Thanks for backing your opinion with a good summary like this. It provides a good framework for discussion. People should read it. That said, although it out

Thanks for backing your opinion with a good summary like this. It provides a good framework for discussion. People should read it. That said, although it outlines the issues well, I disagree with many of their conclusions. I think in parallel, people should watch the 17 minute version of Carlson's interview with Bobulinksi and determine for themselves how well the details match: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zLfBRgeFFo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zLfBRgeFFo. Or if video averse, read the transcript here: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/10/27/tucker_carlson_interviews_hunter_biden_business_partner_tony_bobulinski_about_joe_biden_involvement.html https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/10/27/tucker_ca.... Just to pick one example, here's Politifact on the question of who "the chairman" referred to: "Bobulinski has also claimed that Joe Biden was the person described in another message days later as "the Chairman." Whereas the interview goes much further than just a "claim". Instead, it directly shows a text message sent to Bobulinski by Rob Walker (the "Biden family representative") clarifying that "the Chairman" does in fact refer to Joe Biden: https://youtu.be/2zLfBRgeFFo?t=906 https://youtu.be/2zLfBRgeFFo?t=906 (or search the transcript for "the chairman"). Now certainly, the text message might be faked, or Rob Walker might not actually know what was meant. Hopefully, if allowed to happen, future research will be able to determine this. But this is something that can and (probably) should be verified. To reduce this to "Bobulinksi has also claimed" doesn't give adequate weight to fact that Bobulinski did a surprisingly good job of providing verifiable evidence for his interpretation. So yes, read the Politifact article, but also listen to the interview before deciding to trust its conclusions!