Interesting points, thank you.
I was inspired to ask this question after reading about the bodyguards. It struck me that MM had to hire 9 ex- Navy Seals after making some remarks about an obviously sly president. If he was honestly wrong, then someone could have refuted his claims. A forthcoming government would have empirically proved him wrong, rather than letting their business colleagues use a loudmouth like GB to spin public perception. Ad hominem attacks are childish- they can distract from actual issue.
It seems even more suspicious that heavily influenced political media would openly condone the murder of an American Citizen, let alone anyone else. I’m not naive enough to believe, even for a second, that they honestly didn’t think MM (and his family) would be put in danger. Do we really allow these barbarians to speak for us?
Frankly, it all seems surreal. Regardless of our perception of him or his methods, he has every right to say as he pleases (Same as FOX, even if I don’t like it). The difference between them is MM never said anything that put anyone’s kids at risk. Based on that alone, any rational human being can at least see which person is more volatile (Q idea: Why is it commendable to be an violent person?).
I needn’t remind anyone that this is America; a Country forged in a revolution that sought freedom from oppression. If there is someone, with even a shred of credibility, who says they have proof that our government is misleading us- it is our duty as Americans to lend our ears. Anyone who tells you different is selling you something.