lurking lurker wrote:
Any evidence that they bought chorizo and pork fat? Judging by your convoluted answer, apparently not.
Looks like you were just having fun with fghfgh, and have no evidence that the food truck owners bought any other "pieces of pig". Carry on.
You asked me if I have "evidence that that statement is wrong", and provided an incomplete quote clipping some of what was wrong, in order to ask an irrelevant question. My response was not convoluted, but an itemized list of several things that were not true.
Are you suggesting that they got these other "pieces of pig" for free? Or stole it? How is that relevant to rebutting Houlihan's maintained claim, in light of the evidence of "grease" and "chorizo (pork sausage)"?
"fghhgf" kept moving the goalposts each time his claim was debunked:
fghhgf wrote:
"she provided no evidence for any pork ingredients other than stomach or butt in the chorizo or in the offal."
"Houlihan provided only evidence for butt (meat) and stomach (outer stomach muscle aka meat) as pieces of pig used by the food truck - for offal and chorizo alike."
"Houlihan provided only evidence for butt (meat) and stomach (outer stomach muscle aka meat) as pieces of pig *acquired* by the food truck - for offal and chorizo alike."
"Houlihan provided only evidence for butt (meat) and stomach (outer stomach muscle aka meat) as pieces of pig bought by the food truck - for offal and chorizo alike."
But they all fail for the same reason, as there was evidence of other pork ingredients that were used/acquired/bought before both the AIU and the CAS. No matter how he continues to rephrase it, there is no word that will make the AIU's incomplete rebuttal of Houlihan's maintained claim to the AIU complete.