I do doubt he'd bother writing a story everyone else is already reporting and writing. I have approaching zero doubt in the same circumstances concerning a story that suggests corruption that nobody else was writing that he would do it about Don jr, Eric, Ivanka, Jared Kushner or anyone in that orbit. I also believe he looks at Trump's Republicans and Biden's Democrats and finds them equally revolting. You and I can disagree with him on that if we choose to. The anti-Trump stories you mention that he points to? Yeah, not many others writing about Trump write those stories as a focus that I saw. Maybe you saw it differently? I don't want to use him as a repub-dem scoreboard or as my sole source of news so I'm absolutely fine with that. In fact even if he were an ardent Trump Republican supporter or ardent Democrat, (which I think is nonsense for what that's worth), I'd still want to read his stuff.

And for me that is what makes him interesting. He does not fit the "He's a dem/repub" so... But there do seem to be a lot of people who want to shoe-horn him into that line of thinking.

Separate to that the other thing I really like about Glenn is that it is easy to knowledgably disagree with him, (and I frequently, possibly even usually do). He makes that easy by, in my view, having the best mastery of that, (in terms of newspaper traditions) extremely modern writing technique, using the hyperlink. When he draws an inference from facts he links the source. I frequently follow that and look at it and think to myself that his inference is one possibility but I'm not especially sold on it. My own views are made more robust, altered somewhat or even changed by having been exposed to his writing even when I disagree with him. I really like that.

In my view his integrity, devotion to principle, willingness to support his argument with evidence and disdain for following the zeitgeist simply because it exists make him someone I want to read.

Just take each story on it's own. If it interests you follow the links he has and look at other reporting on it so you can make up your own mind and you might find like I do Glenn's stuff is worth your time.

The story has been discredited right up to the point of the emails. Nobody I'm aware of has said they are fake. Not even the Bidens. That makes them interesting concerning a presidential candidate and his response to shady dealing in his own immediate family based on his political profile. That makes them interesting if you are a Democrat. That makes them interesting if you think Biden is a great candidate and the possible person to be President.

If you really want Trump gone at all costs you might want to suppress it. That's a huge cost.

You don't have to trust Rudy Giuliani and i don't as far as i can drop kick him. Does anyone? The "it's the Russians" as a source also lacks evidence.

Where the hell is the laptop from? How did it happen? No clue. Why isn't that being followed with some vigor? It's strange that it isn't, no?

I sure won't be hitching my wagon to the honesty and integrity of Hunter Biden. The emails don't detract at all from the stench.

There's still a belief that we got Trump because Russians and Wikileaks and not because some run of the mill Democrat party corruption came to light and was widely reported on. There's still a belief that reporting on that Hilary Democrat corruption was doing the work of Russia. You either decide that it's your job to report on corruption every single time it comes to light regardless of who or you don't. Washington corruption is endemic. Perhaps we can agree on that.

"Inappropriate" I'd agree with. We clearly see that very differently. I want Glenn being inappropriate regarding the powerful. I'd like it if more journalists were inappropriateb when it comes to highlighting corruption.