No, I appreciate your perspective, and in a lot of ways I feel the same. But I am glad you understand why I chose to have him on. I would be open to interview most out there that at least claim to have something important to discuss. In this case, when he reached out claiming to have sources that had insight into the truth behind this story, I felt I owed it to all of you to see what he had to say, but I am as skeptical and doubtful as you. But I simply ignored everyone I didn't like, as a journalist I would see that as very irresponsible. I try to remain objective and unbiased as much as possible, as that is what media is supposed to be. But sadly, most today actually desire the hyper-partisan echo chambers, like MSM. I try to be different. Yet I am not sold on his claims here, as I was hoping he would have more to back it up. Thank you for your comment.