Quote:
Originally Posted by Resolute 14
I don't think there is a single shred of evidence that GWI would back down over its public image. Backing down in this case would actually go opposite the image they seek to project. They have never struck me as the "it's a matter of degrees" type when it comes to their view on the legality of a deal. If they thought it was illegal, they would have challenged, period.
|
Again, your out to lunch here. It is a total different scenario then the former where it was believed to be a short term solution with a sure fire payback after a group purchased it with their own money. This time it could be 10 years of taxpayers money with no guarantee that money will ever be recouped. You are still totally clueless on this.