Re: subjunctive.

Jessica Biel likes some men enough to have sex with them. I'm a man. I could someday have sex with Jessica Biel.

Major and minor premise I would argue are true statements. They are also necessary conditions for the "could" in the third statement being accurate.

They are, however, not sufficient conditions for the "could" becoming "will".

If Voldemort lies, he shows himself capable of lying. That's all Rourke is saying. Right?

That Favre has been proven to be dishonest in this instance changes his credibility. Or for Favre apologists it takes away plausible deniability.

The defenders have always said the it is Favre's word agains Glazer's in the Lionsgate story. Glazer put his employer's butts on the line with his story and if he lied, he and they could be sued. His claim that Favre went to several of the Packers opponents and divulged privileged information is actually against trade secret laws. Opponents including the Lions, who went on record, and some that didn't. (I read an article in a legal journal about it) Favre could sue if the story were a fabrication. Glazer stood by the story and Favre denied it. Since this is a more significant issue than some leaked texts and Favre was obviously willing to lie about them. The conclusion could be reached that Favre did indeed leak his reads and keys to several of the Packers opponents in '08. Sabotaging them and Rodgers in his first year.

Since Bevel admitted that the Vikings were also in contact with Favre before his demand to be reinstated, one could also infer that they were one of the other off the record teams Favre tried to help beat the Packers.

That is why Favre's credibility matters. Nothing he claims can be believed as true. Not that is is believed to be a lie, but not credible. So if someone says Favre is not telling the truth. The conclusion is that unless the other party has proven to be as big of a liar as Favre, it is credible.

Why whine about it.. you have a Brett section let this shit play out.. sounds like just bitching to bitch about something constantly trying to stop the Brett debates. ;)

Being a dick aside.. lol.

Brett section, his own damn section speaks volume about the effect he has on people.. no other player has a dedicated section.. so what else is expected past nonstop debates about him?

Nope read what Non has said...He has said it perfectly, but yet "people" cant even put the IDEA in their heads that maybe Brett COULD have done something...

Even hypothetical situations people still will say Brett can't do that or wont..

That is unbelievable

Where did I say that hypothetically Favre couldn't have lied? I DON'T CARE IF HE LIES OR NOT. I do not like Favre for being a great human being. I don't care. All I am saying is that even IF IF IF IF (so your in a subjunctive mood or whatever) Favre lied, it does not necessarilymake any inference about 2008. You don't know why he lied and most importantly EVERY SINGLE F'N PERSON (including your beloved TT/MM) have lied at some point.

All I was saying was that I don't understand the point of throwing out all these hypotheticals. Why don't you just want until you have facts, like proof of what the texts said or the motivation behind lying, etc. Tahts its, thats my point. Right now, you are all making inferences about him based on theories. Why do you care so much and why don't you just wait until you have solid information.

Its like the whole thing with that Jets cheerleader or whatever. Everyone jumped all over it and guess what, nothing, no proof yet. Its like the Schism thing, its like Ed Werder's reports last year, etc.

All I am saying is taking everything you read about Favre with a grain of salt. Or a pound of salt.

My point exactly. If you all of this ammunition with Lionsgate or whatever and you have already proven to yourself that he is capable of lying, then why do you need this particular hypothetical to once again prove he is capable of lying. Thats what I am not getting. If this text thing is your strongest proof that Favre is capable of lying (when ALL human beings are capable of lying), I don't know what ot tell you.

Also, I assume you are not actually making that point but if part of what your saying is that Rodgers failed in his first because Favre gave other teams hints, Rodgers is pathetic and so is the Packers coaching staff. Every year players go from one team to another, you adjust every year. You don't think McNabb is going to tell the Redskins about the Eagles playbook, etc. Sharper went from the Packers to the Vikings, shouldn't you just naturally evolve the defense or the offense?

And if your point is that they didn't expect Favre to tell other teams, when he's friends with Matt Millan and they know he dislikes them, they're stupid too. YOUR AN NFL F'N COACH, PREPARE.

Or perhaps one of these salt blocks upside the head? :)

I'm in the same boat my friend, lol.