> And look, asking hard questions to someone being proposed to the Supreme Court isn’t “assuming them guilty”, it’s just doing due diligence for an important lifetime appointment.

They accused a man of being a serial rapists, and what evidence was presented? A decades old accusation by someone who couldn't say when, where, or who's party it was. And NO one could corraborate her story. The other people who came out were either discredited or recanted their story. That didn't stop our wonderful journalists and politicians from blasting the airwaves with these accusations.

If that is justified to you, then you have to believe that the hunter Biden stuff needs to be investigated. Because unlike the Kavanaugh situation. Named witnesses that were in those email chains, worked directly with Hunter and his father, have all come out verifying the accusations. But something tells me you will apply a different standard. For some reason these are immediately discredited as false and completely blocked by big tech and the media.

Sorry man, hypocracy is on full display.

> His son was given a job he wasn’t qualified for, purely due to his status

Why would anyone give a ridiculously high paying job to an unqualified individual based solely on status? Was Hunter getting them into the hottest night clubs or lots of press? or more likely, they would get an audience with his Father, which they did. Why would any company pay millions of dollars to get an audience with Biden? photo op or maybe something more?

> He did not work directly with Russian agents to coordinate election interference

So you believe that the Mueller investigation was bullshit from the start? How many of those indictments were related to Trump or his campaign. The whole purpose for the investigation. THat took years and dominated the news cycle through most of that time.