-
Posts
1,634 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Events
Forums
Downloads
Quizzes
Gallery
Blogs
Posts posted by Longwood50
-
-
19 hours ago, ThailandRyan said:
34 years as a LEO and DA Investigator
And which college is your JD from?
-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
On 8/29/2022 at 3:36 PM, johnnybangkok said:You're really not doing very well here are you? This has been explained to you several times
Yes Johhny,
You have "explained it to me" I am looking for confirmation from someone who is knowledgeable with the law, not a Trump Hater.-
1
-
2
-
21 hours ago, billd766 said:
There are several posters on this forum and this thread who have many years of experience with the Justice Department and Law enforcement but you refuse to accept what they say simply because it does not agree with your bias.
Again, I think you are WRONG. I have seen no posts from people who have represented themselves to be US atorneys or former justice department personnel.
In the USA you have to have probable cause not "suspicion" in order to legally obtain a search warrant.
Again, I don't believe that they can they hide and say oh but we don't have to tell you how or why we believe we have probable cause. That is just an end around the 4th amendment that precludes unlawful search and siezures. If a government can cloak itself in secrecy and not have to disclose probable cause it in effect has limitless power to conduct whatever searches and siezures it wants without having to prove it had probable cause.-
2
-
-
21 hours ago, eisfeld said:
You are confusing totally different things again. This was not a subpoena.
You are correct I used the wrong term. There has to be a predicate for a search warrant.
-
2 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:10 minutes ago, Longwood50 said:
A distinction without a difference. CLASSIFIED IS CLASSIFIED.
Also we don't know if those classified emails had any attachments or does that make a difference if the Russians who hacked her computer had to print it out.
TRY AGAIN.Your confused my friend, very confused. an email document is not a stamped and held under lock and key document which is for certain people with certain security clearances to review, "For Your Eyes Only
Can you tell me the FOR YOUR EYES ONLY that was stamped on the sailors digital photo of the area he worked in on the nuclear submarine that he shared with no one, not even via an email?
-
1
-
1
-
-
3 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:
I answered your question above, beyond me why you still deflect. It was a warrant which served to obtain the information and which was issued based upon a declaration of probable cause called an affidavit.
Yes and I answered yours, I don't think you are correct that a subpoena is routinely blacked out and only disclosed at trial.
If what you say is true, why conceal the 'name" of the perons but not the content.
Instead they are trying to conceal any predicate. Also, subpoenas are to be very specific as to what the authorities are looking for and where they can look. I doubt Melania's closet was stuffed like Sandy Bergers pants with classified material.
Also you stated that Hillary Clinton's classified were emails. So I guess if Trump had an aide like Huma Abedin had all those classified documents scanned and put into PDF files and emailed to him, then that would be ok then. HUH?-
1
-
1
-
-
8 minutes ago, ThailandRyan said:
Emails, not actual documents....your hero the Donald had actual stamped TS classified documents in hand....try again.
A distinction without a difference. CLASSIFIED IS CLASSIFIED.
Also we don't know if those classified emails had any attachments or does that make a difference if the Russians who hacked her computer had to print it out.
TRY AGAIN.-
1
-
1
-
1
-
-
19 hours ago, billd766 said:
Why do you keep asking questions of the people on the forum? They know as much as you know.
Very simple, you made the point that the subpoenas are usually hidden. I don't think that is true.
Hint" there may be an attorney from the USA on this forum who would definitively know that answer. DUH.-
1
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
14 hours ago, Credo said:First, there is no evidence that Hillary had any classified documents on the server
Not only did she have classified information, it was current since she was serving as Sec. of State.
Further she shared that information with the people who were servicing her server ANOTHER VIOLATION
She also gave access to Huma Abedin her aide which who did not have classified clearance.
Huma forwarded the contents of the server to her husband Anthony Weiner (the person convicted of sending sexually explicit photo's to minors)
That was also a crime by Huma
ALL THE CLINTON PEOPEL WERE GIVEN IMMUNITY
They included but not limited to her lawyer Cheryl Mills, Human Abedin and Paul Combetta who worked on Clinton Server and deleted the emails.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/three-more-hillary-clinton-witnesses-were-given-immunity-by-fbi-
1
-
1
-
2
-
2 minutes ago, ozimoron said:
There is always always concealment of the warrant until a trial.
I don't believe that to be true.
In order for a warrant to be issued it is suppose to show probably cause and it also can not be unreasonablly broad. You can't go into a person's home saying you are looking for drugs, find guns as you search and then charge them with illegally possessing a firearm.
Is anyone on this forum a former attorney in the USA that could speak definitely on the concealment of a warrant.-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, billd766 said:Trump's creed: Laws are for everybody else, but not for me.
It is "reported" that all the former presidents have some classified information in their homes. But I guess we will never know for sure because in the 250 years since the USA declared its independence Trump is the ONLY president it was ever deemed necessary to serve a search warrant on.
Also omitted from the news reports was that there were ongoing negotiations with the Trump representatives over the documents. Trump's lawyers had served a rebuttal challenging the governments claim to them. THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN A MATTER FOR THE CIVIL COURTS to adjudicate.
However the Democrats wanted the public spectacle.-
1
-
2
-
- Popular Post
1 hour ago, Bkk Brian said:Calm down buddy, wait till it goes to trial and most of its closed to the public, you need a little more energy left for your hysteria......
I am merely pointing to the fact that if there was a clear predicate for the warrant, there should not be the concealment.
In terms of a trial, do you know if that comes before or after the Clinton trial for having classified information on her server that was hacked by the Russians and where it stands in the queue with the James Comey trial for deliberately releasing classified material from the FBI.
-
1
-
3
-
6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:
Well look who got through Mar-a-Largo ‘security’:
Yes we certainly know those servers that Clinton used that contained current classified information were secure. Oh remind me, was her home raided and was she prosecuted. Oh yes, I now recall, James Comey said that no reasonable prosecutor will bring charges.
I guess he was covering himself because he not only had classified information but he revealed it. But of course that is something to ignore.
Liberals creed: Laws are for thee not for me.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/us/politics/leak-investigation-james-comey.htmlhttps://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/us/politics/clinton-campaign-hacked-russians.html
-
1
-
-
17 hours ago, LosLobo said:
One reason was to conceal the names of witnesses.
Boy there must have been a lot of witnesses since the entire group of pages is almost entirely blacked out. CONCEALMENT
-
1
-
-
- Popular Post
6 hours ago, LarrySR said:Seriously, you’re baffled why there are redactions?
Clearly, you haven't been paying attention. Do a little homework before you post.
This isn't a "redaction" it is outright concealment.
-
1
-
5
-
Even CNN said the first few pages contained some information and the remainder as shown here were "redacted" in other words you could not decipher anything. If there is nothing to hide and a clear predicate why hide it.
-
1
-
1
-
-
I think several Thai's found his finger at least I think so they were all waiving a middle finger at him.
-
Is this "change of power" a distinction without a difference?
-
1
-
-
13 hours ago, Sheryl said:
Monovision can also be achieved with Lasik.
Yes I was aware of that. Years ago I lost a contact lens and went to my opthamologist for a replacement. I asked if there was anything I could do regarding reading since with the contacts I could not read. He laughed and said, yes you just discovered it. Wear only 1 contact lens. I did that for years.
I had a good outcome with the cataract surgery achieving what I wanted to but not entirely by design. Despite all the modern testing my first eye was undercorrected by +1.75. The doctor for the second surgery manually adjusted the power that the Zeiss interocular calculated for the required power.
There are several formulas used by the machine to predict the required power and they don't come out the same. That prediction is complicated by prior lasik. My doctor had me go a second time to have the machine calculate my power, then ran three separate tests manually on his computer based on my measurements. He then made his "best guess" as to which measurement would produce the best outcome. He got it within -.25 diopters.
My only point is that with other options I would not select Lasik if I was to go back in time. Anyone considering Lasik should consult with an opthamologist and shall we say. Go in with their eyes wide open, about the positives and negatives associated with Lasik surgery. -
On 8/25/2022 at 12:59 PM, richard_smith237 said:
Different experiences, different opinions...
I don't know your age, however my vision started to "improve" in my 50's. So now I needed both reading glasses and corrective glasses to reduce the over correction done by lasik.
Perhaps your eyes are stable, or perhaps you have not reached the age where your eyes have changed.
One way or another, most people will experience cataracts as they age. Ask any opthamologist and they will tell you that selecting the correct lens replacement for a person who has previously had lasik is far more challenging and involves a bit of guesswork. Despite all the testing, my first eye with the lens was - 1.25 diopters. The second a +25 after the doctor adjusted what the Zeiss machine calculated my required lens to be for the second eye.
Now as it turns out, this is exactly what I wanted. Monovision. I see with the eye that is nearly perfectly corrected, and I get close up vision with the eye that is undercorrected.
I would just caution that once your cornea's are shaved, there is no going back. With IOL lens or a corneal ring insertion you can adjust it if your vision needs change.
-
I had Lasik done years ago. Here is some advise don't do it. I was nearsighted so I could read. I corrected my vision with Lasik for distance. Guess What, they didn't tell me that it would rob me of my near vision. So now instead of having to wear glasses only occasionally for distance, I now was chained to having a set of reading glasses all the time. Even if you are young this will eventually happen to you. It is called Presbyopia.
Now, my distance vision was great. However again, another pitfall is that your vision changes as time goes on. I experienced what many are now finding and that is called second sight. Your distance vision improves as you age. Now of course with Lasik I was over corrected and my vision blurry from too much correction.
With my cornea now flattened contact lenses don't fit properly. I could get away with single vision contacts but the new multi-focal lens were worthless. Blurry at any distance. So again, still chained to glasses.
Finally, as I have aged night driving has a glare which is normal. The opthamologists told me that the flattened cornea made the glare more pronounced. I had small cataracts but not bad enough to warrant surgery. I am 73 and asked the doctor why wait your estimated 5 - 7 years until my cataracts worsen. He finally relented and I had cataract surgery which is IOL inter ocular lens. I can now read and see at distance. The glare is reduced but not entirely because in part to the prior lasik. The selection of the lens was considerable more challenging because of the Lasik which makes calculating exactly what lens to replace it a bit of a guesswork.
So, if I was to go back in time, I would opt for interocular lens replacement instead of Lasik. If my vision changed over time the lens can be removed and a new one replaced.
Another option which I did not have at that time are the newer Multi Focal contacts. That does not rid you of the nuisance of contacts but it does eliminate the glasses.
Talk to your OPTHAMOLOGIST first and not the Lasik person before deciding. Ask him/her if my comments are not something you should take into consideration.
If you are in Chonburi go for a free evaluation go to Jomtien Hospital. On Thursdays Dr. Santa Methasari. He is also on staff at Bangkok Hospital Pattaya but visit is not free.-
2
-
-
I just got mine a couple of weeks ago. Two passport photo's two copies of your passport signed. Two copies of your visa extension signed, two copies of your original visa signed. Some proof of residence. I used my drivers license, copy front and back signed. Could be your TM30 90 day extension or a lease showing where you live.
-
1
-
-
The loans while well intentioned give the colleges the knowledge that they don't have to be competitive with their tuition. Also students can make really lousy choices obtaining degrees in disciplines that don't lead to a career.
If the degree is really an "investment" that investment should produce a return with a higher paying occupation allowing the student to repay the loan. If the investment does not lead to a higher paying occupation it is then a lousy investment and you should not be subsidizing things that are not worthwhile.
If you have a person who instead of going to college opens up a small business and borrows money to get it started, do you then pay off their business loan as well. How about the taxi driver who instead of college purchases a car so they can transport people or the person who buys a boat so they can engage in commercial fishing.
Having people be responsible for the consequences of their decisions is the best way to be guaranteed that they will make those decisions wisely. -
On 8/21/2022 at 2:17 PM, Liverpool Lou said:
That was my point, they would not be identical cars because one had been repaired!
I am not sure what point you are trying to make. The issue was depreciated value of a repaired car. Though "identical" in terms of make, model, year mileage, options, and wear and tear, the fact that one car was repaired and the other not is a differntiating factor even if ALL OTHER ATTRIBUTES were the same.
-
1
-
Why are you proud to be gay?
in Gay People in Thailand
Posted
Is this one of the obigatory monthly posts regarding gays? For all the waling and knashing of teeth over reported discrimination never have I seen a group go to such great lengths to disclose the reason that they are reportedly discriminated against.
With racism, the persons skin color is obvious, sexual preference is not. There has to be some crying need for affirmation because of self doubt that is the reason why the LGBT community keeps parading their lifestyle in everyones face and apparently asking for affirmation of it.
You are gay, great. Most people when asked to describe themselves talk about their family, being a parent, an occupation, their faith, maybe their educational background. They don't have this self image that revolves soley around who they prefer to have sex with.