Quote:
Originally Posted by calgARI
Pretty logical question. I think Feaster was hoping people wouldn't ask questions and get caught up in all of his fancy and unnecessarily excess legal language.
I think he would have actually looked better saying they didn't know. Instead, by trying to save face and saying they knew of this potential issue, it looked like they just didn't do diligence on it.
Either way, completely and totally inept.
|
Yeah, the obvious answer is, he didn't know about it and is just covering his tracks. Its not lazyness, it was a mistake and he's covering his tracks. Kind of annoyed... he's better off saying he didn't know about the rule, its a honest mistake which could be forgivable. Lying though... god I hate hate.