• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP Sen. Mike Lee furious after an 'insulting' Senate briefing on Trump's Iran strike:

Barnacle said:
I see you changed your post; that's okay too.

Wasn't Schiff/Pelosi's impeachment supposed to take care of the imminent threat?!?

How much weight does a Resolution carry?
Click to expand...

The resolution amends the Wars Power Act Resolution to basically say that the president is not authorized to attack Iran without authorization from congress. The War Power Act was only meant for Iraq...but the WH is trying to use it as an excuse to attack Iran without approval from congress.

I think the "separation of powers" is going to become a hot topic in the Senate.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
The resolution amends the Wars Power Act to say that the president is not authorized to attack Iran without authorization from congress.

I think the "separation of powers" is going to become a hot topic in the Senate.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but whether or not the War Powers Act is even Constitutional has always been an open and murky question. It would be a good opportunity for the Supreme Court to weigh in.
 
I knew Trump would wrangle in the war messes past presidents have gotten us in. Maybe he will piss off even more republicans and the congress will then pass the act.
You guys only think in two dimensions.
 
tres borrachos said:
This thread is about the Senate briefing, not the soldiers and not the General. You really should understand what's being discussed before raging into a thread and screaming about liberals to make a political point.
Click to expand...

You expect that from right wingers? They don't read anything, their entire mind process is "liberals are stupid poopyheads"
 
Barnacle said:
He wants the work visas for Indians for IT jobs in the US. Trump put a limit on the number of them, big business like Apple need a bunch of them in order to avoid paying high wages to American IT guys.

Lobbyists ... you know how that goes.
Click to expand...

<sigh> I thought it was something like that :(
 
bearpoker said:
Give him a break. Trumpers are incapable of sticking to any topic unless it's how evil the liberals are. It's a mental challenge that should be respected.
Click to expand...

Yep, they have DDS Dem Derangement Syndrome.
 
Barnacle said:
Mike Lee is not a Trump loyalist; he's also pretty much libertarian.

... but his school-girl performance in front of running cameras was quite hilarious ... :lol:
Click to expand...

I get it. Now he's a Never Trumper. You people never cease to amaze me. Trump can do no wrong. Let's see how you feel when Mike Lee votes to approve the new war powers resolution.

Trump needs all his powers to be taken from him. He is incompetent, ignorant, narcissistic, and a terribly dangerous president.
 
Come on. Did any idiot actually think that a person who had to be bailed out by his daddy, for over a $billion$ dollars, and grabs chicks between the legs while sleeping with and payng off porn workers was going to make a great military leader for our best and bravest men and women in uniform?

Seriously? People bought THAT?
 
bearpoker said:
Give him a break. Trumpers are incapable of sticking to any topic unless it's how evil the liberals are. It's a mental challenge that should be respected.
Click to expand...

I agree. When people have obvious physical, mental or emotional limitations as quantified and measured in past performance, you do not taunt them or embarrass them by publicly demanding more than those limitations constrain. Its just not a nice thing to do. If you have a short person, don't demand they reach for the highest shelf without giving them a stepstool.
 
Moot said:
The resolution amends the Wars Power Act Resolution to basically say that the president is not authorized to attack Iran without authorization from congress. The War Power Act was only meant for Iraq...but the WH is trying to use it as an excuse to attack Iran without approval from congress.

I think the "separation of powers" is going to become a hot topic in the Senate.
Click to expand...


Okay; so I read up on the WPA. And what you're all hoping for - curbing the power of the Commander-in-Chief - is not gonna happen.
 
RetiredUSN said:
LOL

You keep flailing out just like many other liberals on here just hoping something will stick.

The general was a legal target who was directly responsible for the deaths of 500-600 American soldiers.

It is quite obvious that you couldn't give a **** about those soldiers as long as you get to make your political point.

Most soldiers and sailors would give the the middle finger.
Click to expand...

There's a few generals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia (Khashoggi and 9/11, remember?), Russia and North Korea that have blood on their hands too. Should the US just go around indiscriminately assassinating those generals all over the globe?
 
maxparrish said:
Doesn't matter. The Commander in Chief has to power to order military action to terminate any enemy combatant and terrorist. Obama didn't go to Congress every-time his drones wasted key figure in terrorism.
Click to expand...

Congress has the authority of the War Powers Act and any act that may lead to a war is their responsibility to either approve or reject. That's all there is to that.
 
HumblePi said:
There's a few generals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia (Khashoggi and 9/11, remember?), Russia and North Korea that have blood on their hands too. Should the US just go around indiscriminately assassinating those generals all over the globe?
Click to expand...

Only reason for it was impeachment distraction. It has worked to an extent. The only problem is we are between impeachment proceedings. Better luck next time Twump !!!
 
Napoleon said:
Maybe, but whether or not the War Powers Act is even Constitutional has always been an open and murky question. It would be a good opportunity for the Supreme Court to weigh in.
Click to expand...
Imo, the War Powers Act [edit: see below] was borderline constitutional in that it limited the president's war powers to Iraq and nationless terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS. It did not include other countries.

The Constitution is very clear who the power to declare war belongs to...and there is no mention that congress can abrogate that power to another branch of government. So there's really nothing for the courts to decide. It's up to congress if they want to exercise their constitutional power to authorize war or not. But what they can't do is to abrogate absolute power over to the executive branch. But since the War Power Act [edit: see below] just gives the president authority to attack Iraq...is that not congress giving the president a limited authorization of war?

edit: Actually, I was referring to this...not the WPA...
Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 - Wikipedia
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
What does Obama have to do with Senator Lee's frustration with today's Senate briefing? Was Obama in the room, or did he deliver it?
Click to expand...

Everything. If Obama wasn’t a Muslim sympathizer we wouldn’t be here now
 
HumblePi said:
There's a few generals in Pakistan, Saudi Arabia (Khashoggi and 9/11, remember?), Russia and North Korea that have blood on their hands too. Should the US just go around indiscriminately assassinating those generals all over the globe?
Click to expand...

You’re such an anti-American that you want to blame our allies for 9/11?

The Saudi Government did not conduct 9/11. Bin Laden was a wanted man in Saudi Arabia at the time of the attacks.

Kashoggi was Osama’s BFF and wanted to turn Saudi Arabia into a legit terror state like Iran
 
Barnacle said:
Okay; so I read up on the WPA. And what you're all hoping for - curbing the power of the Commander-in-Chief - is not gonna happen.
Click to expand...

It will if the resolution limits his power to attack Iran.
 
Mr Person said:
It really does amaze me.

Trump may be the only person who could manage to take out an evil murdering bastard and still do it so ineptly that he manages to piss people off (other than his cultists).
Click to expand...

But but but...he could say "You're Fired!" so well. Surely that qualifies him to be POTUS.
 
JustHanging said:
But but but...he could say "You're Fired!" so well. Surely that qualifies him to be POTUS.
Click to expand...

Apparently they didn't let him know that he was severely edited before broadcast on Celebrity Apprentice.

As you can guess, it was so that he didn't sound like a Thorazine Bro.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Kashoggi was Osama’s BFF and wanted to turn Saudi Arabia into a legit terror state like Iran
Click to expand...

That's the most disgusting post I've read on this forum. To defend Trump's behavior in this manner is shameful.
 
Moot said:
Imo, the War Powers Act was borderline constitutional in that it limited the president's war powers to Iraq and nationless terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS. It did not include other countries.

The Constitution is very clear who the power to declare war belongs to...and there is no mention that congress can abrogate that power to another branch of government. So there's really nothing for the courts to decide. It's up to congress if they want to exercise their constitutional power to authorize war or not. But what they can't do is to abrogate that power over to the executive branch. But since the War Power Act just gives the president authority to attack Iraq...is that not congress giving the president a limited authorization of war?
Click to expand...

The issue here is that declaring war and waging war are distinct powers belonging to separate branches of government with no clearly defined relationship either textually or in historical practice. The President doesn’t necessarily require preemptive authorization to exercise his power to wage war. Congress only has a reactive Constitutional mechanism to stop that action by exercising its power of appropriation. In other words, the President doesn’t need Congressional permission to exercise his power to engage in hostilities - only to spend money on such an endeavor assuming it is a prolonged action.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
Everything. If Obama wasn’t a Muslim sympathizer we wouldn’t be here now
Click to expand...

Yeah, gotta love those Muslim sympathizers...

main-qimg-a45199be85426a5c3ea1cd2747d284cd


100823_bushmuslims251.jpg


glowingorb.JPG
 
Napoleon said:
The issue here is that declaring war and waging war are distinct powers belonging to separate branches of government with no clearly defined relationship either textually or in historical practice. The President doesn’t necessarily require preemptive authorization to exercise his power to wage war. Congress only has a reactive Constitutional mechanism to stop that action by exercising its power of appropriation. In other words, the President doesn’t need Congressional permission to exercise his power to engage in hostilities - only to spend money on such an endeavor assuming it is a prolonged action.
Click to expand...

I guess we'll find out soon enough. But as it stands...Trump is backing away from his threats to commit war crimes.
 
Last edited:
Moot said:
I guess we'll find out soon enough. But as it stands...Trump is backing away from his threats to commit war crimes.
Click to expand...

I think all we need to do in this case is read the text of Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists and the War Powers Act. Nothing Trump has said or done thusfar represents a violation of either them.
 
maxparrish said:
Doesn't matter. The Commander in Chief has to power to order military action to terminate any enemy combatant and terrorist. Obama didn't go to Congress every-time his drones wasted key figure in terrorism.
Click to expand...

This is not the way things are done. The idea that a president can order the assasination of a senior figure in a foreign government without briefing Congress, and preferably, our closest allies, was almost unthinkable before Trump.

He doesn’t need permission. But he needs advice and to know who is going to support his position.

The imbecile just goes out and does it, doesn’t tell anyone in Congress, or our allies. Then they invoke the old Cheneyesque “iminent threat” line. Then Pompeo practically dares anyone to question him as he backs away from his own claim, and now they expect everyone to take them at their word!!!!!

And then, the idiot has the temerity to stand up there and demand that the very people he didn’t respect enough to inform (much less explain) his policy to, to fall in line behind his reckless failed schemes, and follows up with some right wing talk radio BS about Obama (as if that had anything to do with this!).

This man is in so far over his head that it’s long past time that he has his toys taken away from him before he can blow anything else up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom