrection Act, and then the second wave team was going to bring in the guns.  It wasn't a great plan, and it's pretty clear Trump lost his nerve once Pence started giving orders and the chain of command started following them, but it was a plan.  You just can't see it because you don't want to see it.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Of course, I don't think the feds should've pushed those people to action, but the chance to get the gullible to blame Trump was too much to pass up. As for the 10 people with charges, thats pretty laughable if our Country is so fragile that they present an actual threat. As I said, the lack of guns at the site is the clearest evidence of lack of intent. Had the mob been armed, as they easily could've been, we'd be talking about dead congress critters and cops while patching up bullet holes in the Capital. Instead you have to pretend that an insurrection was planned and executed with flag poles and fire extinguishers as the weapon of choice. Meanwhile you try to downplay what's happening now, days before the actual trigger event will occur, because a guy legitimately trying to kill a Justice over a ruling isn't the same attack on our Sacred Institutions since he's a Lefty attacking a Conservtive.

It was not easy for the mob to be armed.  You can't open carry in DC.  They had to cause general lawlessness first, get the cops distracted, and maybe get some units from DC NG on their side with Trump invoking the Insurrection Act, and then the second wave team was going to bring in the guns.  It wasn't a great plan, and it's pretty clear Trump lost his nerve once Pence started giving orders and the chain of command started following them, but it was a plan.  You just can't see it because you don't want to see it.

More like you seeing what isn't there.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

I wonder why CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. hasn't reported much on the assassination attempt on a Supreme Court Justice?  After all, that's a direct attack on our way of government.

Oh that's right, they need to breathlessly report on this sham "hearing" to deflect from the mess that the country has become in less than two years.

The left wing media adopted the talking point of an "insurrection" and far left democrats like Mikesez ate it up.

Meanwhile....

record inflation
gasoline at an all time high
diesel at an all time high
border wide open with many more on the way
massive violence due to "de-fund the police"
the embarrassing bungled attempt to leave Afghanistan
baby formula shortage

The list goes on and on.

Can you imagine if someone had been caught outside RBG’s home in an identical scenario during Trump’s presidency?  Would the media ho hum such a scenario?

If those on the left are being honest with themselves, they’d realize and admit the media reaction would be a 180 to Kavanaugh’s situation.  And it’s not just that scenario.  It’s pretty much any scenario of left vs right when filtered through the media. It’s because the majority of news outlets blatantly carry water for democrats and the left and it gets observably worse and more out in the open the closer we get to an election (i.e. Hunter Biden).  

Its timing release of stories for maximum damage.  It’s sitting on stories to protect.  It’s almost completely one sided. They went so far as to, at worst, outright lie to the American people that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation and, at best, gleefully shout from the mountain tops this democrat party disinformation narrative while actively suppressing the story to protect “the big guy”.

What type of candidates do you think you’re going to get when those who are supposed to vet them in the public eye are actually completely in the pocket of the person/party they’re supposed to be vetting?

---

I wonder why CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. hasn't reported much on the assassination attempt on a Supreme Court Justice?  After all, that's a direct attack on our way of government.

Oh that's right, they need to breathlessly report on this sham "hearing" to deflect from the mess that the country has become in less than two years.

The left wing media adopted the talking point of an "insurrection" and far left democrats like Mikesez ate it up.

Meanwhile....

record inflation
gasoline at an all time high
diesel at an all time high
border wide open with many more on the way
massive violence due to "de-fund the police"
the embarrassing bungled attempt to leave Afghanistan
baby formula shortage

The list goes on and on.

Can you imagine if someone had been caught outside RBG’s home in an identical scenario during Trump’s presidency?  Would the media ho hum such a scenario?

If those on the left are being honest with themselves, they’d realize and admit the media reaction would be a 180 to Kavanaugh’s situation.  And it’s not just that scenario.  It’s pretty much any scenario of left vs right when filtered through the media. It’s because the majority of news outlets blatantly carry water for democrats and the left and it gets observably worse and more out in the open the closer we get to an election (i.e. Hunter Biden).  

Its timing release of stories for maximum damage.  It’s sitting on stories to protect.  It’s almost completely one sided. They went so far as to, at worst, outright lie to the American people that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation and, at best, gleefully shout from the mountain tops this democrat party disinformation narrative while actively suppressing the story to protect “the big guy”.

What type of candidates do you think you’re going to get when those who are supposed to vet them in the public eye are actually completely in the pocket of the person/party they’re supposed to be vetting?

The points that you bring up are very true.

The fact of the matter is, the mostly peaceful protest that took place that day is and was told by many on the far left mainstream media in a different light.  They are the ones that started the "insurrection" narrative and gullible far-left liberal democrats like Mikesez lapped it up and went with it.

FACT:  The only death that occurred that day was the result of a Capitol police officer shooting an un-armed woman.  You won't see that brought up in this so-called "hearing".

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

I wonder why CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, etc. hasn't reported much on the assassination attempt on a Supreme Court Justice?  After all, that's a direct attack on our way of government.

Oh that's right, they need to breathlessly report on this sham "hearing" to deflect from the mess that the country has become in less than two years.

The left wing media adopted the talking point of an "insurrection" and far left democrats like Mikesez ate it up.

Meanwhile....

record inflation
gasoline at an all time high
diesel at an all time high
border wide open with many more on the way
massive violence due to "de-fund the police"
the embarrassing bungled attempt to leave Afghanistan
baby formula shortage

The list goes on and on.

Can you imagine if someone had been caught outside RBG’s home in an identical scenario during Trump’s presidency?  Would the media ho hum such a scenario?

If those on the left are being honest with themselves, they’d realize and admit the media reaction would be a 180 to Kavanaugh’s situation.  And it’s not just that scenario.  It’s pretty much any scenario of left vs right when filtered through the media. It’s because the majority of news outlets blatantly carry water for democrats and the left and it gets observably worse and more out in the open the closer we get to an election (i.e. Hunter Biden).  

Its timing release of stories for maximum damage.  It’s sitting on stories to protect.  It’s almost completely one sided. They went so far as to, at worst, outright lie to the American people that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation and, at best, gleefully shout from the mountain tops this democrat party disinformation narrative while actively suppressing the story to protect “the big guy”.

What type of candidates do you think you’re going to get when those who are supposed to vet them in the public eye are actually completely in the pocket of the person/party they’re supposed to be vetting?

The party that said nothing while Jared Kushner became the money manager for middle eastern monarchs doesn't get to feign outrage when Hunter Biden tries to do the same with Chinese captains of industry or wives of Russian politicians. No one's even sure the money got to Hunter at all.
No one's alleging it changed Joe's behavior.  

But sure, yeah, biggest story ever.  No other story worth talking about.  No one should be taken seriously if they're not talking about Hunter Biden.

And of course the media are totally in bed with Dems at election time, like when Hillary's team planted that story about Trump campaign servers communicating with a Russian bank? The media totally ran with that for... oh days wasn't it? Oh right. It was only hours before they figured out Hillary was lying and took down the story.

You have a point with regard to Kavanaugh, that is an important story. But that story is probably over, don't you think? Do we need to breathlessly report every revelation on the guy's motives or state of mind?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Lol. This Hunter thing didn't happen because of Kushner. It's been happening. Also, the whole Russian collusion was a hoax. The media is corrupt, unreliable, and unbelievable.

---

Can you imagine if someone had been caught outside RBG’s home in an identical scenario during Trump’s presidency?  Would the media ho hum such a scenario?

If those on the left are being honest with themselves, they’d realize and admit the media reaction would be a 180 to Kavanaugh’s situation.  And it’s not just that scenario.  It’s pretty much any scenario of left vs right when filtered through the media. It’s because the majority of news outlets blatantly carry water for democrats and the left and it gets observably worse and more out in the open the closer we get to an election (i.e. Hunter Biden).  

Its timing release of stories for maximum damage.  It’s sitting on stories to protect.  It’s almost completely one sided. They went so far as to, at worst, outright lie to the American people that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation and, at best, gleefully shout from the mountain tops this democrat party disinformation narrative while actively suppressing the story to protect “the big guy”.

What type of candidates do you think you’re going to get when those who are supposed to vet them in the public eye are actually completely in the pocket of the person/party they’re supposed to be vetting?

The party that said nothing while Jared Kushner became the money manager for middle eastern monarchs doesn't get to feign outrage when Hunter Biden tries to do the same with Chinese captains of industry or wives of Russian politicians. No one's even sure the money got to Hunter at all.
No one's alleging it changed Joe's behavior.  

But sure, yeah, biggest story ever.  No other story worth talking about.  No one should be taken seriously if they're not talking about Hunter Biden.

And of course the media are totally in bed with Dems at election time, like when Hillary's team planted that story about Trump campaign servers communicating with a Russian bank? The media totally ran with that for... oh days wasn't it? Oh right.  It was only hours before they figured out Hillary was lying and took down the story. 

You have a point with regard to Kavanaugh, that is an important story. But that story is probably over, don't you think? Do we need to breathlessly report every revelation on the guy's motives or state of mind?

You are, as always being intellectually dishonest. It’s like you rip your narrative right of the DemoRat playbook. What the hell does Kushner have to do with the crimes committed by Hunter and “the Big Boss” deflect, deflect, deflect.

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

Lol. This Hunter thing didn't happen because of Kushner. It's been happening. Also, the whole Russian collusion was a hoax. The media is corrupt, unreliable, and unbelievable.

Perhaps true, but certainly irrelevant!
Kushner's corruption wasn't discussed much in the MSM either, if we're going to pout about stuff getting buried by MSM.
The point is, the Hunter Biden laptop story, even if I beleived the entire thing right away, should not cause any rational person to change their vote. "I just learned the son of candidate A was enriching himself by peddling access to his father, so I should vote for candidate B, whose son-in-law has been doing exactly that, out in the open, this entire time." Who thinks like that?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Can you imagine if someone had been caught outside RBG’s home in an identical scenario during Trump’s presidency?  Would the media ho hum such a scenario?

If those on the left are being honest with themselves, they’d realize and admit the media reaction would be a 180 to Kavanaugh’s situation.  And it’s not just that scenario.  It’s pretty much any scenario of left vs right when filtered through the media. It’s because the majority of news outlets blatantly carry water for democrats and the left and it gets observably worse and more out in the open the closer we get to an election (i.e. Hunter Biden).  

Its timing release of stories for maximum damage.  It’s sitting on stories to protect.  It’s almost completely one sided. They went so far as to, at worst, outright lie to the American people that Hunter’s laptop was Russian disinformation and, at best, gleefully shout from the mountain tops this democrat party disinformation narrative while actively suppressing the story to protect “the big guy”.

What type of candidates do you think you’re going to get when those who are supposed to vet them in the public eye are actually completely in the pocket of the person/party they’re supposed to be vetting?

The party that said nothing while Jared Kushner became the money manager for middle eastern monarchs doesn't get to feign outrage when Hunter Biden tries to do the same with Chinese captains of industry or wives of Russian politicians. No one's even sure the money got to Hunter at all.
No one's alleging it changed Joe's behavior.  

But sure, yeah, biggest story ever.  No other story worth talking about.  No one should be taken seriously if they're not talking about Hunter Biden.

And of course the media are totally in bed with Dems at election time, like when Hillary's team planted that story about Trump campaign servers communicating with a Russian bank? The media totally ran with that for... oh days wasn't it? Oh right.  It was only hours before they figured out Hillary was lying and took down the story. 

You have a point with regard to Kavanaugh, that is an important story. But that story is probably over, don't you think? Do we need to breathlessly report every revelation on the guy's motives or state of mind?

Mike, if you've ever wondered why no one takes you serious when you claim to be a republican or in general, your zeal for defending the left (and now the media) at every turn and in every thread might have something to do with it.  Just putting it out there.  Some people have no self awareness.  Not saying that's necessarily you.  I'm just at a loss. 

You'd have to be pretty gullible or an agent of the left peddling lies to say/believe no money ever made it to Hunter Biden.  Hello Burisma at the very least and I'd find it hard to believe that's not the tip of the iceberg. Family of political figures should be allowed to pursue their own business interests, even foreign ones.  It should be scrutinized heavily, sure.  Selling your artwork for big bucks (up to $500k per painting) when your father is currently the sitting President and you have no prior history of being able to do so is suspect, no?  Excerpt from thehill.com:

• Ethics concerns arose over the summer about (Hunter) Biden’s artwork and the White House created an agreement with Bergès to keep purchases confidential, according to The Washington Post. The agreement allows Bergès to set prices for the art and withhold all records, including potential bidders and final buyers. 
  

Um, what?  How do ethics concerns over this activity lead to less transparency?  Of all the things Hunter could do to make money, why choose to dally in the realm of peddling your artwork given his father's position?  Also from thehill.com article:

• Last year, the Treasury Department also issued an advisory warning that high-value artworks, “make it attractive to those engaged in illicit financial activity, including sanctions evasion.” 
  

Anyway, Jared at least appears to have a resume that supports his foreign business ventures.  Hunter?  Please feel free to come to his aid further if you wish, but to me it's quite obvious what's going on.  And it's ok if money got to Joe as long as his decisions affecting those who 'donated' weren't changed by the 'donation'?  Disagree.  Just ask yourself how that whole scenario plays out in the media if Jared is Hunter and Hunter is Jared.  This isn't difficult.

Also, I never claimed it was the biggest story ever.  I was drawing parallels of how the media covers things and the Hunter Biden story was relatively recent and egregious in it's one-sidedness.  I'd really rather not continue talking about Hunter Biden beyond this.  The fact that the media ran with Hillary's lie and retracted it is further evidence of one-sidedness because you know good and well those same outlets wouldn't have run something against Hillary without fully and carefully vetting it and then they would have probably sat on the story if true anyway to help carry their gal across the finish line.

The Kavanaugh story doesn't need breathless wall to wall coverage.  It's essentially over unless there are more lunatics of a similar mindset out there and quite frankly with how agitated the left likes their base to be there probably are.  Regardless, the act of assassinating a sitting SC Justice is a far greater threat to the constitution than what happened on January 6th and that attempt was thwarted thankfully.  As long as we're harping on this issue, at least answer the hypothetical I posed.  How would you envision the media coverage of a thwarted attempt on RBG's life 4 years ago?  Or don't and let's just move on agreeing to disagree because this is very likely what it seems to be anyway.

---

The party that said nothing while Jared Kushner became the money manager for middle eastern monarchs doesn't get to feign outrage when Hunter Biden tries to do the same with Chinese captains of industry or wives of Russian politicians. No one's even sure the money got to Hunter at all.
No one's alleging it changed Joe's behavior.  

But sure, yeah, biggest story ever.  No other story worth talking about.  No one should be taken seriously if they're not talking about Hunter Biden.

And of course the media are totally in bed with Dems at election time, like when Hillary's team planted that story about Trump campaign servers communicating with a Russian bank? The media totally ran with that for... oh days wasn't it? Oh right.  It was only hours before they figured out Hillary was lying and took down the story. 

You have a point with regard to Kavanaugh, that is an important story. But that story is probably over, don't you think? Do we need to breathlessly report every revelation on the guy's motives or state of mind?

Mike, if you've ever wondered why no one takes you serious when you claim to be a republican or in general, your zeal for defending the left (and now the media) at every turn and in every thread might have something to do with it.  Just putting it out there.  Some people have no self awareness.  Not saying that's necessarily you.  I'm just at a loss. 

You'd have to be pretty gullible or an agent of the left peddling lies to say/believe no money ever made it to Hunter Biden.  Hello Burisma at the very least and I'd find it hard to believe that's not the tip of the iceberg. Family of political figures should be allowed to pursue their own business interests, even foreign ones.  It should be scrutinized heavily, sure.  Selling your artwork for big bucks (up to $500k per painting) when your father is currently the sitting President and you have no prior history of being able to do so is suspect, no?  Excerpt from thehill.com:

• Ethics concerns arose over the summer about (Hunter) Biden’s artwork and the White House created an agreement with Bergès to keep purchases confidential, according to The Washington Post. The agreement allows Bergès to set prices for the art and withhold all records, including potential bidders and final buyers. 
  

Um, what?  How do ethics concerns over this activity lead to less transparency?  Of all the things Hunter could do to make money, why choose to dally in the realm of peddling your artwork given his father's position?  Also from thehill.com article:

• Last year, the Treasury Department also issued an advisory warning that high-value artworks, “make it attractive to those engaged in illicit financial activity, including sanctions evasion.” 
  

Anyway, Jared at least appears to have a resume that supports his foreign business ventures.  Hunter?  Please feel free to come to his aid further if you wish, but to me it's quite obvious what's going on.  And it's ok if money got to Joe as long as his decisions affecting those who 'donated' weren't changed by the 'donation'?  Disagree.  Just ask yourself how that whole scenario plays out in the media if Jared is Hunter and Hunter is Jared.  This isn't difficult.

Also, I never claimed it was the biggest story ever.  I was drawing parallels of how the media covers things and the Hunter Biden story was relatively recent and egregious in it's one-sidedness.  I'd really rather not continue talking about Hunter Biden beyond this.  The fact that the media ran with Hillary's lie and retracted it is further evidence of one-sidedness because you know good and well those same outlets wouldn't have run something against Hillary without fully and carefully vetting it and then they would have probably sat on the story if true anyway to help carry their gal across the finish line.

The Kavanaugh story doesn't need breathless wall to wall coverage.  It's essentially over unless there are more lunatics of a similar mindset out there and quite frankly with how agitated the left likes their base to be there probably are.  Regardless, the act of assassinating a sitting SC Justice is a far greater threat to the constitution than what happened on January 6th and that attempt was thwarted thankfully.  As long as we're harping on this issue, at least answer the hypothetical I posed.  How would you envision the media coverage of a thwarted attempt on RBG's life 4 years ago?  Or don't and let's just move on agreeing to disagree because this is very likely what it seems to be anyway.

You're making this way too complicated.  Why does anything that Hunter Biden does matter?  If nothing Jared Kushner did mattered, nothing Hunter does matters either.  You keep giving details of the thing, but I already told you it doesn't matter and why it doesn't matter. 

Now, if Chinese money was making it from Hunter to Joe, that would be different.  Neither a President nor a Presidential candidate can legally accept foreign money.  But no one is saying Hunter shares his winnings with his dad.  

I'm completely aware that many of you think I'm a poser or not serious and it doesn't feel great, but I'm more concerned about what it says about us as a country.  Where are we as a country if we think the only serious people are ones whose beliefs and judgements conform to one of two menus of ideology? Is this not encouraging politicians to be even more divisive?

I also think you misunderstand the nature of my defense of leftists and of the media.  I'm only saying that some of the charges against them are overwrought or hypocritical.  I'm not saying they are good.  I'm saying they are necessary.  If there are leftist people in this country, there must be leftist politicians, and they deserve some modicum of respect from all of us.  If we are to have informed voters, there must be an open media space, where it is inevitable that some outlets will make errors and omissions that must be corrected by others.  I'm not saying any of these things are good.  I'm not sure if it was Churchill or Lewis who said, "This system is by no means good, except, it is better than all alternatives." That's where I'm coming from. In your zeal to inflame passions against the system we have and the officials it empowers, what direction are you really pushing things?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

The system they were describing no longer exists.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

The system they were describing no longer exists.

This is true, this country and our way of life is hanging by a thread…

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

The system they were describing no longer exists.

This is true, this country and our way of life is hanging by a thread…

...because of people like you, who keep this myth going that the election was stolen, and that vaccines are harmful, and that the January 6 incident was set up by the FBI, and that we didn't land on the moon, and the earth is flat, and so on and so forth, endlessly spewing out conspiracy theories that ignorant people buy into.

The internet has been taken over by grifters who mislead people for money or for fun.

---

The system they were describing no longer exists.

I looked it up..  
Churchill was merely speaking about democratic systems where the people vote for who should be in power.
He said this at a time when he had been removed from power by voting. He accepted that, and tried again later.  And he won.

In what way is that system gone, and who is to blame?

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

This is true, this country and our way of life is hanging by a thread…

...because of people like you, who keep this myth going that the election was stolen, and that vaccines are harmful, and that the January 6 incident was set up by the FBI, and that we didn't land on the moon, and the earth is flat, and so on and so forth, endlessly spewing out conspiracy theories that ignorant people buy into.

The internet has been taken over by grifters who mislead people for money or for fun.

It's because of people like you, who won't hold the system accountable. And like Mikey, who puts more emphasis on what he's told than what he sees with his own two eyes. For starters, how about not equating stuff with mountains of evidence and logical probability with flat eartherism and moon landing deniers. Calling something a conspiracy doesn't automatically mean it isn't true, not matter how much you huff and puff. How many times to the "conspiracy theorists" need to be right about something before maybe you start questioning the ones telling you they are incorrect. I could probably do 3 pages of things that were "conspiracy theories" that turned out to be true, but you never change your opinion. You and the Mikesters of the world just jump onto whatever the MSM uses to dismiss their being wrong... AGAIN. And you buy it. How about we fix our institutions? Oh, that's right... we can't do that because of you. And Mikey. 

If you want people to believe the election is on the up and up, you hold institutions accountable when they don't let observers view the ballots. You demand answers when elections are shut down and you can see that people are still inside counting votes with no oversight. You don't allow "crises" to let individual officials alter our voting systems without going through their state congress. You want to know more information when it comes out that people are visiting 10 or more ballots and taking pictures dropping off 8-10 ballots while taking photos of themselves. You don't just blindly listen to the media who says, "This was the most secure election in history," 2 days after the election when ZERO investigations have been made. You demand accountability and transparency.

I'll keep going. You don't instinctively trust an organization that convolutes the way we can see the data on a disease we are all tracking, because it doesn't support their narrative. You don't blindly follow a company's claims that a vaccine is 100% safe when there's zero data to support it. You maybe AT LEAST question your point of view when the claims that it is safe become unraveled when the Johnson and Johnson vaccine is no longer recommended, and Moderna gets banned in other countries. You maybe want a way to see if a company is being transparent and get outraged when you find out that they don't need to present their actual research when their products are peer reviewed. You could maybe even question their data when they want to keep their information secret for the next 50 years. You should question your position when they start vaccinated kids with ZERO data on its efficacy. How about questioning the policies that are created largely by people who used to be employed by these corporations in question. I could do this one all day, but I'll not waste my time trying to get you to think. But it sure would be nice if people weren't so afraid of this "crisis" that they gave up all their rights and blindly lined up to make these companies rich.

January 6th, though, lol. Let's talk about the FBI. This one really requires you to make inferences, so I'll just assume your incapable and keep this simple. We know the FBI has incited violence already. We have two court cases on record where the FBI had informants and undercover agents that funded and encouraged violence. One in a terrorist plot and the other with the kidnapping of Governor Whitmer. If you don't know about that, it's on you, but it's undisputed facts. Knowing this is in their playbook, here's where the thinking starts: It's already come out in trials that the FBI had informants in some of these groups AND embedded agents. Number 2 on the FBI's most wanted was a man named Ray Epps, who was seen outside encouraging people to storm the Capitol. His name was removed from the list with no punishment. He denies being associated with the FBI, but we have him on video giving orders to two men who began removing videos while he got on the bullhorn and told people to raid the Capitol. Considering they are prosecuting 80-year-old women for trespassing, is it not at least possible that this guy isn't being prosecuted because he's a Fed? Especially when you consider the FBI's history? The dude commanded two people to remove barricades. What about those two men? Have they been prosecuted. I bet you don't know because you don't care because you don't think for yourself. It doesn't bother you at all that, when questioned, the head of the FBI refused to say whether or not they had any involvement on January 6th? That's not a huge red flag? How about the two of you get outraged that we have an agency that can't tell our congress what they are involved in, and NO ONE PUSHES AGAINST IT. What the actual [BLEEP], man. 

You guys need to stop drinking this [BLEEP] Kool-Aid and blaming others for their lack of trust in the institutions. That just doesn't fall out of the [BLEEP] sky. Our institutions are corrupt as hell, but you bury your head in the sand and point your fingers at someone like me. Keep being a puppet, but stop pretending that I am the problem. Even if I'm wrong about some of my accusations, these problems stem directly from a system that is no longer transparent and has no accountability. If you want to fix the "conspiracy theorist," you need to pour your effort into restoring the integrity of our institutions.

---

Mike, if you've ever wondered why no one takes you serious when you claim to be a republican or in general, your zeal for defending the left (and now the media) at every turn and in every thread might have something to do with it.  Just putting it out there.  Some people have no self awareness.  Not saying that's necessarily you.  I'm just at a loss. 

You'd have to be pretty gullible or an agent of the left peddling lies to say/believe no money ever made it to Hunter Biden.  Hello Burisma at the very least and I'd find it hard to believe that's not the tip of the iceberg. Family of political figures should be allowed to pursue their own business interests, even foreign ones.  It should be scrutinized heavily, sure.  Selling your artwork for big bucks (up to $500k per painting) when your father is currently the sitting President and you have no prior history of being able to do so is suspect, no?  Excerpt from thehill.com:

• Ethics concerns arose over the summer about (Hunter) Biden’s artwork and the White House created an agreement with Bergès to keep purchases confidential, according to The Washington Post. The agreement allows Bergès to set prices for the art and withhold all records, including potential bidders and final buyers. 
  

Um, what?  How do ethics concerns over this activity lead to less transparency?  Of all the things Hunter could do to make money, why choose to dally in the realm of peddling your artwork given his father's position?  Also from thehill.com article:

• Last year, the Treasury Department also issued an advisory warning that high-value artworks, “make it attractive to those engaged in illicit financial activity, including sanctions evasion.” 
  

Anyway, Jared at least appears to have a resume that supports his foreign business ventures.  Hunter?  Please feel free to come to his aid further if you wish, but to me it's quite obvious what's going on.  And it's ok if money got to Joe as long as his decisions affecting those who 'donated' weren't changed by the 'donation'?  Disagree.  Just ask yourself how that whole scenario plays out in the media if Jared is Hunter and Hunter is Jared.  This isn't difficult.

Also, I never claimed it was the biggest story ever.  I was drawing parallels of how the media covers things and the Hunter Biden story was relatively recent and egregious in it's one-sidedness.  I'd really rather not continue talking about Hunter Biden beyond this.  The fact that the media ran with Hillary's lie and retracted it is further evidence of one-sidedness because you know good and well those same outlets wouldn't have run something against Hillary without fully and carefully vetting it and then they would have probably sat on the story if true anyway to help carry their gal across the finish line.

The Kavanaugh story doesn't need breathless wall to wall coverage.  It's essentially over unless there are more lunatics of a similar mindset out there and quite frankly with how agitated the left likes their base to be there probably are.  Regardless, the act of assassinating a sitting SC Justice is a far greater threat to the constitution than what happened on January 6th and that attempt was thwarted thankfully.  As long as we're harping on this issue, at least answer the hypothetical I posed.  How would you envision the media coverage of a thwarted attempt on RBG's life 4 years ago?  Or don't and let's just move on agreeing to disagree because this is very likely what it seems to be anyway.

You're making this way too complicated.  Why does anything that Hunter Biden does matter?  If nothing Jared Kushner did mattered, nothing Hunter does matters either.  You keep giving details of the thing, but I already told you it doesn't matter and why it doesn't matter. 

Now, if Chinese money was making it from Hunter to Joe, that would be different.  Neither a President nor a Presidential candidate can legally accept foreign money.  But no one is saying Hunter shares his winnings with his dad.  

I'm completely aware that many of you think I'm a poser or not serious and it doesn't feel great, but I'm more concerned about what it says about us as a country.  Where are we as a country if we think the only serious people are ones whose beliefs and judgements conform to one of two menus of ideology? Is this not encouraging politicians to be even more divisive?

I also think you misunderstand the nature of my defense of leftists and of the media.  I'm only saying that some of the charges against them are overwrought or hypocritical.  I'm not saying they are good.  I'm saying they are necessary.  If there are leftist people in this country, there must be leftist politicians, and they deserve some modicum of respect from all of us.  If we are to have informed voters, there must be an open media space, where it is inevitable that some outlets will make errors and omissions that must be corrected by others.  I'm not saying any of these things are good.  I'm not sure if it was Churchill or Lewis who said, "This system is by no means good, except, it is better than all alternatives." That's where I'm coming from. In your zeal to inflame passions against the system we have and the officials it empowers, what direction are you really pushing things?

My whole point was how, by and large, the media is essentially the propaganda arm of the democrat party. Anything else springing from my initial response is you dragging it in that direction. You claim you want reasons why you are wrong when someone responds to you.  Don’t now complain when you get them.

Hunter Biden matters more than Jared Kushner because of the obvious circumstances surrounding Hunter.  For all intents and purposes he’s a deadbeat placed on Burisma’s board, selling his “artwork”, emails indicating a cut for “the big guy”, etc.  Corruption matters right?  Scrutinize the hell out of Jared, I don’t care.  If he’s guilty of selling influence on behalf of Trump lock them both up. Foreign money in our elections and politics is illegal but not properly enforced and it should be with severe penalties including jail time.  With Hunter though, there just happens to be a pretty damning trail of evidence behind him that you seem apt to dismiss or defend.  That’s the difference.

A media is necessary, but a heavily tilted media either way is a threat to the republic.  I don’t care that the media is hard on republicans.  They should be.  If you can’t answer tough questions as a politician, you shouldn’t be there.  What I care about is that they don’t do this for democrats by default unless it’s time to get rid of one democrat for another.

---

You're making this way too complicated.  Why does anything that Hunter Biden does matter?  If nothing Jared Kushner did mattered, nothing Hunter does matters either.  You keep giving details of the thing, but I already told you it doesn't matter and why it doesn't matter. 

Now, if Chinese money was making it from Hunter to Joe, that would be different.  Neither a President nor a Presidential candidate can legally accept foreign money.  But no one is saying Hunter shares his winnings with his dad.  

I'm completely aware that many of you think I'm a poser or not serious and it doesn't feel great, but I'm more concerned about what it says about us as a country.  Where are we as a country if we think the only serious people are ones whose beliefs and judgements conform to one of two menus of ideology? Is this not encouraging politicians to be even more divisive?

I also think you misunderstand the nature of my defense of leftists and of the media.  I'm only saying that some of the charges against them are overwrought or hypocritical.  I'm not saying they are good.  I'm saying they are necessary.  If there are leftist people in this country, there must be leftist politicians, and they deserve some modicum of respect from all of us.  If we are to have informed voters, there must be an open media space, where it is inevitable that some outlets will make errors and omissions that must be corrected by others.  I'm not saying any of these things are good.  I'm not sure if it was Churchill or Lewis who said, "This system is by no means good, except, it is better than all alternatives." That's where I'm coming from. In your zeal to inflame passions against the system we have and the officials it empowers, what direction are you really pushing things?

My whole point was how, by and large, the media is essentially the propaganda arm of the democrat party. Anything else springing from my initial response is you dragging it in that direction. You claim you want reasons why you are wrong when someone responds to you.  Don’t now complain when you get them.

Hunter Biden matters more than Jared Kushner because of the obvious circumstances surrounding Hunter.  For all intents and purposes he’s a deadbeat placed on Burisma’s board, selling his “artwork”, emails indicating a cut for “the big guy”, etc.  Corruption matters right?  Scrutinize the hell out of Jared, I don’t care.  If he’s guilty of selling influence on behalf of Trump lock them both up. Foreign money in our elections and politics is illegal but not properly enforced and it should be with severe penalties including jail time.  With Hunter though, there just happens to be a pretty damning trail of evidence behind him that you seem apt to dismiss or defend.  That’s the difference.

A media is necessary, but a heavily tilted media either way is a threat to the republic.  I don’t care that the media is hard on republicans.  They should be.  If you can’t answer tough questions as a politician, you shouldn’t be there.  What I care about is that they don’t do this for democrats by default unless it’s time to get rid of one democrat for another.

I'm not complaining, in fact thank you for explaining your thinking, I'm just telling you that I didn't find the argument persuasive, in fact I find the argument hypocritical.  Your particular spin is actually not hypocritical, because you are saying that both Hunter and Jared should be scrutinized to the point of casting a pall on both the current President and the former President.  I respect that but I think it's better at this point to ignore them both rather than punish them both.  
The comparison between Hunter and Jared actually points the other way.  Joe has never ever said he takes advice from Hunter.  Donald went out of his way to promote the public image of both his daughter and his son and law as important advisors on public policy.  If our expectations for them were different, our expectations for Jared would be higher. 
I just want you to notice, that when the MSM presented the facts about Jared, it was very ho-hum.  A media that truly was in the bag for Democrats would have pushed that angle harder.  The handful of folks who tried to get Trump punished under the emoluments clause were portrayed in MSM as jokes and cranks.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

Thanks for proving my point. That didn't take long.

---

This is true, this country and our way of life is hanging by a thread…

...because of people like you, who keep this myth going that the election was stolen, and that vaccines are harmful, and that the January 6 incident was set up by the FBI, and that we didn't land on the moon, and the earth is flat, and so on and so forth, endlessly spewing out conspiracy theories that ignorant people buy into.

The internet has been taken over by grifters who mislead people for money or for fun.

So says the guy that supported the crook in office now. See, DO YOU SEE what they are doing to everyone? Are you really that partisan and dishonest?

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"

The left did far more damage and illegal crap the last 8 years. Time after time, but they ALWAYS get a pass. What a joke, this whole Jan 6 crap is just that, ANOTHER kangaroo court to after Trump and his supporters. How long do we have to suffer them attacking President Trump? They have not let up in 8 years. Daily bombardment... I don't listen to anything they have to say anymore. They have cried wolf a 1000 times already, IT MEANS NOTHING...


Remember this? 

---

"If you always do what you've always done, You'll always get what you always got"