If you’re covering for David Brooks, and we assume that Brooks is not himself a pedophile to be charitable, then you’re covering for whatever unknown pedophile Brooks is covering for.
This isn’t a court of law, it’s an international private forum with no binding consequence on anybody’s liberty. We don’t have to presume people doing shady fuck are innocent, since we’re not even accusing anyone of crimes.
People are very clearly accusing him of crimes, in the “court of public opinion”. Evidence in said “court” shouldn’t be considered the same evidence in a real court.
Epstein isn’t even in the photos with Brooks. Which pedophile am I covering up for, exactly?
That’s entirely the point.
If you’re covering for David Brooks, and we assume that Brooks is not himself a pedophile to be charitable, then you’re covering for whatever unknown pedophile Brooks is covering for.
This isn’t a court of law, it’s an international private forum with no binding consequence on anybody’s liberty. We don’t have to presume people doing shady fuck are innocent, since we’re not even accusing anyone of crimes.
People are very clearly accusing him of crimes, in the “court of public opinion”. Evidence in said “court” shouldn’t be considered the same evidence in a real court.