First question asked - implied Russian interference in Trump’s election. Pretty well tosses a huge discrediting into the discussion.
The speaker does make valid points - but while he pretends to be “unbiased”- even going to great lengths to make it VERY clear he is “independent” and represents no-one but himself - which is a hallmark of those who are most definitely on a particular side.
Yes- he does present so facts/truths - but completely ignores Russian aggressions over the years leading up to that lecture (which was in 2018). He ignores Russian actual meddling in near neighbors. He ignores Putin’s old rhetoric.
Totally agree with you that he ignored Russian aggression. Those were my thoughts when I listened to it.