How does the New York Times write an article about Colorado Rep. Lauren Boebert without mentioning her four arrests and court no-shows? Without mentioning her husband’s arrests for exposing himself and domestic abuse? https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/13/us/politics/lauren-boebert-republican.html

Where her restaurant Shooters Grill is mentioned, the reporters point out that the servers can be armed - but they fail to note that Boebert is accused of allowing minors at her establishment to be armed. If charged, it would be a felony. Why gloss over her sordid, relevant past?

One wonders whether a profile of a Black or brown freshman Congress member would be so forgiving. This piece is about Boebert’s radical behavior and agenda - particularly as it pertains to guns. Her history casts doubt on her claims of being a responsible, law abiding gun owner.

Is it any surprise that someone who broke the law in Colorado would break the law in DC? That someone charged with resisting arrest is fighting with Capitol police over screening? That someone who espoused support for QAnon would support - and maybe even abet - the Capitol riot?

Big media failed to warn the nation about Boebert because she was running in a sleepy mountain district. Colorado media failed to unearth public records about her husband’s past. More coverage means more people might have paid more intention to this red race in a blue state.

This is a good point, too. If you want quality local journalism, you have to be willing to pay for it. https://twitter.com/omgchronicles/status/1349604917611167746