Instead of doing your usual misogynistic attack against BSG, (who, by the way, is repeating exactly what the federals appeals court ruled) - why not, as a lawyer, you poke holes in what THEY ruled and is going before the Supreme Court now? Tell us how THEY, the 3 judge bipartisan panel, are wrong?
The official duties of the President don’t include addressing a rally of your supporters.
I think he’s gone. He’s pulled an Elvis.
i wonder if harpy would still defend trump if he had literally shot someone on 5th avenue whilst president as it being done under his official duties as a president? clearly it's a ridiculous stance but one that trump would happily see as the status quo just so long as he was president: he could then make quite sure he remained president for as long as he wanted, handing down his dynasty to family members in his wake.
So an executive order...... If only there was position that could revoke an executive order
Instead of killing Donald Trump, President Biden should just send some thugs to beat him up. That's not assassination, so it wouldn't run afoul of the executive order.
Trump literally said he would pay for the lawyers if one of you MAGAts would beat people up.
The NATO treaty does not explicitly mandate direct financial payments by individual member countries. However, national contributions play a crucial role in funding NATO’s activities. Here’s how it works:
NATO isn't a transactional body.The NATO treaty does not explicitly mandate direct financial payments by individual member countries. However, national contributions play a crucial role in funding NATO’s activities. Here’s how it works:
In summary, while NATO does not directly require financial payments, member countries’ contributions are essential for maintaining the alliance’s strength and security.
- National Contributions:
- The largest component of NATO funding comes from national (or indirect) contributions borne by each member country.
- These contributions include the forces and capabilities held by each nation, which can be provided to NATO for deterrence, defense activities, and military operations1.
- 2% Guideline:
- While not a strict requirement of the NATO treaty, an informal agreement among members exists.
- According to this agreement, each member country aims to allocate at least 2% of its gross domestic product (GDP) to national defense or military spending2.
- However, this guideline is not legally binding, and actual spending varies among member nations.
- Voluntary Commitments:
- NATO allies voluntarily choose to contribute troops, capabilities, and funding to the alliance.
- The specific amount each country spends on its defense is not mandated but is guided by self-imposed standards and guidelines to ensure the alliance’s military preparedness3.
Learn more
1nato.int2usafacts.org3abcnews.go.com4nato.int5gettyimages.com
So in essence the US is not required to spend any money and could refuse to provide monetary aid like 2/3ds of Nato members do as we speak. right?
It's a hypothetical. I don't want President Biden to order Donald Trump to be beaten to a bloody pulp. I was just pointing out that according to you it would be perfectly legal if he did so.
You seem upset. Dumb people often express anger when caught in their hypocrisy.
He doesn't get it. Or, he gets it but he's dug in and can't afford to admit he's 100% totally wrong.
I don't think you understand what legally constitutes a threat.
He would do well to put you on ignore.
Thanks for showing that a country not paying it's 2% of GDP is not a problem. Your correct, if the US didn't pay it's 2% it could still be a full member of NATO.The NATO treaty does not explicitly mandate direct financial payments by individual member countries. However, national contributions play a crucial role in funding NATO’s activities. Here’s how it works:
In summary, while NATO does not directly require financial payments, member countries’ contributions are essential for maintaining the alliance’s strength and security.
- National Contributions:
- The largest component of NATO funding comes from national (or indirect) contributions borne by each member country.
- These contributions include the forces and capabilities held by each nation, which can be provided to NATO for deterrence, defense activities, and military operations1.
- 2% Guideline:
- While not a strict requirement of the NATO treaty, an informal agreement among members exists.
- According to this agreement, each member country aims to allocate at least 2% of its gross domestic product (GDP) to national defense or military spending2.
- However, this guideline is not legally binding, and actual spending varies among member nations.
- Voluntary Commitments:
- NATO allies voluntarily choose to contribute troops, capabilities, and funding to the alliance.
- The specific amount each country spends on its defense is not mandated but is guided by self-imposed standards and guidelines to ensure the alliance’s military preparedness3.
Learn more
1nato.int2usafacts.org3abcnews.go.com4nato.int5gettyimages.com
So in essence the US is not required to spend any money and could refuse to provide monetary aid like 2/3ds of Nato members do as we speak. right?
Trump is not talking about refusing to pay money into the NATO. He flatly said if a county was attacked when he were president the US military will not come to their defense via the treaty that is something he cannot do.. This month Trump caused an uproar when he said he once warned a NATO ally that he “would encourage” Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to countries in the alliance that don't spend enough on defense.
Harpy’s on the verge of a meltdown.
Oh please no I hope notHe would do well to put you on ignore.
Do you have a case to provide us with?
