# Reviewing the Biden-Trump debate: conscience and concerns
*2020-10-01*

> Bill Young and John O'Rourke discuss the recent presidential debate, focusing on the conduct of the candidates, allegations regarding Hunter Biden, and concerns over the future of the Supreme Court.

## Allegations and the Biden Family

Bill opens the discussion by addressing the controversy surrounding Hunter Biden. He references a bank Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) from the Treasury, claiming it shows Hunter Biden received $3.5 million from the ex-wife of the former mayor of Moscow. Bill expresses concern over the source of these funds, suggesting a connection to illegal activities, and argues that such reports were suppressed by the Obama administration to protect the family. He contrasts this with the Trump family, noting that they took pay cuts to serve in government salaries.

## The Future of the Supreme Court

The hosts discuss the Democratic proposal to 'stack' the Supreme Court by adding more justices. Bill argues that expanding the court to a 6-6 split would render it worthless and threaten fundamental liberties, including the First and Second Amendments. They also touch upon the proposal for term limits for justices, which they view as an attempt to change the rules of the game after losing the current judicial battle.

## Debate Performance and Conduct

John describes Joe Biden's behavior during the debate as that of an 'impetuous teenager,' citing his name-calling and lack of respect for the office of the presidency. He notes several instances where Biden seemed to forget questions and required the moderator, Chris Wallace, to repeat them. Conversely, they discuss Donald Trump's performance, noting that while he may be 'tough and rough,' that quality is necessary when dealing with adversaries like Russia, China, and North Korea.

## Media Bias and Election Integrity

The hosts criticize the mainstream media, which Bill refers to as the 'propaganda press,' for ignoring negative stories about the Biden campaign while amplifying others. They express deep skepticism regarding the security of mail-in ballots, sharing personal anecdotes about postal inefficiency and errors. They argue that implementing a mass mail-in voting process without rigorous testing and planning is a recipe for fraud.

*The hosts conclude that while Trump's style can be abrasive, his strength and the current state of the economy and security are more vital for the country than the perceived instability of the Democratic platform.*