Masterton

Well the difference is that Trump had the authority to take the documents, and the clearance to de-classify them whereas Biden and Clinton did not. Wierd how the Dems always gloss over that inconvenient little fact as it completely contradicts their narrative. Here we go again with this... When the judge asked that hypothetical question, the lawyers stated (and I am paraphrasing...) that there would be a process to follow whereby the president would need to be impeached first and then convicted in the senate before any "prosecution" took place. If you're going to cherry pick facts to argue a point, at least present them in the correct context.

What a ridiculous post. Are you living in Bizarro World ?? Your post contains nothing but fake news Democrat propaganda talking points. Good grief... try removing yourself from the Democrat controlled media and educate yourself. Denying the validity of elections? Oh you mean like your side STILL do with the 2000 election? And the 2016 election? Trum colluded with the Russians right? 🤣 The Stacy Abrams governership election? Claiming permanent immunity from prosecution for all crimes committed while in office? It is a fact that the president has immunity, it is not a "claim", furthermore Trump did not commit any crimes, and as with most fake talking points, the clip you refer to about the Seal team assasinating his rival was a hypothetical question asked by a judge. Trump has made it clear he doesn't respect democracy and elections, and wants to be immune from all prosecution for his crimes? Absolutely clueless. Tell me, how many supreme court decisions did Trump ignore? And how many has Biden ignored? Yet it's Trump who doesn't respect democracy... Please... go off and educate yourself, and then come back and argue with the grown-ups.

Posts a link about a non-existent Muslim ban from The Guardian (🤣) in a thread about a conspiracy theory and then expects to be taken seriously... 🙄

Thai people also tend to refer to their age as a year more than it is due to them referring to their age as the age they are turning in any particular year. A seventeen year old in their eighteenth year will consider themselves eighteen. Again this is something that you learn with time, it is unlikely a tourist would know this.

Lots of people are in denial about this fact. They assume that because Thai girls generally look younger than their age, then they must therefore be of legal age but just look young. When you have been here long enough, you can spot them a mile away, in the same way you learn to spot a LB a mile away. In the past, I would often be the aforementioned bar and spot a clearly not-yet-18 yr old and ask the mamasan, how old is she? "Nineteen". How old is she really, I would then ask, raising my eyebrows at her. "Sixteen". Completely agree. Too many people in this thread going out of their way to signal their virtue. Assuming that the guy in the article went with the girls knowing they were not of legal age or actively sought them out. There is zero evidence of this. But lets break out the torches and pitchforks at dawn. Methink they doth protest too much...

Funny how some on here automatically assume he has fallen on hard times and actually needs a plane ticket. Most of these types are scam artists praying on the genorisity of other people (mostly Thais) to fund their 'stay' in Thailand. Personally I find 'begpackers' despicable and give foreigners here a bad name.

How nice and boringly predictable that the TDS sufferers on this forum have emerged from beneath their fake news enshrouded rocks to honour us with their presence. Yes yes, orange man bad.... bla bla bla yawn... The more things change, the more they stay the same.....

Well that explains where all the 50b notes have gone and why there are so few in circulation...

Agree, Great White's version was great (lol) but the song was actually originally written and sung by Ian Hunter in the 70's