- Joined
- Feb 7, 2013
- Messages
- 65,926
- Reaction score
- 74,003
It's not that I have a "need to profit", I just like easy money. There is none easier than those that willfully abandon all objectivity for their admitted prejudices. Doesn't matter the subject, sports, whatever. You've admitted your feelings about the merits of the case and Rolfe (with which I agree), but you've jumped the shark by extending that to something as clearly provable as a bond violation. Can't fault me for just trying to help you realize your mistake. There is only one 'truth'. It will be what the explicit language of his bond conditions are. I'm willing to bet he violated them. That's all.You feel a burning need to profit from this discussion?
If we go that route, we'll have an endless argument about what reliable proof is, fed info by dishonest spin doctors, intent on shaping a narative in an intense political battle. Will be a classic case of there being three truths.
Your grand total potential winnings (from me) are: I'll acknowledge you are right and I am wrong if that becomes obvious to a rational observer.
An honest exchange is worth more than a few bucks in your pocket or a beer in your belly.
Having said that, I hope you are right actually. I genuinely do. But someone would have to give ME 100:1 odds to take that side of the bet. (And no, I'm not giving you those odds. )