LosLobo

You overlooked the part where that the Act was expressly written to stop Trump from withdrawing from NATO. Despite these measures, this act might not be enough to prevent a potential withdrawal. Obviously, Congress had evidence that Trump 'seriously means to cancel US membership of NATO' otherwise they would not have passed the law. Like Trump, you say too much based on opinion instead of fact. Congress acted to protect NATO. But it might not be enough to stop Trump (msn.com)

For those who enjoyed Season One of Tokyo Vice, Season Two Episodes 1 &2 are now available. Tokyo Vice (TV Series 2022– ) - IMDb Rating 8/10

Giving the devil his due is akin to feeding a troll. A broken clock comes up with potentially useful pieces of information as well, twice a day, every day.

It's not a guessing game, unless you have dementia or were down a rabbit hole on the day. Trump's Insurrection was watched live by millions, it was one of the biggest news events of modern times. Likely a billion people witnessed it with their own eyes on that day. The insurrection was even live on Fox. Networks See Spike In Viewers As Capitol Siege Played Out (deadline.com) World media see Trump ignite an 'insurrection' - BBC News

The Capital of US is Washington DC! By the way, you already asked some days ago if I was an 'education major' and I replied. Dementia comes to mind. I'm done proving all my posts, and getting bored, stop embarrassing yourself. Have a good evening!

As I said before literacy is not your friend. You obviously don't know the difference between the US Capital and US Capitol!

Obviously besides facts, literacy is not your friend either.

Do you know not telling the truth when you know it's not the truth is lying? As you already acknowledged my post with evidence that there were guns long before this post, I suggest you are now lying.

Ergo..... Nemo me impune lacessit.

Facts don't seem to be your friend. Jan. 6 defendant admits he had a gun when he stormed the Capitol (nbcnews.com) Guns on Jan. 6: Multiple people brought firearms to Washington - The Washington Post

FYI : Tax ID Required For Thai Retirement Visa Extension? - Integrity Legal - Law Firm in Bangkok | Bangkok Lawyer | Legal Services Thailand

'We know FOR A FACT' about an off-topic subject?......interesting!

Thanks. I posted a relevant 'Do Not Feed the Troll' meme possibly two years ago when the problem first 'raised its ugly head'. I would repost it but don't have an hour to find it in this current morass.

I unreservedly apologise to @My Ego and this forum for unknowingly posting an incorrect viewpoint and the out of context information of ATO Blake. Though I have not seen any definitive information to say otherwise, I can accept my viewpoint on paying tax on the AAP in Australia was incorrect, through the preponderance of anecdotal evidence here. I suggest my error was accepting the ATO community Blake as gospel instead of consulting my own 'tax professional'. Paradoxically Blake as an ATO nominated tax professional should have qualified his response by including a rider that his decision may not apply if a DTA was in force. Seems many others also may have failed to factor in the DTA issue as well, we were lucky to have @Norbra's input. Nevertheless, on the personal side, the consensus of no tax payable on the AAP in Australia, is welcome as my Thai tax liability will be minor and any tax on minor bank interest in Australia will be offset by SAPTO and possibly no Australian tax return will be necessary. The sad part of this saga is that this forum once a Book of Knowledge is now contaminated with over 600 posts of repetitive seemingly 'bogus' information. Possibly going forward we could request this forum be closed and a new chapter opened. This will not necessarily rid the forum of the 'resident troll' but now we are all cognisant of what havoc 'feeding the troll' has wrought. https://community.ato.gov.au/s/question/a0J9s0000002ngF/p00172380

Preaching to the choir come to mind. Just-Security-Carroll-response-brief-due-March-20-in-Trump-2nd-Cir.-appeal-of-district-court-order-denying-a-retrial-following-jury-verdict-in-Carroll-II.pdf (justsecurity.org)

But here is the docket for it: Trump’s appeal for last year's court case filed 20th Nov 2023. This doesn't appear to have been posted before, though it seems to have been available for some time. And an appeal for Trump's right-to- alibi et alia has been referred to many times in discussion since. Last's year's verdict by a jury of Trump's peers with a preponderance of evidence is water-under-the bridge for most, but for Trump and supporters it is still a bridge-too-far. It’s important to note that this is a legal document prepared by Trump’s legal team, and the arguments presented in it represent their perspective on the case and are not established facts. They are made by one side in this legal dispute and will be subject to scrutiny and counterarguments from the other side in the course of the legal proceedings. Summary of Trump's reasons for the appeal argument (followed by the docket of Trump's brief): 1) The district court allowed two other women to testify that President Trump had sexually assaulted them in the past, even though their stories were very different from Plaintiff’s and happened a long time ago. This was unfair and prejudicial because it made the jury think that President Trump had a habit of assaulting women. 2) The district court also allowed a recording of President Trump talking about grabbing women’s genitals to be played to the jury, even though it had nothing to do with Plaintiff’s allegation and was not a confession of any crime. This was also unfair and prejudicial because it made the jury dislike President Trump and believe he was capable of assaulting Plaintiff. 3) The district court prevented President Trump from presenting evidence and questioning witnesses that could have shown that Plaintiff was lying and had a political motive to sue him. For example, the court did not let President Trump show that Plaintiff was funded by a billionaire who opposed him, that Plaintiff coached another witness to change her story, and that Plaintiff lied about having President Trump’s DNA on her dress. 4) The district court’s errors were not harmless but affected the outcome of the trial. Plaintiff’s lawyers emphasized the wrongly admitted evidence and the court did not give proper instructions to the jury. President Trump was not able to defend himself effectively and the jury was influenced by the errors. Therefore, the verdict should be vacated and a new trial should be ordered. Case 23-793, Document 74, 11/20/2023 23-0793-cv Brief For Defendant-Appellant Just-Security-Trump-brief-in-his-2nd-Cir.-appeal-of-district-court-order-denying-a-retrial-following-jury-verdict-in-Carroll-II-Nov.-20-2024.pdf (justsecurity.org)

Judge Kaplan just entered an order on Trump payment of $83.3M 'That starts the clock for Trump's post-trial motions and for him to post a bond'. 'Specifically, federal rules governing civil cases stay a plaintiff's execution on a judgment for 30 days after the entry of judgment, which effectively means he has 30 days to provide a bond or other security to lengthen that stay pending an appeal," Rubin continued. 'Trump also has 28 days after the entry of judgment to move for a new trial or to 'alter or amend' the judgment.' 'That starts the clock': E. Jean Carroll judge just entered an order on Trump payment Docket for Judge Kaplan's Judgement Case Carroll vs Trump 1:20-cv-07311

I will share the news with you...... #TrumpSmells Becomes Top Trend in U.S. As Claims of Putrid Odor Go Viral - MeidasTouch Network

The 'alligator moats' also has been reported on PBS one of US's most trusted News services. 'In Texas, he delivered remarks highlighting his administration’s efforts to curb illegal immigration and the progress made on his signature 2016 campaign promise: building a “big, beautiful wall” across the length of the southern border — an imposing structure made of concrete and reinforced steel. But over time, Trump demanded modifications that have been largely rejected: He wanted it painted black to burn the hands of those who touched it; he wanted it adorned with deadly spikes; he even wanted to surround it with an alligator-filled moat. While he promised that it would be funded by Mexico, U.S. taxpayers ended up footing the bill.' Trump says ‘25th Amendment is of zero risk to me’ while visiting Texas border wall | PBS NewsHour

Where does it say King Charles is undertaking chemotherapy? There are many types of cancer treatment including combinations of them: Surgery: This is a procedure in which a surgeon removes cancer from your body. Chemotherapy: This is a type of drug-based therapy that uses drugs to kill cancer cells. Radiation therapy: This is a type of energy-based therapy that uses high doses of radiation to kill cancer cells and shrink tumors. Hormone therapy: This is a type of therapy that slows or stops the growth of breast and prostate cancers that use hormones to grow. Immunotherapy: This is a type of biological therapy that helps your immune system fight cancer. Targeted therapy: This is a type of drug therapy that targets the changes in cancer cells that help them grow, divide, and spread. Stem cell transplant: This is a type of stem cell-based therapy that restores stem cells that grow into blood cells after they are destroyed by high doses of chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Photodynamic therapy: This is a type of therapy that uses a drug activated by light to kill cancer and other abnormal cells. Hyperthermia: This is a type of heat-based therapy that heats body tissue to as high as 113 °F to help damage and kill cancer cells with little or no harm to normal tissue. Cryoablation: This is a type of cold-based therapy that freezes and destroys cancer cells. Types of Cancer Treatment - NCI Cancer treatments: MedlinePlus Medical Encyclopedia

Perhaps an appropriate approach for me in AN Vox Populi lingua franca would be ‘quid pro quo’.

Again, like in the post that you have not responded to as yet: 'What is the point you are trying to make here?' I am only quoting from the source, shown in my post. 'Judge Kaplan added that both parties had the opportunity to make DNA analysis an issue in the upcoming April trial — and both, for their own 'strategic' reasons, opted against it'. Judge rejects Donald Trump DNA offer in E. Jean Carroll Case

I would like to offer a different perspective for your consideration: DNA Evidence: It’s important to remember that Donald Trump had the opportunity to submit his DNA at any point during the litigation process. His decision to offer it late in the process could potentially delay the trial, which is his usual modus operandi. The judge said that the offer was a “quid pro quo” that had no justification and came too late in the litigation. Strategic Decisions: E. Jean Carroll’s legal team’s decision not to compel a DNA sample from Trump was a strategic one. Drawing conclusions from this decision, as you have done, could lead to a logical fallacy. The absence of an action does not necessarily imply a particular motive or outcome. Anecdotal Evidence: The comments made by a lawyer about the dress are anecdotal without concrete evidence. They are part of their advocacy for their clients and are not independently verified facts. Therefore, while they may provide context, they should not be taken as evidentiary. Judge rejects Donald Trump DNA offer in E. Jean Carroll Case As another anecdote, seems Boris Epshteyn the Trump lawyer who is the author of the Donna Karan blazer dress claim, has 'some skin in the game' just like his client. Trump adviser Boris Epshteyn arrested in 2021 after groping complaints at club, police records show | AP News

Trump is not only dominating primaries he is dominating weirdness. He is not only a reincarnation of the Messiah..... https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/111869870716367808

My point with all my posts to you has been your obsessive posting. With respect, have you ever considered possibly becoming a valuable member of this forum. Your past behaviour has had negative consequences for both you and this forum community, it: Wastes time, energy, and resources. Is obviously damaging your reputation, credibility, and relationships here. Violates the rules of the forum. Is annoying, offending, and alienating other users. And, is disrupting, derailing, and dominating the forum discussion where we should be focussing on the topic of the forum, at a time of potential considerable change.