Liverpool Lou

And as I mentioned before, you have no idea what was in this tenants lease contract.

Beg away, that won't give you any more credibility unless you say what you know about the content of the lease in question.

It serves me very well most of the time, particularly when it comes to the accuracy of my comments here as opposed to some others I could mention.

Yes, they can, it is not free, though, and you may have to tell security that you're using the hotel facilities. It may make you feel better if you bought a coffee in the hotel lobby which may also get you a stamp on the ticket.

Yes, I agree, they may be shackled only in those circumstances, that is what I said. They are not shackled in any other circumstances such as in the normal course of daily prison life, that is also what I said. You commented that it was "BS" to my comment that "no one wears ankle chains inside Thai prisons unless they are being punished for in-jail misbehaviour". My comment was accurate, your "BS" remark was not.

Are you implying that he had to take action to have her indicted?

And so accurate. That's what.

I think that's a pretty shallow interpretation of the facts of this case. For example, we've all heard the perfect phone call. Several times. No more shallow than your "perfect phone call" comment. What facts are you so privy to about this case, perhaps you're involved in the discovery process?

He said so. Are we not to believe him? It is his prerogative to say whatever he wants to say, even if it is hyperbole. Whether you believe him or not is up to you and makes no difference to his intent.

Are you saying that Trump was lying when he said he would put Hillary Clinton in jail? No, I said it was hyperbole...but what if he was lying?

At this stage that is b0llocks, he is innocent of these charges until proven otherwise.

No, they are allegations, not affirmations.

Oh, no, the rabble here won't like that!

They are!

No one outside of the legal teams have the facts of the case so you cannot argue anything, either!

Daft question without discovery (unless you're part of his legal team, of course). It'll come out in court.

Most standard rental contracts include that clause . Bye So you have no idea whether that is the case in this instance, thought as much.

A lot more than "a cupboard" is clearly missing.

What's so odd about that?

Really? You've seen the lease, have you, or maybe there's a law here that states that?

Did he? Where was that stated?

Which means nothing if they didn't catch him working.

I think that you'll find that theft is a criminal matter.

Which "unit above"? Was there another house built on the roof?

Which condos are you referring to? There's no condo in the OP.