Free Republic 3rd Quarter Fundraising Target: $88,000 Receipts & Pledges to-date: $34,806
39%  
Woo hoo!! And the first 39% is in!! Thank you all very much!!

Keyword: warpowersact

Brevity: Headers | « Text »
  • Rand Paul's excuse for avoiding the 'religious freedom' law controversy doesn't add up

    04/03/2015 12:10:36 PM PDT · by C19fan · 34 replies
    Business Insider ^ | April 2, 2015 | Hunter Walker and Colin Campbell
    Sen. Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) is the only major Republican likely 2016 presidential candidate who hasn't weighed in on the controversy over Indiana's "religious freedom" law that erupted this week — and his explanation for avoiding the issue is questionable.
  • US, allies conduct 29 airstrikes on Islamic State targets

    01/17/2015 12:28:36 PM PST · by Libloather · 23 replies
    The Hill ^ | 1/17/15 | Peter Schroeder
    The United States and its allies carried out 29 separate airstrikes targeting the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq on Friday, according to the Combined Joint Task Force. The strikes occurred between Friday and Saturday morning, and targeted a range of Islamic State vehicles, buildings, and other positions, according to Reuters. Sixteen of the attacks occurred in seven different Iraqi cities. Vehicles, buildings, equipment and fighting positions were targeted, as well as Islamic State units, according to the task force. In Syria, 11 more airstrikes were conducted around the city of Kobani. Those strikes destroyed a tank and other fighting...
  • U.S. troops battle both Taliban and their own rules [Did the Left worry and obsess over this?]

    01/31/2015 4:17:42 AM PST · by Cincinatus' Wife · 5 replies
    Washington Times ^ | November16, 2009
    *****November 16, 2009*****".....The [Washington] Times compiled an informal list of the new rules from interviews with U.S. forces. Among them: • No night or surprise searches. • Villagers have to be warned prior to searches. • ANA or ANP must accompany U.S. units on searches. • U.S. soldiers may not fire at the enemy unless the enemy is preparing to fire first. • U.S. forces cannot engage the enemy if civilians are present. • Only women can search women. • Troops can fire at an insurgent if they catch him placing an IED but not if insurgents are walking away...
  • Aide: Obama open to limits in war authorization (against ISIL)

    11/19/2014 7:19:52 PM PST · by Olog-hai · 8 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Nov 19, 2014 6:14 PM EST | Bradley Klapper
    The Obama administration is open to limits on the duration of its military efforts in Iraq and Syria and on the potential use of ground forces in a new war authorization against the Islamic State, a top presidential adviser said Wednesday. Tony Blinken, currently President Barack Obama’s deputy national security adviser, said discussions would continue with Congress on updating the legal basis for the U.S. intervention. There has been no progress on an authorization in the two weeks since Obama vowed to coordinate with lawmakers on establishing a stronger legal basis for military action. That has prompted growing frustration among...
  • Congress in No Rush to Return for ISIS War Authorization

    09/25/2014 4:15:11 PM PDT · by mojito · 4 replies
    Roll Call ^ | 9/23/2014 | Matt Fuller
    The United States has begun a bombing campaign in Syria, but don’t bet on Congress returning to Washington to vote on a new war authorization anytime soon. Shortly after airstrikes against the Islamic State in Syria started, some lawmakers started pushing again for an authorization vote. But so far, leaders aren’t gearing up to bring their members back to town. Rep. Justin Amash, R-Mich., tweeted Monday night it was “irresponsible and immoral” that congressional leaders had chosen to recess for nearly two months instead of debating and voting on war. And the ranking Democrat on the Budget Committee, Chris Van...
  • What's So Important About a Declaration of War?

    05/10/2011 7:36:54 AM PDT · by Tom Mullen · 19 replies
    Tommullen.net ^ | 5/7/2011 | Tom Mullen
    Presidential hopeful Ron Paul insists that the U.S. government shouldn’t go to war without a declaration of war. His son Rand has also taken this position, as have several libertarian-leaning Tea Party candidates. According to the U.S. Constitution, the congress is invested with the power to declare war. These constitutionalists say that obtaining one should be a requirement before military action is authorized. I’m not sure that this is resonating with those that are unfamiliar with what a declaration of war means. For most people, the declaration of war is a formality whereby the president makes sure that it is...
  • Rand Paul Calls for a Formal Declaration of War Against ISIS

    11/24/2014 6:16:29 AM PST · by Citizen Zed · 12 replies
    NY Times ^ | 11-23-2014 | JEREMY W. PETERS
    Senator Rand Paul is calling for a declaration of war against the Islamic State, a move that promises to shake up the debate over the military campaign in Iraq and Syria as President Obama prepares to ask Congress to grant him formal authority to use force. Mr. Paul, a likely presidential candidate who has emerged as one of the Republican Party’s most cautious voices on military intervention, offered a very circumscribed definition of war in his proposal, which he outlined in an interview on Saturday. He would, for instance, limit the duration of military action to one year and significantly...
  • Don’t Authorize Obama’s War (Column: Why his request for war authorization is a trap)

    02/13/2015 7:39:28 AM PST · by Kaslin · 29 replies
    The Washingon Free Beacon ^ | February 13, 2015 | Matthew Continetti
    The authorization for the use of military force against ISIS that the Obama administration sent Congress this week is not worthy of the name. Its language is far more about what the president won’t do against the terrorist army that controls much of Syria and Iraq—limits on ground troops and a sunset provision for the authorization after three years—than what he will do. Congress should reject it. If the threat of ISIS is as dire as the president says it is in the preamble of his resolution, if ISIS really does pose “a grave threat to the people and territorial...
  • Obama asks Congress to authorize U.S. war on Islamic State

    02/11/2015 12:01:54 PM PST · by Jim Robinson · 109 replies
    Reuters ^ | February 11, 2015 | BY PATRICIA ZENGERLE
    (Reuters) - U.S. President Barack Obama asked Congress on Wednesday to authorize military force against Islamic State that would bar any large-scale invasion by U.S. ground troops and limit operations to three years. Republicans, who control Congress, put up swift resistance to the proposal. They say Obama's foreign policy is too passive and want stronger measures against the militants, also known as ISIL. With Obama's fellow Democrats wary of another Middle East war, it could be difficult for the White House to win enough support to pass the bill, even though six months have passed since the military campaign began....
  • Obama to seek new war powers from Congress

    11/06/2014 5:35:23 AM PST · by TangledUpInBlue · 36 replies
    AP ^ | 11/6 | Deb Reichmann
    President Barack Obama said Wednesday he would work with Congress on new war powers to fight Islamic State militants and expressed cautious optimism about whether the international face-off over Iran's nuclear program will be resolved — two issues that could prove harder for the White House to maneuver with Republicans in charge on Capitol Hill. Obama spoke at a news conference the day after his party was thrashed by Republicans in midterm elections, leaving the GOP soon to be in charge of both the House and the Senate. When he approved U.S. airstrikes in late September against extremists who have...
  • Former Congressman accuses Capitol Hill of dereliction for ducking vote on ISIS war

    10/04/2014 11:39:23 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 4 replies
    Hot Air.com ^ | October 4, 2014 | ED MORRISEY
    He’s not the only one, but Tom Campbell may have the highest level of moral authority to rebuke Congress on this point. Now a law professor, Campbell filed a lawsuit to block Bill Clinton from ordering air strikes in Serbia in the late 1990s without an explicit Congressional authorization for war. Now Campbell tells Yahoo News’ Olivier Knox that the current Congress risks setting a precedent that will all but eliminate the legislature’s ability to control when America goes to war: “This is Congress running way from its responsibility,” the soft-spoken Campbell told Yahoo News in a telephone interview. “Is...
  • Obama Says He Has ‘Legal Authority’ To Strike Syria

    09/10/2014 7:07:44 AM PDT · by Olog-hai · 29 replies
    INN ^ | 9/10/2014, 12:10 PM | Ari Yashar
    US President Barack Obama says he has the “legal authority” to order US airstrikes on Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) forces in Syria, according to sources present at a dinner with foreign policy experts at the White House on Monday. Obama “thinks he has the legal authority he needs” to expand action in Iraq and Syria under the War Powers Act, according to Jane Harman, the president of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, who told the Washington Post about the dinner. Another attendee of the dinner, former undersecretary of defense for policy Michčle Flournoy, told the paper Obama...
  • Statement by the Press Secretary on the War Powers Resolution Report for Iraq

    06/16/2014 3:43:59 PM PDT · by kristinn · 4 replies
    The White House ^ | Monday, June 16, 2014 | Josh Earnest
    The White House Office of the Press Secretary For Immediate Release June 16, 2014 Statement by the Press Secretary on the War Powers Resolution Report for Iraq Today, consistent with the War Powers Resolution, the President transmitted a report notifying the Congress that up to approximately 275 U.S. military personnel are deploying to Iraq to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad. The personnel will provide assistance to the Department of State in connection with the temporary relocation of some staff from the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to the U.S. Consulates General in Basra...
  • Obama tells Congress U.S. deploying up to 275 troops to Iraq

    06/16/2014 3:46:39 PM PDT · by tcrlaf · 139 replies
    Reuters ^ | 6-16-2014 | Reuters
    President Barack Obama told Congress on Monday the United States was deploying up to 275 military personnel to provide support and security for U.S. personnel and the country's embassy in Baghdad after militants seized control of the north of the country.
  • Letter from the President --War Powers Notification on Chad

    05/21/2014 5:31:54 PM PDT · by mdittmar · 63 replies
    The White House ^ | May 21, 2014 | Office of the Press Secretary
    Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:) Approximately 80 U.S. Armed Forces personnel have deployed to Chad as part of the U.S. efforts to locate and support the safe return of over 200 schoolgirls who are reported to have been kidnapped in Nigeria. These personnel will support the operation of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance aircraft for missions over northern Nigeria and the surrounding area. The force will remain in Chad until its support in resolving the kidnapping situation is no longer required. This action has been directed in furtherance of U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, pursuant to my constitutional...
  • McCain, Kaine unveil measure to change war powers

    01/19/2014 4:37:22 PM PST · by Olog-hai · 14 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Jan. 16, 2014 3:56 PM EST | Donna Cassata
    Two members of the Senate are pressing for significant changes to how presidents consult with Congress on sending the military into war. Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Tim Kaine, D-Va., unveiled legislation on Thursday that would repeal the 1973 War Powers Resolution, often ignored by presidents of both parties, and replace it with a new law that requires greater consultation and a congressional vote within 30 days on any significant armed conflict. …
  • Fox News Fossil John Bolton: President Wages War While Congress Just Declares War

    09/01/2013 11:31:51 AM PDT · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 53 replies
    9/1/2013 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist
    I was watching Fox News last night, and John Bolton (R-GOP-e) was asked to give a reply to a previously recorded clip from Rand Paul, and Bolton seemed to be acting as if the president (Obama) is the one who gets to wage war, while Congress just gets to merely declare and/or authorize it. As if the president (be it Nixon, GHWB, or Clinton) sits on the throne and Congress' job is to merely place the crown on their heads and the scepter in their hands. Once again, it seems as if another Republican goes to bat for Obama (like...
  • After Painting Himself Into a Corner and Losing All His Allies, NOW Obama Looks to Congress!

    08/31/2013 12:08:27 PM PDT · by Reaganite Republican · 48 replies
    Reaganite Republican ^ | 31 August 2013 | Reaganite Republican
    As an excuse to back down, that is...  then blame the Republicans, of course After days of talking VERY publicly of all the terrible things he could do to Bashir Assad's odious regime in Demascus... Russia's sent 6-7 warships in and told him to back off while France scampered and the Brits said 'pass'. All of a sudden now he wants to ask Congress, please. Either somebody warned Obama he's opening himself up to impeachment with another violation of the war powers act... or he simply realized he's been abandoned or opposed by just about everybody on Earth, including the UN. The Peace...
  • Obama May Be Walking Into an Impeachment Trap

    08/31/2013 12:38:55 AM PDT · by Freedom of Speech Wins · 116 replies
    PopularResistance.org ^ | 8/30/12 | Kevin Zeese
    Obama May Be Walking Into an Impeachment Trap Posted on Aug 30, 2013 Beth Rankin (CC BY 2.0) By Kevin Zeese, PopularResistance This article originated with PopularResistance.org. The irony of the Obama presidency may hinge on whether he attacks Syria. He began his presidency prematurely winning the Nobel Peace Prize and could end it being impeached for starting an illegal war without congressional or UN approval – violating both domestic and international law. Yesterday 163 Members of Congress sent letters to President Obama telling him that under the US Constitution he is required to get congressional approval before beginning a...
  • Constitution Gives Obama No Power to Use Force in Syria

    08/28/2013 8:36:37 AM PDT · by Kaslin · 20 replies
    Townhall.com ^ | August 28, 2013 | Terry Jeffrey
    "We're actively looking at the various legal angles that would inform a decision." That is what an anonymous administration official told the Washington Post this week about President Barack Obama's deliberations on whether he will personally involve the United States in another Middle Eastern war by ordering military action in Syria. But the only law that ultimately matters here is the one Obama swore to preserve, protect and defend: the Constitution of the United States. As recently as six years ago, Obama exhibited a clear understanding of the power the Constitution does and does not give the president in using...
  • John Bolton is a POS (vanity, obviously)

    08/30/2013 7:51:28 PM PDT · by Leaning Right · 97 replies
    me
    Greta was in for O'Reilly tonight. One of her guests was John Bolton. Greta asked Bolton if Obama had the authority to strike Syria without Congressional approval. Bolton didn't hesitate for a second. He said Obama absolutely has that authority.
  • Boehner: Obama Must Consult Congress Before Acting in Syria

    08/26/2013 3:41:21 PM PDT · by xzins · 76 replies
    Newsmax ^ | 26 Aug 2013 | Courtney Coren
    Speaker of the House John Boehner called on President Barack Obama Monday to make a decision on the Syrian conflict, but not without the approval of congress first. "The Syrian regime has blatantly crossed President Obama's red line, the White House has acknowledged, by using chemical weapons on its people," the Ohio Republican wrote in a statement. "The options facing the president are complicated, have far-reaching ramifications, and may require significant resources." "That's why, if he chooses to act, the president must explain his decision publicly, clearly, and resolutely," he added. "The president is commander-in-chief. With that power comes obligations,"...
  • Will Obama go to Congress before attacking Syria?

    08/27/2013 9:07:17 AM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 36 replies
    Hotair ^ | 08/27/2013 | Ed Morrissey
    The answer to that question is … probably not. Despite all of the handwringing by Democrats in the last administration about “imperial presidencies,” Barack Obama has exercised military powers unilaterally, especially in Libya, which was a war against Moammar Qaddafi in all but name. Based on the responses from the White House late yesterday, we can expect more of the same regarding Syria: Carney also downplayed a role for Congress in reviewing or approving any strike plan. “I’m not going to speculate about a [presidential] decision that has not been made,” he said.“I’m not going to itemize calls … [but]...
  • Lawmakers to Obama: Syria strikes need our OK

    08/27/2013 8:38:25 AM PDT · by Olog-hai · 17 replies
    Associated Press ^ | Aug 27, 2013 10:50 AM EDT | Bradley Klapper
    A Republican lawmaker is rallying support to pressure President Barack Obama into seeking congressional authorization for military strikes against Syria. Rep. Scott Rigell of Virginia is asking colleagues to sign a letter to Obama that urges him to reconvene Congress and seek approval for any military action. …
  • Obama doesn't need Congress to intervene in Syria

    08/26/2013 5:01:56 PM PDT · by Oldeconomybuyer · 95 replies
    AFP ^ | August 26, 2013
    US President Barack Obama has the authority to launch air strikes against Syria. But he has to notify lawmakers in Congress -- a process which has begun, according to both sides. "The administration is actively consulting with members of Congress, and we will continue to have these conversations in the days ahead," Kerry said Monday in a strongly-worded statement on Syria.
  • New poll: Syria intervention even less popular than Congress

    08/27/2013 5:51:46 AM PDT · by Colonel Kangaroo · 10 replies
    The Washington Post ^ | August 26, 2013 | Max Fisher
    A new Reuters/Ipsos poll has finally found something that Americans like even less than Congress: the possibility of U.S. military intervention in Syria. Only 9 percent of respondents said that the Obama administration should intervene militarily in Syria; a RealClearPolitics poll average finds Congress has a 15 percent approval rating, making the country’s most hated political body almost twice as popular. The Reuters/Ipsos poll was taken Aug.19-23, the very same week that horrific reports emerged strongly suggesting that Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad has used chemical weapons against his own people, potentially killing hundreds or even thousands of civilians. If there...
  • Americans Would Rather Get a Root Canal or a Colonoscopy than Launch War Against Syria

    08/27/2013 5:44:39 AM PDT · by Zakeet · 25 replies
    Zero Hedge ^ | August 26, 2013
    We noted last month than Congress is less popular than North Korea, cockroaches, lice, root canals, colonoscopies, traffic jams, used car salesmen, Genghis Khan, Communism, BP during the Gulf oil spill, Nixon during Watergate or King George during the American Revolution. The Washington Post notes today that a Syria intervention is less popular than Congress. So that means that the American people would much rather get a root canal or a colonoscopy than bomb Syria. Indeed, while John Kerry announced today that the Syrian government used chemical weapons, Reuters noted: The polls suggest that so far, the growing crisis in...
  • Patrick Buchanan: Congress Should Veto Obama’s War – OpEd

    08/27/2013 5:17:03 AM PDT · by Colonel Kangaroo · 16 replies
    Eurasia Review ^ | August 27, 2013 | Patrick J Buchanan
    “Congress doesn’t have a whole lot of core responsibilities,” said Barack Obama last week in an astonishing remark. For in the Constitution, Congress appears as the first branch of government. And among its enumerated powers are the power to tax, coin money, create courts, provide for the common defense, raise and support an army, maintain a navy and declare war. But, then, perhaps Obama’s contempt is justified. For consider Congress’ broad assent to news that Obama has decided to attack Syria, a nation that has not attacked us and against which Congress has never authorized a war. Why is Obama...
  • Engel, Corker: U.S. action in Syria may not wait

    08/25/2013 7:32:22 AM PDT · by maggief · 32 replies
    POLITICO ^ | August 25, 2013 | LEIGH MUNSIL
    President Barack Obama should not necessarily wait for Congress to return from recess before taking action in Syria, two lawmakers said on "Fox News Sunday." "We have to move, and we have to move quickly," said Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.), the ranking member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. "Congress needs to be involved, but perhaps not initially." The U.S. can and should act to respond after reported widespread chemical attacks in Syria, using cruise missile strikes but not "boots on the ground" to destroy Bashar al Assad's runways, munitions and fuel, Engel added. "I think we have to respond,...
  • Sen. Corker predicts Obama will take military action against Syria (Yet ANOTHER Hussein war?)

    08/25/2013 7:30:54 AM PDT · by Libloather · 12 replies
    The Hill ^ | 8/25/13 | Ian Swanson
    Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) predicted Sunday the U.S. will take military action against Syria. Corker, the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he had been in discussions with the administration, and that he believed it would ask Congress for authorization to take military action. Corker suggested the action would be limited to air strikes and that U.S. forces should not be involved on the ground. "I think we will respond in a surgical way and I hope the president as soon as we get back to Washington will ask for authorization from Congress to do something in...
  • The Lawless Dictator

    08/24/2013 4:59:12 PM PDT · by SatinDoll · 39 replies
    The Market-ticker ^ | August 24, 2013 | Karl Denninger
    Are we, the people, going to allow yet another unlawful military action to take place? Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel suggested Friday that the Pentagon was moving naval forces closer to Syria in preparation for a possible decision by President Obama to order military strikes. Hagel declined to describe any specific movements of U.S. forces. He said Obama asked that the Pentagon to prepare military options for Syria and that some of those options "requires positioning our forces." I don't seem to recall a Declaration of War by Congress. And there is certainly no exigent emergency that requires an immediate response...
  • The new Marx Brothers

    08/27/2013 6:34:43 AM PDT · by The Bat Lady · 10 replies
    youtube ^ | The Bat Lady
    80 years ago the Marx brothers unknowingly parodied the Obama brothers - Barack, John Kerry, John McCain, Lindsey and the acquiescent Congress.
  • Obama and his team contradict past statements on war powers, Syria

    08/27/2013 3:23:33 PM PDT · by Hotlanta Mike · 12 replies
    The Daily Caller ^ | 08/27/2013 | W. James Antle III
    As President Barack Obama weighs military action in Syria, it remains unclear whether he will first seek congressional authorization. It is clear, however, that Obama once thought such authorization was necessary. “The president does not have power under the Constitution to unilaterally authorize a military attack in a situation that does not involve stopping an actual or imminent threat to the nation,” candidate Obama told The Boston Globe in late 2007. He added that the president can only act unilaterally in “instances of self-defense.”
  • How can Obama take us to war in Syria without asking congress?

    08/24/2013 11:01:51 PM PDT · by d_focil · 44 replies
    AND Magazine ^ | 8/24/2013 | David Focil
    Beyond troubling considerations in regards to the rebels, there are serious questions on the constitutionality and appropriateness of President Obama's military options. While mainstream media outlets are busy getting all worked up for the potential ratings bonanza a new war will bring, dolling out all the typical military analysts to give us tantalizing speculations on how cruise missile and drone strikes on Assad's forces could play out, no one seems to be asking if President Obama even has the authority to launch a strike in the first place. How far have we fallen into the abyss of an unchecked executive...
  • EDITORIAL: Obama’s hostility to the truth--White House needs to own up to its war in Libya

    07/05/2011 5:54:30 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 22 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | July 5, 2011 | Editorial
    President Obama dismissed criticism of his Libya policy last week, saying, “A lot of this fuss is politics.” Regardless of action on Senate Joint Resolution 20, the McCain-Kerry plan to authorize the limited use of force in Libya, the more important issue is Mr. Obama’s unwillingness to own up to his decisions in his role as commander in chief. Mr. Obama took the country to war in Libya, and he should admit it. The fuss goes beyond politics, beyond whether Mr. Obama’s policies are in the U.S. national interest and even beyond whether American military action has been effective. The...
  • President Obama still flaunts the Law calling questions about his Libya war “noise”: “Noise”?

    07/02/2011 9:59:58 AM PDT · by darkwing104 · 23 replies
    Coach is Right ^ | July 2nd, 2011 | m Emerson, staff writer
    When asked about his personal war against Libya and criticism about ignoring congress in a blatant disregard of the War Powers Act the President brushed both aside as just “noise”. Obama has no intention to seek congressional approval as required by law. The President wants Americans to ignore the fact that the incursion into Libya was supposed to be a US Lead effort to establish a UN mandated “No Fly Zone” and no more. He wants us to overlook the fact that this “kinetic military exercise” which started as a NATO air operations is now an overt effort to assassinate...
  • Will Congress limit funding for military action in Libya?

    06/21/2011 10:45:17 PM PDT · by Kevmo · 5 replies
    Intrade ^ | June 20 2011 | Intrade
    I asked Intrade to open up this contract so that anyone who knows they're right can make money on that certainty. Politics - US Congress Will Congress limit funding for military action in Libya? Contract Bid Ask Last Vol Chge LIMIT.FUNDING.LIBYA.JUL2011 House of Representatives to pass any measure to limit funding for Libyan actions before midnight ET Forum entries http://bb.intrade.com/intradeForum/posts/list/492453.page Author Message 16/06/2011 05:15:35 Subject: Whether or not Obama will be Subject to the War Powers Act over Libya ko Sage Joined: 03/11/2007 19:01:54 Messages: 1530 Offline I suggest we open a contract that would expire if Congress passes a...
  • EDITORIAL: Defund the war in Libya

    06/20/2011 5:05:21 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 10 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | June 20, 2011 | Editorial
    Congress has the duty to curb presidential warmakingThe absurd argument that there is no war in Libya should not stop Congress from defunding it. Moving against this unnecessary “limited kinetic action” using the power of the purse will return Congress to first principles that have been obscured by the arcane debate over the meaning of the War Powers Resolution. Conservatives have questioned the propriety of the resolution since it was passed over President Nixon’s veto in 1973. The law’s “legislative veto” provision is probably unconstitutional, though it has not been tested in court. In June 1995, the Republican Congress nearly...
  • Is McCain Laying Out A False Choice That We Must Choose Either Obama's War Policy Or Isolationism?

    06/20/2011 4:17:56 PM PDT · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 21 replies
    6/20/2011 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist
    It seems as if that is the case, given that John McCain has chastised those GOP presidential candidates who wonder how Libya posed a threat to the U.S., how Obama has grounds for claiming that the U.S. isn't even at war with Libya or how he can claim - through Harold Koh and Jay Carney - that "the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of hostilities envisioned by the War Powers Resolution." Obama is claiming that since U.S. troops are supposedly at little risk in this particular mission and that we have no boots on the...
  • Obama's Gift to Samantha Powers

    06/18/2011 9:44:46 AM PDT · by Meet the New Boss · 9 replies
    National Review Online ^ | 17 June 2011 | Stanley Kurtz
    Over at the Lawfare blog, Jack Goldsmith has some thoughts on the Obama administration’s war powers argument. Whatever you think of the War Powers Act, Goldsmith’s second point is of particular interest: The Administration argues that its operation is legitimated and limited by the U.N. Security Council Resolution. It does not really explain why it thinks this. But in any event, the “no danger to troops” theory, combined with the heavy reliance on the Security Council Resolution, suggest that the Administration is creating a principle of unilateral presidential war power for U.N.-sponsored interventions from a distance. In practice, this principle...
  • 2 Top Lawyers Lost to Obama in Libya War Policy Debate

    06/17/2011 6:54:40 PM PDT · by Hoodat · 168 replies
    NY Times ^ | 17 June 2011 | Charlie Savage
    WASHINGTON — President Obama rejected the views of top lawyers at the Pentagon and the Justice Department when he decided that he had the legal authority to continue American military participation in the air war in Libya without Congressional authorization, according to officials familiar with internal administration deliberations. Jeh C. Johnson, the Pentagon general counsel, and Caroline D. Krass, the acting head of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel, had told the White House that they believed that the United States military’s activities in the NATO-led air war amounted to “hostilities.” Under the War Powers Resolution, that would have...
  • Obama Is Trying To Redefine What Constitutes Warfare (US-Libya)

    06/18/2011 1:21:21 AM PDT · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 13 replies
    6/18/2011 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist
    ...With Harold Koh (legal advisor for the Department of State) and Jay Carney in tow - engaged in a game of semantics. Harold Koh recently said: "We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own. We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of hostilities envisioned by the War Powers Resolution." Problem is, is that the WPA does not make any distinction between one kind of...
  • More of why you’re an idiot to believe anything Obama says

    06/17/2011 2:27:27 PM PDT · by Starman417 · 6 replies
    Flopping Aces ^ | 06-17-11 | DrJohn
    When Barack Obama went to war on Libya he cited the War Powers Act as his justification for doing so. A few days ago, on March 22, President Barack Obama informed Congress formally about his unilateral decision to assist in the coalition of nations protecting rebel forces and civilians in Libya from attack from Col. Moammar Gadhafi's loyalist troops. In the formal letter, reprinted in USA Today, the president used as justification the War Powers Resolution. But said resolution is very specific in the conditions under which a president can involve the nation's armed forces in a conflict against...
  • NATO bombs Tripoli, sending Khadafy into rage

    06/18/2011 12:22:59 AM PDT · by Jet Jaguar · 26 replies
    Boston.com ^ | June 18, 2011 | By Adam Schreck and Hadeel Al-Shalchi
    Provoked by renewed daylight NATO bombing of his capital, Libyan leader Moammar Khadafy raged against the alliance yesterday, screaming his message and daring Western forces to keep it up. Khadafy spoke in a telephone call that was piped through loudspeakers to a few thousand people demonstrating in Tripoli’s Green Square at the end of a day when NATO intensified bombing runs across the capital. State television carried the Khadafy message live, then repeated it a few minutes later. “NATO will be defeated,’’ he yelled in a hoarse, agitated voice. “They will pull out in defeat.’’ The sound of automatic weapons...
  • President Rejects Need for Congressional Approval of Libyan Military Operation

    06/17/2011 10:22:52 AM PDT · by John Semmens · 35 replies
    A Semi-News/Semi-Satire from AzConservative ^ | 16 June 2011 | John Semmens
    The Obama Administration rejected contentions that the attacks on Libya that he authorized beginning in March must conform to rules laid down by the 1973 War Powers Act. “The intent of the War Powers Act was to restrain then President Nixon from abusing his authority,” State Department legal adviser Harold Koh argued. “Ultimately, it was his abuse of Presidential powers that led to his impeachment and resignation. That crisis has passed. The War Powers Act is no longer needed.” Aside from the alleged “narrow historical applicability” argument, Koh also parsed the phrasing of the Act. “Strictly speaking, the War Powers...
  • Obama: Limited Strikes For 90 Days Under WPA. Carney: These Limited Strikes Nullify WPA 90 Day Rule

    06/17/2011 9:04:13 AM PDT · by Laissez-faire capitalist · 16 replies
    6/17/2011
    On March 21, 2011, Obama cited the WPR which requires him to notify Congresa 48 hours before beginning military operations. That same day Obama said that the military strikes against Libya would be "limited in their nature, duration and scope." During the past almost 90 days, Obama has given updates on these "limited" strikes. Now that 90 days draws near, Carney says that since the strikes have been "limited" that basically the 90 day rule doesn't apply. He apparently wants to use a WPA provision which allows for the president to deploy U.S. forces and engage in military strikes for...
  • Boehner Blasts Obama Claims on Libya

    06/16/2011 7:51:20 AM PDT · by kristinn · 91 replies · 1+ views
    USA Today | Thursday, June 16, 2011 | David Jackson
    Headline and link only for USA Today.Also, the AP has a short article that matches the headline given:House speaker says Obama argument on Libya doesn't pass the 'straight face' test
  • WH to Congress: War Powers Act doesn’t apply to Libya because we’re not engaged in “hostilities”

    06/15/2011 7:39:20 PM PDT · by SeekAndFind · 34 replies
    Hotair ^ | 06/15/2011 | Allahpundit
    So predictable that even a dummy like me saw it coming. The two senior administration lawyers contended that American forces have not been in “hostilities” at least since April 7, when NATO took over leadership in maintaining a no-flight zone in Libya, and the United States took up what is mainly a supporting role — providing surveillance and refueling for allied warplanes — although unmanned drones operated by the United States periodically fire missiles as well.They argued that United States forces are at little risk in the operation because there are no American troops on the ground and Libyan forces...
  • EDITORIAL: Obama, warmonger--Libyan war has united both parties against the president

    06/15/2011 6:11:06 PM PDT · by jazusamo · 28 replies
    The Washington Times ^ | June 15, 2011 | Editorial
    A bipartisan group of congressmen is filing a lawsuit against the president for pursuing an illegal war. The speaker of the House warned the Obama administration it would soon run up against a 90-day deadline, after which it will be “in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission.” Who ever would have thought this would be happening to Nobel Peace Prize winner Barack Obama? The Obama administration has badly mishandled the domestic political aspects of the unpopular war in Libya. Back during...
  • So Is Obama a War Criminal Now, Or What?

    06/15/2011 5:55:05 PM PDT · by The Looking Spoon · 6 replies
    The Looking Spoon ^ | 6-15-11 | Jared H. McAndersen
    The Obama Administration says the War Powers Act doesn't apply to Libya because bombing and blowing up a country until its leader is deposed doesn't constitute engaging in "hostilities."Somewhere in the afterlife George Orwell is either blushing, or this was the tipping point that finally gave him his wings.I don't need to tell anyone that if Obama were a Republican Cindy Sheehan would be staging topless protests in front of the White House right now. Let that sink in for a second.....let me rephrase that.....clean the vomit off your screen, and let that sink in for a second.Liberals in...