This dove-tails nicely with Obola's NDAA 2011 which authorizes indefinite detention of any citizens found to be beligerent to gov't, without benefit of due process.
Interesting that democrats forbid strict screening measures of immigrants from ISIS dominated countries, so we can take the fight to ISIS, within our homeland...
Mitch IS in his snow fort.. getting ready to lob snowballs at ISIS.
Thanks for posting this. It definitely sounds concerning and is not something that should not be rushed through with no discussion.
Imagine how many will be locked up if the thin skinned Donald Trump wins the nomination and takes the presidency...
The man viciously attacks people left and right with the sole weapon he currently has in his arsenal: Twitter
Domestic deployment? Uh, no. Not with Hussein.
Waco? Blue Ridge? Do these ring a bell? We are not interested Mitch.
Key point:
**The AUMF put forÂward by McÂConÂnell would not reÂstrict the presÂidÂent’s use of ground troops, nor have any limÂits reÂlated to time or geoÂgraphy.**
Nor would it touch on the isÂsue of what to do with the 2001 AUMF, which the Obama adÂminÂisÂtraÂtion has used to atÂtack ISÂIS desÂpite that auÂthorÂizÂaÂtion’s inÂstrucÂtions to use force against those who planned the 9/11 terÂrorÂist atÂtacks.
**By conÂtrast, the legÂal auÂthorÂity put forÂward by the adÂminÂisÂtraÂtion last FebÂruÂary wouldn’t auÂthorÂize “enÂdurÂing ofÂfensÂive ground comÂbat opÂerÂaÂtions†and would have ended three years after enÂactÂment, unÂless reauÂthorÂized.**
Mitch and the GOPe have outdone the Democrats in giving this president and those following, unconstitutional limitless war power abroad or domestically, with an expiration period.
Something is up.
“US Senate leader Mitch McConnell” ...
...pathetic, worthless, privileged, bastard.
I think you nailed it.
The laws that GWB proposed in this regard set the groundwork. IIRC, the Hamdi case is a good line to follow, as well as the SCOTUS striking the law that allowed the executive to create terrorism and war courts (also Hamdi, agian, IIRC).
There is much meat in those debates, and we are at a risky place where much use of force is allowed, outside of war and behind closed doors.
My impression with this sort of act is that they emanate from the WH, with a public fiction being that they originate with Congress. Of course it is a Congressperson who drops the bill in the hopper, but that is mere formality.
The Supreme Court Goes to War: Hamdi, Padilla, and Rasul at 10 - Steve Vladeck - June 27, 2014
This isn't an authorization for use of force against ISIS. It is an authorization for use of force against the American people. McConnell is a traitor.
This violates my policy of drunk postings, but the day we give AUMF to Obama is the day.....
Do not allow the ‘progressives’ to sabotage our forces again, PLEASE!
1. Create a foreign terrorist crisis:
Now the truth emerges: how the US fuelled the rise of Isis in Syria and Iraq
By Seumas Milne
The sectarian terror group won’t be defeated by the western states that incubated it in the first place...
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq
WASHINGTON Jan 20, 2016, 4:07 PM
Senate Democrats on Wednesday blocked a bill that would crack down on Syrian and Iraqi refugees coming to the US.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/senate-leader-fearmongering-syrian-refugee-bill-36391409
“Essentially a modern-day equivalent of a declaration of war, an authorization of military force, or AUMF, would allow Congress to spell out its priorities in the fight against the Islamic State. And the resolution introduced by McConnell highlights a clear contrast with the administration on foreign policy. It authorizes the president to:
From the Act language: “use all necessary and appropriate force in order to defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, its associated forces, organizations, and persons, and any successor organizations.”
*NOTHING in its provisions CONSTRAINS the length of that fight, LIMITS its GEOGRAPHIC scope, or imposes restrictions on the nature of the forces that could be deployed.
That may be well received by Republican lawmakers concerned that the administration’s proposal didn’t go far enough. But it is likely to alarm war-weary Democrats fearful that the U.S. could become locked into a protracted conflict abroad.
The resolution is co-sponsored by Graham along with Republican Senators Orrin Hatch, Joni Ernst and Daniel Coats.
The administration did not immediately signal opposition to the proposal on Thursday, instead indicating a potential willingness to compromise. “We certainly welcome Republicans taking an interest in specifically authorizing the continued use of military force against ISIL,†a White House spokesperson said, adding that the administration “remain[s] open to reasonable adjustments†to the president’s proposal.”
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/01/islamic-state-war/426528/
Prelude to war, unless Boinky vetoes it. Saving American lives my left foot. More likely aiding and protecting the enemy. 2017 can’t get here fast enough.
Don’t worry, this will never pass the House.
-Oct 2009
Don’t worry, this will never pass the Senate.
-Dec 2009
Don’t worry, this will never pass.
-Mar 2010
Don’t worry, the court will strike this down.
-June 2011
The smartest people in the room talking about Obamacare.
So now they’re telling me don’t worry, this bill won’t pass....
There's something ugly going on here.