nauseus

A bit like paying your membership of the flying club then expecting a free plane! The contributions required by NATO are peanuts compared to 2% of any nation's GDP. If those 100 tanks were to be required in a hurry, who do you think NATO would look to to supply them?

Trump did not suggest that NATO 'partners' pay or have to pay the USA at all! In fact NATO members are expected to spend a minimum of 2% of their individual GDP's on their own militaries, which can include direct and indirect funding to NATO itself. "NATO is resourced through the direct and indirect contributions of its members. NATO’s common funds are composed of direct contributions to collective budgets and programmes, which equate to only 0.3% of total Allied defence spending (around EUR 3.3 billion for 2023). These funds enable NATO to deliver capabilities and run the entirety of the Organization and its military commands". https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_67655.htm But, in fact, nearly 20 years after the agreement less than half NATO members are still yet to make the 2% mark. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/defence-spending-pledges-by-nato-members-since-russia-invaded-ukraine/

Exactly. Should be a part of your contract, whoever has to pay.

I don't concur with all of those comments but I do agree that Trump is not doing himself any favors by spouting off on this particular topic, in this way. So I'm not applauding. Trump's position on NATO member state defence budget obligations was made known well enough a few years ago - I understand that - but a statement like this is too bad, even if it's part of a story from way back. Trump will stand more chance of winning if he talks less and lets Joe Biden take the lead for a while.

But do you have a lot of legal links?

Always with the non-comparisons,

Wouldn't be too sure about that.

Joe seemed a bit rattled about the report - Egypt and Mexico are both famous for those pointy pyramid things - that was probably why he got the leaders mixed up. Oh! Hang on.

Sad news. RIP to this man and I hope the wife is now recovering after the shock. The times are confusing because the both local Thai time and UTC are used. From the Flight Radar record, the A380 was airborne just after midnight in Thailand (5:07PM(UTC)) and landed again at BKK at 0227 local time (7:27PM(UTC)). About right for the distance flown. There was a rapid about turn just after passing Yangon and enough time over water to dump enough fuel for immediate landing. https://www.flightradar24.com/data/flights/lh773 My link seems not to work. You can go to https://www.flightradar24.com/ Search the flight and playback if you care to.

So your comment and supposition (below) was both off-topic and therefore irrelevant then: If Biden were as bad as a bet for the 2024 election as Trump supporters would have us believe, they’d be keeping very quiet about it until Biden is locked in to the candidacy. Oddly, they’ve been doing their best to get Democrats to change Biden out for another candidate. No real surprise, I suppose.

"Trump supporters" did not produce this report.

Well, I can believe you on that one.

So, does all that circumventing mean that I'm not a liar after all?

I'm not lying and I did not say that you said "don't watch the Interview" I took your suggestions as a recommendation from you, which is fair, I think. Your post follows: I will add this. I did watch it all and I would not suggest that you do the same. Not worth the time. What I DO suggest is to watch the live reaction that will be coming up in about five hours from the Inside Russia youtube channel. That way you will spend your time more efficiently. Still watching the Tucker Kremlin show but getting all the B.S. called out in detail in real time.

You asked the question. Now you ask another. No pleasing some people.

Golly! Was this commute every day? Was it on a private jet. Somehow, I doubt it.

You are imagining or creating what you perceive to be my 'opinion'. My opinion was only given once. The fist 'quote' was part of a sarcastic response (not to you of course) to Jingthing's recommendation that we should not bother to watch the interview. There was nothing to reverse. You have merged my two separate comments, on separate issues, incompletely and dishonestly. Now you are trying to defend doing that, so I wouldn't put it past you to do it again.

Started out? Ended up?! Those are two pieces of two separate comments/responses to two separate and different posts. You have misrepresented them as one. What is laughable is your pathetic attempt at cheating.

Perhaps 'overflowing' would describe it better?

A shame that this is all going on at a time when solid leadership is required.

From the source report: The investigation said there was plenty of evidence to suggest that Biden was aware that he was not allowed to keep such classified notes after leaving office, pointing out that his long Washington career meant he was familiar 'with the measures taken to safeguard classified information and the need for those measures to prevent harm to national security.'

Stick to this case. The report mentions that Biden was aware that those documents should not have been in his garage.

If you mean Trump, then that's fine if he is guilty. My problem is that Biden is getting away with it.

We won't - it's gone - straight over your head.

Bottom line is that Biden not only held unsecured documents (not just notes) for years but used some of the info therein to feed to his "ghostwriter", while reportedly being quite aware that he was doing wrong, throughout. That's OK because he's old and can't remember anything? The DOJ would have their dogs out chasing Trump all day and night for the same thing. The question should be not whether to believe the Special Counsel but, rather, how many tiers of standard the DOJ has?