Jon Stewart hasn't changed, and that's the problem. As far as his comedy, no notes. He's undeniably funny. But his politics just leave a sour taste. His enlightened centrist voice of reason shtick hits different now.
He's defended people like Rogan and Chapelle. And I get it, they're his buddies. He doesn't see them as public figures, but as flawed individuals. And that's a valid perspective, just a rarefied one.
His first guest upon his return was the editor of The Economist magazine who gushed about Reaganomics and Thatcherism. She framed the rise of right-wing politics in the West as first and foremost a threat to the neoliberal world order as Jon nodded along. And we all know that progressiveism is just the other side of the horseshoe to people who think this way.
I'll be watching Stewart, and I really do admire him. But never meet your heroes I guess.
So this guy is charged with making a donation to an ISIS front, and buying rifles (from the FBI).
I think the reason they do this is because to convict someone of a conspiracy, the State has to show you completed an "overt act" in furtherance to your plan, so you can't just convict a person of terrorism because they like to talk out of their ass.
It's concerning how common it is that the FBI is directly involved in facilitating that overt act by being the arms dealer, hit-man, or bomb-maker themselves. If you examine many of these cases you'll find that the most competent and dangerous person in the conspiracy was just play-acting for the Feds. And I'm not just talking entrapment, but also the opportunity costs of focusing on the low hanging fruit. And this goes for the militia people as well as the Jihadis.