Where there's smoke, there's fire? Grrr

I'm getting very tired of hearing people say that phrase "Where there's smoke, there's fire" in regards to the Roethlisberger case. To be honest, I'm tired of hearing about the non-case period...

Let's be clear. "Where there's smoke, there's fire" is a very valid phrase, at least in a couple contexts. The first is a natural - where you literally see smoke (or what you presume to be smoke - could be steam, too). If you investigate it you should know in short order whether there was actual fire or not. The second is when it comes to multiple allegations against a normal everyday Joe that has nothing extraordinary to offer his accusers.

It is not and can not be applicable in the case of multi-million dollar athletes / movie stars / politicians. These people have so much to offer an accuser just so the story goes away that it's worth making a false allegation against them.

And what better time to make an allegation against said multi-millionaire than shortly after someone else accuses them of the same thing??? Firstly, it makes your average everyday retard say "Where there's smoke, there's fire". Secondly, it softens a jury populated with the aforementioned retards and makes it easy for them to think "Where there's smoke, there's fire".

Hell, at this point, and since there are so many "Where there's smoke, there's fire" phrase loving folks out there, I'm thinking about driving to Pittsburgh, dressing up in drag, finding Ben, and then filing an accusation about him myself... You'll never even know I did thanks to rape shield laws - until you see my driving around in my pimped out Caddy...

"Where there's smoke, there's fire" right? I mean, three people who have all filed the same allegation - it has to be true now, right? Shit, I should be able to walk away with a cool million in hush money...

Uggh