discuss. article five is when there is action taken. right. it still doesn t trigger war. it doesn t mean an automatic world war iii, it means some countries respond. article five has been triggered once, september 12, 2001. as we look at the information what article iv is and what happens, there s no official calling, they re just looking into the possibility and that s just a meeting to discuss. rights. article 4 is a meeting. so what happens to zelenskyy now? he s going to continue to have strong rhetoric with regard to the war. he wants more support from the west. maybe this meeting will determine, within article 4 will determine he gets more support. he needs to figure out a way to get through the winter. that s the help he needs right
missiles that should launched. how good is that success rate in terms of ukraine s defense capabilities. can they keep that up? yeah, you re never going to have 100% solution. you have some pretty good capabilities that exist. nato has stepping up. the united states in particular has been stepping up. our experience when we look across the board and look at the very successful air telephones capability also, certainly valve is a real step up but you re never going to have 100% solution. the key thing is how do you try to assess what s really going on, so you can then make good decisions on the ground, but then that has a tremendous impact in terms of what you re doing at the operational and strategic levels. the polls came forward and said we would like to evoke article
Should the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment now be revisited 147 years after the amendment was ratified, followed five years afterwards by a Supreme Court decision whose interpretation of the clause has persisted since then?[1] Just as the Slaughterhouse Cases decision has persisted, so has the controversy surrounding it.
maria: it s absolutely extraordinary, sir. and i know that the word invasion comes with technical responses from the government. so are you reluctant to say it s an invasion? do you believe this is an invasion? if. so the technical reasons for it lie in the constitution. there are two parts of the u.s. constitution, article iv, section four, article her section 10. in that executive order that i issued this past week, i referenced both of those, plus i reference a provision of the texas constitution that also uses the word invasion. the purpose of using those words is it triggers certain additional ways and strategies that at states can use their powers to try to protect against actions such as this that are driven by the cartels. maria: okay, i understand. we have put up on the screen ways that you and your team in texas are defending the southern