Originally posted by GhostofDempsey
View Post
I'm able to process information by looking at the whole picture, unlike you who tries to take one thing that fits YOUR agenda and latch onto it for dear life.
You did the same thing with the Breonna Taylor thread in the lounge. There were about 12 witnesses. All of them said the police didn't identify themselves. ONE said they didn't, then a month later changed his story and said they did. The others remained consistent.
Which one did you choose to believe? The one that agreed with all the others and changed his story a month later. Hmmmmmmmm.
So in this situation, we have Arum saying there was a contract, Floyd saying there was a contract, Iole saying there was a contract, and only Shaeffer saying there wasn't one.
So why would you chose to believe Shaeffer instead of the three others. One from each side and one neutral. Schaeffer certainly had an incentive to lie and the article made it clear why he would lie, but that doesn't fit your agenda so you can't handle it. Shaeffer was responsible for negotiations. He's not going to admit that they agreed to a 50/50 split because they knew Mayweather was always the A-side and didn't want to have to make the concession again. They certainly didn't really believe Pac was worth 50/50 from the beginning and probably just conceded to get the fight made. Once he side-stepped that, it was going to be pulled off the table.
Now you tell me. Why would you choose one man instead of 3 others? Let's see you flail and lie your way around that, embarrassing yourself like you usually do.
Comment