Jump to content


Advanced Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Yellowtail

  • Birthday 11/25/1957

Profile Information

  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Yellowtail's Achievements

Star Member

Star Member (12/14)

  • Conversation Starter
  • First Post
  • Posting Machine Rare
  • 10 Posts
  • One Year In

Recent Badges



  1. Not in Chiang Mai, but the local pharmacist I trade with (it's a franchise) regularly can order most anything and have it in a few days. She's also good at recommending generic alternatives.
  2. I don't think you have to remove the ballast, just the starter,
  3. Tops has a nice you-buy-we-fry gig going as well.
  4. By "hardcore religious fundamentalists" you mean people that actually practice their faith, yes?
  5. You mean the court that is run by leftists and has no power over Israel? Why would they?
  6. Yes, the left, that are largely responsible for destroying everything that the religious built, always blame the religious for the destruction.
  7. A cowboy, an Indian and a Muslim are sitting at the gate waiting for their flight. The old Indian looks out the window and sadly says: "Once mu people were many, but now we are few.". The Muslim stands up and states: "Once my people were few, but now we are many! Why do you suppose that is?" The cowboy pushed his hat back and says: "That's because we haven't got around to playing cowboys and Muslims yet, but we's a fixin' to....
  8. "If Trump is convicted, appellate courts will focus on the law and the evidence. They will raise these and unless they decide to stretch the law beyond all current authority, they will likely reverse. But that’s irrelevant, because prosecutors will still have their verdict before the 2024 election. It’s honestly appalling for any lawyer to feel like he has to write that. Frank Snyder is Executive Professor of Law at Texas A&M University School of Law." https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-memo/3011093/brad-smith-what-i-would-have-told-trump-jury/
  9. Or the old: "Attention hippies, the rock candy in the urinals is not for you."
  10. The obvious, but disturbing, answer is that there is none, but for political reasons they want a guilty verdict, notwithstanding the law. Juries sometimes find it difficult to follow unfamiliar statutes with multiple elements. When they can’t, prosecutors hope they may rely on the prosecution’s big picture—Trump stole the 2016 election and covered it up—rather than niggling details like the actual elements of the crime. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/3007722/trump-trial-verdict-now-law-later/
  11. It’s not that the prosecutors are incompetent. They’re experienced and skillful. They just don’t seem to have any relevant evidence. They don’t seem even to be trying to fit evidence into the specific charges. Why? https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/3007722/trump-trial-verdict-now-law-later/
  • Create New...