[nsj]

[ QUOTE ]

How much more do you need to know?
And what are you going to do with that information?

[/ QUOTE ]

I want to know as much as I can. The depth and scope of the impropriety, namely. Wouldn't it be nice to have some cold hard fact to go with all the rampant speculation? Was it $700k over the last three months, or $7-million over the last five years? Scott and AJ, or a motley crew of cheats in CR, Panama, Montana, and Miami? Just 363, or numerous 'superuser' observer clients?

Everyone is assuming that 99% of the AP payroll is crooked. I think it's more likely that 99% of them aren't. Obviously Nat (and anyone else who goes down) should proceed with caution and skepticism, but to universally say "don't go, they're going to brainwash you with PR tactics!!!!!" is hysterical.

Just go and see. It's more responsible than summarily passing judgment based on incomplete information.

And the answer to the second question follows the first. This is a very intriguing story. I want to know more about the plot and the players and how everything went down. Your question suggests you'd rather take what little we know, pass judgment, and file the story away.

There's more here, and I encourage those who may be privy to keep investigating.