this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2025
661 points (98.1% liked)
Not The Onion
19022 readers
915 users here now
Welcome
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
The Rules
Posts must be:
- Links to news stories from...
- ...credible sources, with...
- ...their original headlines, that...
- ...would make people who see the headline think, “That has got to be a story from The Onion, America’s Finest News Source.”
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Congress passed a law demanding disclosure of all files the government had about an infamous pedophile and child trafficer, with an explicit ban on redactions for embarrassed adults. Today they released a whole bunch of files, with essentially every adult in the pictures reacted.
Anyone who thinks this is a non-story is either a pedophile themselves or intentjonallh covering for child trafficing pediphiles. Especially if they are an old white guy who was definitely associated with the inhuman scum at the center.
We don't know if David Brooks is a pedophile himself, but he sure as fuck isnt a journalist.
#1 apologist for the oligarchs.
the same people would defend noam and norm mcdonald despite them repeatedly defending/ associating russia and trump respectively. i had always had a wierd feeling coming out of these 2 people it made sense when they showed thier true colors.
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.
I mean, Michael Wolff is out there, with plenty of email evidence that he was a hack "journalist" that was practically a PR agent for Epstein. Why attack Brooks?
? Por que no los dos ?
Brooks is a notorious hack who built his career shilling for neoconservative policies from the Weekly Standard to the NYT to PBS.
But that social circuit ran through Florida and Texas, rather than New York and London. He's likely just tighter with a different group of pedophiles.