trump claims he told NATO country he would not protect them if Russia attacked them

[Seymour Flops]

What "dictators"? Zelenky is a duly elected President that would be removed in two seconds if he loses confidence of his people.

I guess that’s why he cancelled the election.

Loading…

www.wsj.com

Ukrainians are not shy about coming out to the streets to protest power.

Besides, Mac-7 supports funding for Ukraine. So for him it was win-win.

Take that up with Mac-7.

 

[Flash]

Raise you hand if you are tired of America being the world's policeman and tired of Americans dying in war for other people.

 

[Seymour Flops]

Thats is more bullshit, the law applies WHEREVER encounter takes place.

(a)Authority to apply for asylum
(1)In general
Any alien who is physically present in the United States or who arrives in the United States (whether or not at a designated port of arrival and including an alien who is brought to the United States after having been interdicted in international or United States waters), irrespective of such alien’s status, may apply for asylum in accordance with this section or, where applicable, section 1225(b) of this title.

8 U.S. Code § 1158 - Asylum

www.law.cornell.edu

Maybe you should go read up on it instead of just spreading misinformation.

How would Biden follow that law if it limits people coming in to 5,000?

 

[AntonToo]

How would Biden follow that law if it limits people coming in to 5,000?

Nothing to do with Biden, he can't over-ride the law's mechanism.

 

[iku]

He attacked Haley for her husband not being there, because he's deployed with the military.

I mean, how does he keep the support of military members when he so blatantly attacks them?

I think Trump has reached the point where he can say just about anything now and people will defend him no matter what. As if to admit they're wrong, they'd have to admit they're stupid or something, so double down and support him even more.

'I Could ... Shoot Somebody, And I Wouldn't Lose Any Voters'​

If that happened I would vote for him three times

 

[Seymour Flops]

Nothing to do with Biden, he can't over-ride the law's mechanism.

So if the border bill had passed and the five thousand and first border jumper asks for asylum what happens?

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Why don't you check when and how the US State debt evolved, before making non-relevant statements ???

When the cold war was over in 1991 the US State debt was around US$ 4 trillion - and the USSR was none existent and Russia didn't pose any threat towards NATO at all - until today - aside from waving around it's nuke potential. Highlighted endlessly by the WESTERN press. There was absolutely no threat from Russia for 30 years at all !!! - paying to protect NATO - absolute BULLSHIT.

However the USA spend trillions to pursue US global hegemonic interests Globally from 1990 onward. (Since the USSR was finally out of the equation).

U.S. National Debt by Year

The U.S. national debt is the total of what the federal government owes creditors. The U.S. has always carried debt, but the total has expanded rapidly since 2008.

www.investopedia.com

1989	$2,857	S&L Crisis
1990	$3,233	First Iraq War
1991	$3,665	Recession
1992	$4,065
1993	$4,411	Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act
1994	$4,693	Clinton budgets
1995	$4,974
1996	$5,225	Welfare reform
1997	$5,413
1998	$5,526	Long-Term Capital Management crisis; recession
1999	$5,656	Glass-Steagall Act repealed
2000	$5,674	Budget surplus
2001	$5,807	9/11 attacks; Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act
2002	$6,228	War on Terror
2003	$6,783	Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act; second Iraq War
2004	$7,379	Second Iraq War
2005	$7,933	Bankruptcy Act; Hurricane Katrina
2006	$8,507	Bernanke chaired Fed
2007	$9,008	Banks crisis
2008	$10,025	Bank bailouts; quantitative easing (QE)
2009	$11,910	Bailout cost $250 billion; American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) added $242 billion
2010	$13,562	ARRA added $400B; payroll tax holiday ended; Obama tax cuts; Affordable Care Act; Simpson-Bowles debt reduction plan
2011	$14,790	Debt crisis, recession, and tax cuts reduced revenue
2012	$16,066	Fiscal cliff
2013	$16,738	Sequester; government shutdown
2014	$17,824	QE ended; debt ceiling crisis
2015	$18,151	Oil prices fell
2016	$19,573	Brexit
2017	$20,245	Congress raised the debt ceiling
2018	$21,516	Trump tax cuts
2019	$22,719	Trade wars
2020	$26,945	COVID-19 and recession
2021	$28,428	COVID-19 and American Rescue Plan Act
2022	$30,928	Inflation Reduction Act
2023	$33,167

Name me a single war - where the USA got involved due to a NATO member being attacked. - ZERO. NADA, NEVER.
The USA didn't get militarily involved neither when Turkey attacked Greece, nor when Argentina attacked the Falklands. The same goes for the e.g. Suez-crisis.

And every "wealthy" NATO member has contributed to support those "poor" NATO members, e.g. Portugal, Turkey, Greece, Poland, Romania etc. etc. - and not just the USA. Germany has contributed billions to Greece, Turkey and e.g. Poland - whilst the latter babbles about WW2 compensation.

Even the initial US 2nd hand crap that the Bundeswehr received upon becoming a NATO member in 1955 was ALL paid for by Germany.
And from the 60'ies onward Germany became the largest piggy bank in the European NATO for the US military industry. !!!

All wars since 1945 to which the USA where a part - where initiated and kicked of solely by the USA, to solely pursue US global Hegemonic interests.
And that is exactly as to what the American taxpayer is and has been paying for - since 1898. - US global supremacy.

E.g. Israel nor e.g. Egypt nor Jordan are NATO members, however both receive US$ billions. So why don't you ask these three, to pay by themselves, since the USA is indeed paying for them.

According to the 2021 estimates, U.S. defense spending will be close to $811 billion this year. On the other hand, the defense spending of all other NATO countries combined is projected to be $363 billion, Russia's defense budget will be close to $65 billion.
We (European NATO) need $ from the USA to outspend and or match Russia???? - simply ludicrous.

Just because your Trump talks bull all day long - shouldn't exempt you from trying to think for yourself from time to time.

well done.

 

[JimH52]

Think about it. A former American president said he would "enourage" Poootin to attack a European country if they have not spent enough on defense. I am sure Poootin smiled a big smile when he heard that.

And you Fools want to see him back in the White House. You may as well vote for Poootin himself.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

OK, sure. In an ideal world, I would prefer a world leader, who made clear distinctions between joking around and seriousness. One who was kind to everyone, even his political opponents.

We once had one like that. He was very proper and never had a mean word to say about anyone. He brought back formality to the White House that the previous president had deliberately slacked off on. He often told corny jokes, but he would all but announce “hey, I’m about to tell a joke” he would not ever leave room to think that he was serious. He was a great president.

You guys hated him at least as bad as you hate Trump. His name was Ronald Reagan.

The problem with Trump and his trolling, is that you pants wetters make it way too easy for him. Anyone else would know that he was joking or being ironic about that part. But you insist on taking every single thing any conservative ever says absolutely literally. If Trump said “maybe those folks so worried about global warming, should spend some time at the north pole“ You guys would be crying that Trump is going to ship you all to the frozen wasteland. Further, you would be demanding that Trump supporters defend the real plan of sending progressives to the north pole.

I work with middle school students with AU. Sorry, students on the autism spectrum. They are frequently bullied.

I teach them that part of the reason they are bullied more often than other students use that they overreact to the slightest provocation. That just gives the bully what they want.

For People on the autism spectrum, such common sense understanding does not come naturally to them. They have to be taught it, and they have to be taught it over and over for it to sink in. Even then they don’t actually understand it, but they follow the training you give them.

That is the main reason I spend so much time on these boards. I perceive that many of you have autism features, and find it very difficult to learn from only one explanation. I am here to help!

You are embarrassing yourself comparing trump to regan,Reagan contrary the msm media and our corrupt school system was a traiter.he devasted the lower and middle class familys with reaganomics and was a warmongering mass murderer.after carter came in and made progress dismantling the evil CIA hiring stansfield turner which was why there were no wars started under carter,reagan came in firing turner hiring bill Casey who got the cias covert operations rolling again,incredible the sheep still are brainwashed that reagan was for the people as trump is still to this day.

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Raise you hand if you are tired of America being the world's policeman and tired of Americans dying in war for other people.

Which is what we get with fucking NATO.

 

[Seymour Flops]

You are embarrassing yourself comparing trump to regan,Reagan contrary the msm media and our corrupt school system was a traiter.he devasted the lower and middle class familys with reaganomics and was a warmongering mass murderer.after carter came in and made progress dismantling the evil CIA hiring stansfield turner which was why there were no wars started under carter,reagan came in firing turner hiring bill Casey who got the cias covert operations rolling again,incredible the sheep still are brainwashed that reagan was for the people as trump is still to this day.

Well, thank you for making my point! All this talk about Trump‘s jokes and pretending to take them utterly seriously are meaningless. Ronald Reagan was perfect on that score, and of course the Democrats still hated him.

Democrats don’t understand that you can disagree with people without making bile disgusting comments about their personality and character. They hated Ronald Reagan, just as much as they hated Trump, if not more because he was more successful. That’s what Democrats really hate in a Republican – success.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If it ever did, It authorizes him to turn away illegal migrants

Which means, not people seeking asylum.

Sorry, you're just wrong.

 

[j-mac]

No I should not have.
Do you have a picture of Putin on your wall.

Yeah, it’s the one where you’re sucking his Johnson, on your knees…

 

[j-mac]

Which means, not people seeking asylum.

Sorry, you're just wrong.

Any law passed for the border will have to have a change to our asylum laws. You lefties found a loophole, good for you, but now we’re going to close to clean up the mess your vote stands for

 

[krichton]

You people hear things he didn't say and twist what he says all out of shape and then complain when we don't buy your ignorant comments.

He literally said, he would encourage Russia, to, "do whatever the hell they want," if NATO countries don't pay their imaginary bill. Who here needs to twist his words when they're as plain as day.

 

[Mac-7]

If only there was a bill Republicans could agree to, that would immediately limit assylum applicants.

I do think that most Republicans are Republicans because they are stupid and are just bad at processing information. It's really sad to watch you dupes getting so easily manipulated by charlatans like Trump and his sycophants.

That bill is HB2

2. The bill would significantly limit asylum in the U.S.
my
H.R.2 would restrict both access to and eligibility for asylum. In particular, the bill would:

• Raise the initial screening standard so that a noncitizen would have to prove they were “more likely than not” to ultimately qualify for asylum in order to continue pursuing their protection claim and not be quickly removed from the U.S.;
• Ban the vast majority of asylum seekers from requesting protection at a U.S. border if they traveled through a third country en route to the U.S. and had not already been denied asylum there;
• Generally restrict asylum claims to only those migrants who arrive in the U.S. at an official port of entry;
• Add exclusions to asylum eligibility, including by enacting restrictions against those who unlawfully received a federal public benefit or could reasonably avoid persecution by relocating to a safer area within their home country;
• Deny employment authorization if an asylum seeker entered or tried to enter the U.S. at a place other than a port of entry;
• Impose a fee of not less than $50 to apply for asylum, which might make it harder to afford to make a protection claim;
• Narrow who qualifies for asylum based on their political opinion or membership in a particular social group, in ways that would curtail protection claims by generally excluding cases related to interpersonal violence, gang-related activity, or crime;
• Allow the DHS secretary to indefinitely suspend access to a land or maritime border for migrants who enter without admission or parole, misrepresent themselves to enter, or do not have valid documentation to enter, if doing so would help achieve “operational control;”
• Require the DHS secretary to expand detention capacity, including by potentially reopening detention facilities that have been closed or whose use has been altered during the Biden administration;
• Limit release from detention for asylum seekers with positive credible fear determinations, requiring immigration detention for the duration of their asylum adjudication process. With some cases taking multiple years, this provision would mean that some asylum seekers with credible claims could face lengthy periods of detention;
• Expand the use of programs modeled after the Trump administration’s Migrant Protection Protocols (MPP), so that migrants are returned to Mexico or Canada pending their removal proceedings or reviews;
• Require the U.S. to negotiate an international agreement where the Mexican government would accept the continued presence of non-Mexican asylum seekers during their adjudications for asylum in the U.S., like under MPP; and
• Make other changes to current asylum procedures.

These provisions would make it harder for individuals to request asylum, even in cases where they can demonstrate a well-founded fear of persecution, effectively disqualifying people who would be able to receive protection under the U.S.’s current laws. Taken together, the bill’s restrictions would severely limit asylum for most migrants who traveled through Latin America to reach the U.S.-Mexico border. The new fee requirements could box out asylum seekers without the ability to pay for refuge, while mandatory detention or long-term waits abroad could make it more difficult for migrants to access legal counsel and ultimately win their cases.

Programs such as MPP would also represent a significant safety concern; well over a thousand migrants became victims of rape, murder, torture, kidnapping, and other attacks after the U.S. returned them to Mexican border towns under MPP.

 

[AntonToo]

That bill is HB2

Dummy you have ZERO chance to pass that. It's not on that table.

When are you going to aknowledge that reality already?

You had a good offer to fix the border right now and you fools flushed down the toilet.

Democrats will keep slamming you Republicans for that as soon as you open your mouth about the border all the way to voting booth.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He literally said, he would encourage Russia, to, "do whatever the hell they want," if NATO countries don't pay their imaginary bill. Who here needs to twist his words when they're as plain as day.

That’s how you deal with the bully. You don’t act like you’re terrified of what they might do next. You say words, the effect of “go ahead, make my day.“

That’s what those European countries need to be doing, not refusing to pay their fair share, and acting surprised when an American president, by that, I mean a president who cares about Americans, says “well, in that case why should we protect you?“

Those Europeans are not stupid. They are not surprised at an American president finally said that. They’re just surprised that it took so long across successive administration.

Any European nation that feels threatened by the Russians should say “attack this country, and it will be the last mistake you’ll ever make. You won’t know what hit you. You won’t wake up and be surprised, you just won’t wake up at all.“

That’s how you deal with a bully, not by whining to mommy for a skirt to hide behind.

 

[krichton]

Who said that is Russia's ambition? Any Russians?

If you can't see Russia's ambition is to grab as much land through force, as possible, you truly are deaf, blind and stupid.

 

[Mac-7]

Dummy you have ZERO chance to pass that.

ZERO.

What are you talking about???

You mean because democrats do not want meaningful border security

Check, but that is the least we will settle for