Al Franken argued that because Cheney did not go to the hospital with the man he shot, he is either a bad man or he was drunk. Franken is speculating without full possession of the facts – which is probably enough to satisfy his listeners. If all the facts were the same, but the shooter was not a Republican, would Franken be less inclined to jump to conclusions?
Tucker Carlson interviewed R.J. Eskow, who wrote on Huffington Post,
The real story is already emerging, if you're willing to do a little digging. Cheney and Whittington went hunting with two women (not their wives), there was some drinking, and Whittington wound up shot.
Eskow’s parenthetical “(not their wives)” means that he suspects extra-marital sex, otherwise why mention it? Dick Cheney, irresponsible with his gun. And his shotgun, too.
The Democrats could be right that Cheney was as loaded as his gun, but we need more evidence. The lack of evidence is not stopping them from working this scandal for all it’s worth. Sex, booze, guns – could there be a better scandal? No abstract issues to follow, not even a complicated money trail, just a drunk with a gun. Even pot-smoking rock’n’rollers can understand this story (or the version the Democrats want them to understand).
Aside from the Democrats, who profits most from the attention this story is getting? Those who would destroy freedom, both at home and abroad. Statist bureaucrats work best when no one pays attention, writing and enforcing regulations, expanding the power of the state, intimidating free individuals to submit in obedience. Those who exercise power love it when the media shine all their spotlights on the scandal of the day and leave the bureaucrats free to maneuver in darkness. The growth of the state is never a story to the media; they treat it as a metaphysical reality not to be questioned, like the shining sun and the air we breathe.