4 ms·
> but their reasoning is just a blatant lie. I would actually try to understand the reasoning from the DOT and then look at the rebuttal from the CFPB before I
by tertius 9y ago
> but their reasoning is just a blatant lie.
I would actually try to understand the reasoning from the DOT and then look at the rebuttal from the CFPB before I make statements like this.
If it's as simple as you state, 1 options instead of 2, why hasn't anyone else picked up on this blatant lie?
- baseten 9y agoSometimes the truth is an inconvenient barrier to making money.
- tertius 9y agoAnd that may be the case. But just because it's often/sometimes/always/never the case we can't assume on an individual basis. Well we clearly can assume, but it doesn't make us right.
- ksk 9y agoI don't know why people are down voting you. Your questions are completely valid.
- tehwebguy 9y agoEveryone did pick up on it. That’s what this entire thread is about. Catching a public servant in a lie doesn’t change anything unfortunately.
- tertius 9y agoI haven't seen anyone in this thread talk about the DOT's report, i.e. what it seems the result of the vote is based on. Or even what the White House has said in statements regarding the reasoning to do it. Neither have I seen where the simple statement "one option is less than two" is published by any media outlet.