Well now you’re starting to act like a smart ass which is stupid.
In order to get ‘your version’ of definitions accepted you will need to have courts overturn hundreds of years of precedents - NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
I tried to contribute to your thread objective referenced material but I can see and others reading can see that your aim is to force your view on everyone and everything. I also gave you what I consider wise counsel on how to modify your approach but you do not listen and instead you respond with smart ass remarks.
I’m done here.
Perhaps not, but if we could get 51 Senators that thought like Jeff Sessions, then the Senate could pass a rule stating that no "trade bill" is going to go to the house or be approved without a 2/3 super majority in the Senate. Then it wouldn't matter if they called it a treaty or not.
Instead they decided to give Obama fast track on TPP whether it meets the definition of a treaty or not.