Originally Posted by Rob.Singer View Post
Originally Posted by redietz View Post
Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post

Dude, you need to put YOUR bias away. You don’t get to pick and choose when someone is telling the truth.

My bias is to believe "Singer" did the glitch thing because it makes him a monstrous public liar, misleading people about the source of his alleged winnings. But despite that being my preferred belief, I have a tough time with the posts where he's waiting for a statute of limitations to supposedly expire and he publicly states that others doing what he has done are engaged in an illegal activity.

Hard to make lemonade out of those posts.
I'll let up on kew for a bit since he's having such a difficult time with everybody, it seems. Just like on EVERY forum.

Red, you like to pop into threads with some of what you probably consider "deep thinking". So why not do some here.

Yes I misled my readers Big Time, but what was I supposed to do--say I was winning over $500k/yr. instead of $90k? You saw how much controversy and commotion/disbelief it caused. I thought it would be best to continue the historicals experienced during my first 4 years. I had no clue how long my writing or the play would last.

Now fast-forward to the double up discussion here in 2013. No one has any idea what I did or what I was going thru as the Kane/Nestor case was winding it's way thru the courts. And I didn't bring the subject up either. Would it have been better for me to say what I did recently--that I thought it was OK to do it but then say I didn't think using existing hands or the same hand more than once wasn't? I was extremely careful with everything about this play, especially when I nor anyone else had any idea of anything past or future related to it.

My intention between 2009-2019 was not to slip up or give away any hint of anything. So saying I "believed these guys broke the law" made me feel as if I were keeping eyes and suspicion away, as very small a chance as there was of anything happening. I didn't have to comment on the thread but, well, where would this place have been without me?

Nobody (well, almost nobody) is gonna buy that. I'm bending over backwards to believe it, because from a journalistic perspective, it makes you look like scum, but I'm not sure I can stay conscious long enough given the alcohol intake necessary to buy into your story. And the account on the Mendelson site -- LOL. Sorry, man. I suggest you get hold of a police detective or somebody who actually evaluates written statements for fact-checking, and take their advice regarding it, and rewrite it.