I think it is because Chomsky’s name has been associated with Epstein before this, and when new information popped they reported what is in there. Mainly how Chomsky remained in contact even after knowing the issues of Epstein. I think they did a good job of reporting it properly, instead of sensationalising it, by just explaining the new stuff that is unsealed.
If the guardian is own by some oligarch with real ties to Epstein, It would make sense to push article on people with weak tie to muddy the plot
Aah… I see, I thought you were skeptical of the article. But you were actually expressing confidence in them.
I conflicted. The article doesnt seems to find anything really bad in chomsky and epstein ties… but then why does it exist then?
I think it is because Chomsky’s name has been associated with Epstein before this, and when new information popped they reported what is in there. Mainly how Chomsky remained in contact even after knowing the issues of Epstein. I think they did a good job of reporting it properly, instead of sensationalising it, by just explaining the new stuff that is unsealed.