[El Car]

True to form, King follows up a statement from Rangers with accusations that everyone's lying except him...without actually offering anything to suggest that it was so. He reckons he had an agreement with Sandy Easdale to show him the money later, but Easdale isn't even a member of the board let alone able to speak for 75% of shareholders. If the money was there, I can't think of any good reason not to give proof of funds.

But perhaps the most important aspect of this is that Dave King and his UoF whores have repeatedly bludgeoned the incumbent and previous boards over lack of transparency and reluctance to name shareholders beyond what was required by statute. Yet he - and not for the first time - has made an approach as part of a group that contains members who have refused to let themselves be known. What exactly is the difference?

I don't actually mind the thought of King getting control at some point, but I hate the sheer ignorance of those backing him when they justify it with this hypocritical shite.