Re: Listen... (518 Views)
Posted by:
moosepalm (IP Logged)
Date: May 11, 2021 12:27AM
TGJB Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It’s on occasion been true with Pete and
> O’Neill- check out the figures from that BC at
> CD a few years ago.
>
> Everybody seems to be forgetting the details of my
> original statement. I’m not offering any opinion
> about Baffert using something. I’m saying he
> didn’t use this drug, in the Derby. The closest
> analogy I could come up with is that closer on the
> Mets who got nailed three times for the same
> easily testable steroid, and eventually got banned
> for life. That’s how dumb this would be. Worse-
> Baffert has more to lose, and the steroid has a
> much bigger benefit.
>
> I’ve said here for years that California is the
> cleanest of any major jurisdiction in the country,
> they actually pulled a quote of mine saying that
> and used it in one of their ads a few years ago.
> The reason is Rick Arthur— he is one guy that is
> not messing around.
I wasn't offering an opinion on him using something either. But cases are not always decided on the merits. You're familiar with Kentucky justice. Baffert doesn't have the home court advantage. He's not a sympathetic defendant. And just because it would be stupid to do something doesn't mean that some stupid things aren't done. My point being even if your argument is grounded in logic and sound analysis, it can win a debate, but won't necessarily win a fight.