He's wrapping a political argument in apolitical clothing. If he doesn't realize that's what he's doing, it's bias. If he does realizes that's what he's doing, it's cynical. Either way, it's wrong. He can write whatever he wants, as can you, as can I.
We're back to your only circular point: You've decided my point is political because you've decided that it's political, and you don't care about the merits. Yet, somehow, I'm the political one. It's bunk gaslighting.
Thomas' ethical problems have been of serious concern for years, including his failure to disclosure financial information involving his wife. There was coverage of this in the past.
You are correct in that once someone is more important, their wrongdoing is that much more important to address.
He's wrapping a political argument in apolitical clothing. If he doesn't realize that's what he's doing, it's bias. If he does realizes that's what he's doing, it's cynical. Either way, it's wrong. He can write whatever he wants, as can you, as can I.
We're back to your only circular point: You've decided my point is political because you've decided that it's political, and you don't care about the merits. Yet, somehow, I'm the political one. It's bunk gaslighting.
And it isn't totally true.
Thomas' ethical problems have been of serious concern for years, including his failure to disclosure financial information involving his wife. There was coverage of this in the past.
You are correct in that once someone is more important, their wrongdoing is that much more important to address.