Andrew Tate

But saville didn't go to court but yet you're happy enough to presume him guilty based on testimony and investigations. But not Tate.

Christ on a flippin' bike!

Where have I stuck up for Tim Pool now?

For saying that he isn't the same as Andrew Tate?

By saying that ANYONE to the right of Bernie Sanders is liable to be classed as a Grifter?

Or for saying that a broad definition of grifter would encapsulate a LOT of people?

The recent trend of accusing people of "sticking up for people" when it clearly isn't happening is bizarre.

"You don't hate this person enough for my liking" is more accurate

When you see a pattern of people being all tarred with the same brush because they happen to be on one side of the political spectrum despite being very individually different with very different backgrounds and opinions, it would be silly to dismiss it as anything other than a right vs left issue.

It would be dishonest to ignore that.

And it really takes no time or effort to post honest opinions.

But I can't help but notice that you are inferring that I have been defending him with your use of quotation marks. If you could perhaps indicate or highlight one of my defences of Andrew Tate, I would greatly appreciate it.

Was it when I said I would delight in his sentencing if the evidence proved him guilty?

Was it when I called him an odious oaf?

Was it when I said I didn't like him?

Was it when I have repeatedly stated that I categorically am NOT defending him?

Becuase the only thing that I find "truly baffling" is that I am being accused by multiple people of defending someone despite no evidence or proof other than accusations to the contrary.

Now if that isn't food for thought and perhaps holds a mirror up to your position, then I don't know what to tell you.

I am aware of that. But the evidence now needs to be presented does it not or do we skip that and go straight to sentencing and bypass the whole pesky trial nonsence

lol.

This sums up the whole dishonesty of the thread

Well I think it's ok to highlight that it was said on this thread that there are people who have already made up their mind and KNOW that the Tate Brothers are guilty, before the trial has started.

Now I might be in the minority here, but I think that's a little more of an extreme position to have than mine of, lets see the evidence and then come to a conclusion.

Now I know you don't like the Tates (either do I, as I have said on multiple occassions) but I think calling out people for such claims is kind of justified and not seen as support.

And then to top things off, you accuse me of being something like Tate by suggesting his material is "rubbing off on me"?

So because I am saying things you don't like, I sound like Andrew Tate?

That's either a very silly and childish ad-hominem or proof that anyone who says anything you don't approve of is as bad as each other.