Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="McHunt, post: 3372127, member: 9853"] Sure, but at this point we're mincing words about what constitutes a "contract." Perhaps we should call it a "deal" to avoid getting into a shouting match over legal definitions. The new "deal" is different from the old "deal." I didn't ignore you saying there is no challenge to the validity of his contract, but I have read that there might be knock-on effects. I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm asking where you got this information. You keep saying the source is "trust me" but not the media. You're an anonymous poster. I understand your argument, but I don't see you posting anything to back it up. [/QUOTE]

No members online now.

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)