There's an ambiguity in your comment. You set up "more likely to believe Lehrer now", and then in the second paragraph go on to say: "On the other hand, I'm le

There's an ambiguity in your comment. You set up "more likely to believe Lehrer now", and then in the second paragraph go on to say: "On the other hand, I'm less likely [to believe Lehrer now] because he's a shameful liar, and I don't want to contribute to his livelihood as a liar. I mean, if he was a barrista I'd give him a tip, but it's hard to lie about a latte." It strikes me that the part I have italicised is an entirely separate point, disconnected from the "two hands" you had established. I point this out in such a pedantic way because I think this separate point about not wanting to contribute to the livelihood of a liar is a particularly interesting (moral) one which could be elaborated on. Also, I found your barista analogy entertaining!