Posted on 01/22/2016 2:20:25 PM PST by MarchonDC09122009
Edited on 01/22/2016 2:33:50 PM PST by Jim Robinson. [history]
Neither Republicans nor Democrats knew the majority leader planned to set up a debate on authorizing the use of force against the Islamic State.
SenÂate MaÂjorÂity LeadÂer Mitch McÂConÂnell offered memÂbers a snow-weekÂend surÂprise late WedÂnesÂday night: Quietly teeÂing up a deÂbate on the legÂal unÂderÂpinÂning for the fight against ISÂIS.
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
He appears to be doing a pretty good job of winning support with twitter. And hasn’t blown through a hundred million bucks like some of the others.
I imagine you should be locked up - in a padded cell with the other tinfoil hat-wearing wing nuts.
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 presÂidÂentâs 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 auÂthorÂizÂaÂtionâs 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 wouldnât auÂthorÂize âenÂdurÂing ofÂfensÂive ground comÂbat opÂerÂaÂtionsâ 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.
Makes you wonder if Mitch has visited those bathhouses in Chi-town when BO was there.
“US Senate leader Mitch McConnell” ...
...pathetic, worthless, privileged, bastard.
Rich Lowry, Jonah Goldberg, and William Kristol to start...
I think you nailed it.
Bttt
Please, I beseech you. There are enough threads where you can cross swords with your foes. There is NO NEED to take the battle to unrelated threads such as this one.
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.
Now that was funny, right there!
How so?
Are you comfortable with the current president and those that follow, having standing war power authorization that purposely does not define geographic conflict area or time limitation for deploying military force?
You do realize that it is Congress’s role to enact a specific war power authorization?
Right?
Do you know what Posse Commitatus is?
US military is not to be used domestically unless we are attacked and at war.
What do you think of the US funding Al-Queda in Libya and Syria, creating ISIS, which ensuing creative destruction has wrecked havoc in four countries, killed tens of thousands of christians, and forced over nearly a Million Syrian muslim “refugees” into europe?
Create a crisis like ISIS, deliberately let the threat into your borders, and then pass an unlimited terrorist war powers act to take the fight to an enemy you created, no matter where they are, and for no matter how long?
Even domestically?
No authorization expiration?
Really?
Is that a good idea?
RE: “I imagine you should be locked up”
You re worried about Trump? Are you insane? They re thinking of doing this during Obama s administration. Lame Duck or no, if they pass this there will be no Trump.
Can you make the distinction between a “criticism” and an “attack”?
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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.