Nachrichtenagentur Radio Utopie
Nachrichten direkt von der Quelle. Im Kontext sehen. News directly from the source. There is context in life. Deutsch, English. 24 h. – Democracy First!
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
The contours for a congressional authorization are murky at best. One could argue that portions of the 2001 AUMF serve as justification for the U.S. raid last week in Syria against an ISIS leader. But ISIS didn’t even exist when Congress approved that AUMF to invade Afghanistan and take on al Qaeda following 9/11. Many Democrats – and some Republicans – suggest that multiple presidential administrations have abused AUMF’s for decades now. They say the administrations of Presidents George W. Bush, Obama, Trump and even Biden have leaned on these older AUMFs as a crutch when they need to act overseas.
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
(07.12.2021)
Tim Kaine and Todd Young were preparing to celebrate a historic victory this month: repealing two outdated war authorizations.
But the Virginina Democrat and the Indiana Republican learned this week that their legislation to scrap the 1991 and 2002 Iraq war authorizations has become a casualty of the Senate’s year-end scramble to pass the annual defense policy bill, lift the debt ceiling and approve President Joe Biden’s social spending plan.
There is an ongoing debate between centrist Democrats and progressives in Washington over giving President Biden war powers to go to war with China in the case that Beijing invades Taiwan, Foreign Policy reported on Wednesday.
The centrists are in favor of expanding Biden’s authorities even though any military action against China risks nuclear war, while the progressives favor the current policy.
One Democrat in the House, Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA), the House Foreign Affairs Committee vice-chair, made the case to give Biden the war powers in an op-ed for The Washington Post.
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
And Biden’s Monday characterization of the terrorist threat has some analysts like Anderson wondering just how narrow an AUMF the administration would support, particularly if it’s one that that includes geographic limitations.
“Their logic, now the way they are describing counterterrorism operations, sounds like the last three presidential administrations who have said, ‘This is why we can’t take away the 2001 AUMF,’” said Anderson, a former attorney-adviser at the State Department.
An example is President Trump’s citing of the 2002 AUMF, as a “secondary authority” according to Young, in order to carry out an attack in Iraq that resulted in the death of Iranian military leader Qasem Soleimani in January of 2020.
Young believes these military attacks, though warranted, show that the 2002 AUMF is being abused in order to carry out acts of war without the consent of Congress.
(29. August 2014)
Die nach den Attentaten vom 11. September in den Vereinigten Staaten von Amerika dem Präsidenten vom Kongress persönlich ausgestellte Vollmacht, der ein nun fast dreizehn Jahre andauernder weltweiter Terrorkrieg a.k.a. „war on terror“ folgte, ist in Deutschland immer noch weithin unbekannt.
Radio Utopie dokumentiert dieses in jeder Hinsicht verheerende historische Ermächtigungsgesetz im Wortlaut.
(May 23, 2013)
So I look forward to engaging Congress and the American people in efforts to refine, and ultimately repeal, the AUMF’s mandate. And I will not sign laws designed to expand this mandate further. Our systematic effort to dismantle terrorist organizations must continue. But this war, like all wars, must end. That’s what history advises. That’s what our democracy demands.
(23. Mai 2013)
Now, the speech:
The president who dramatically expanded the CIA secret drone war, ordered a troop surge in Afghanistan and aggressively prosecuted leakers made a forceful defense of his actions and an even more forceful case for winding down the war on terrorism.
The key line: „This war, like all wars, must end. That’s what history advises. That’s what our democracy demands.“
Should lawmakers try to force the issue of updating the 2001 AUMF by establishing an expiration date, one of their best chances would be via an amendment to the must-pass fiscal 2022 defense policy bill that both chambers will take up this fall.
In a Senate Foreign Relations Committee meeting on Wednesday, U.S. Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Todd Young (R-Ind.) advanced a proposal to repeal two Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMF) issued in 1991 and 2002.
The legislation, which has already been passed by the House, will now go to a full vote on the Senate floor.
Three Republicans — Todd Young of Indiana, Ohio’s Rob Portman, and Rand Paul of Kentucky — voted with all the panel’s Democrats for repeal, with some Republicans who opposed the move Wednesday arguing that though they support scrapping both AUMFs, the time is not right amid rising tensions with neighboring Iran.
(04.07.2021)
A near two-decade old act authorising US military intervention across the Middle East and beyond will appear before the Senate for a critical vote today, which could have a huge bearing on America’s capacity to launch wars in the future.
Published Aug. 3, 2021 Updated Aug. 4, 2021, 8:46 a.m. ET
WASHINGTON — The Biden administration is open to several potential ways to tighten a much-stretched 2001 law that serves as the domestic legal basis for the open-ended “forever war” against terrorists around the world, a senior State Department official told Congress on Tuesday.
On Tuesday, Aug. 3, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) is scheduled to hold a public hearing entitled, “Authorizations of Use of Force: Administration Perspectives.” The SFRC is the committee responsible for drafting and ostensibly also repealing Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs). Tuesday’s hearing comes the day before a markup by the SFRC of legislation to repeal the outdated 1991 and 2002 AUMFs.
On Tuesday, Aug. 3, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee (SFRC) is scheduled to hold a public hearing entitled, “Authorizations of Use of Force: Administration Perspectives.” The SFRC is the committee responsible for drafting and ostensibly also repealing Authorizations for the Use of Military Force (AUMFs). Tuesday’s hearing comes the day before a markup by the SFRC of legislation to repeal the outdated 1991 and 2002 AUMFs.
(27.07.2021)
“I think President [Joe] Biden should submit a new authorization for the use of military force and should recognize that the 2001 AUMF should be terminated,” Cardin added.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who has been working with the White House on a replacement for the 2001 AUMF that better aligns with the current terror threats, called on the Biden administration to brief Congress “expeditiously” on its “counterterrorism goals and the current threats.”
(29.07.2021)
Moralisch dürfen die USA nur defensiv oder zur Abwehr eines drohenden Angriffs Gewalt anwenden. Auf die Frage nach der rechtlichen Befugnis für einen offensiven Angriff erklärte ein Pentagon-Sprecher, dass sie in Artikel 2 der US-Verfassung zu finden sei. Doch dort steht sie nicht.
As many expected, the Republican-controlled Senate failed to get the two-thirds majority needed Thursday to overturn Trump’s seventh veto of his presidency, with 49 senators voting in favor of the override and 44 against it.
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) announced Wednesday that the chamber will hold a veto override vote at 1:30 p.m. It’s expected to fall short of the two-thirds support needed, effectively ending the attempt to nix Trump’s veto.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday started his latest briefing to the nation on the government response to the coronavirus crisis by saying, „I would like to begin by announcing some important developments in our war against the Chinese virus,“ again casting the effort in military terms and referring to the disease with a term that has sparked backlash.
At one point, Trump called himself „in a sense, a wartime president.“
The DPA is a law that has its origins in the War Powers Acts of World War II, which granted the executive branch broad powers to direct industrial production for the war effort. Those authorities were allowed to expire when the war was over, but in 1950, after Soviet-backed North Korea invaded South Korea, President Harry Truman revived those lapsed powers by persuading Congress to enact the DPA.
US-Verteidigungsminister Mark Esper teilte auf Twitter mit, die USA würden vom Iran unterstützte Angriffe gegen Amerikaner und ihre Alliierten nicht tolerieren. In Tadschi sind aktuell auch etwa 50 deutsche Soldaten stationiert. Es habe unter ihnen keine Verletzten gegeben, sagte ein Sprecher des Einsatzführungskommandos.
The strikes come one day after the US assessed an Iranian-backed group was responsible for a rocket attack on a base where coalition forces are located, killing two American service members and one British service member. Fox News was first to report on the strike.
(11.03.2020)
The bipartisan measure amounts to an unusual rebuke of the president’s expansive war powers. President Trump has promised to veto it.
(13.03.2020)
Sen. Tim Kaine introduced the resolution after President Donald Trump ordered an airstrike that killed a top Iranian general.
In a largely party-line 227-186 vote, the House approved the resolution that would direct the president to “terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities against” Iran unless Congress specifically authorizes it. Six Republicans voted for the measure.
The Senate passed the resolution in a 55-45 vote last month, with eight Republicans siding with Democrats to support it. Neither chamber of Congress is expected to have the votes to override Trump’s likely veto.
Such votes are rare in part because, for the past two decades, presidents have relied on the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which Congress passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. But nearly 20 years later, presidents increasingly must resort to contorted interpretations of the law to argue that it covers new conflicts. That may be leading lawmakers to turn to the War Powers Act, because they are reluctant to rewrite the AUMF.
“This official report directly contradicts the president’s false assertion that he attacked Iran to prevent an imminent attack against United States personnel and embassies,” said House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Eliot L. Engel (D-N.Y.). “The administration’s explanation in this report makes no mention of any imminent threat and shows that the justification the president offered to the American people was false, plain and simple.”
A spokesman for the National Security Council said the White House had no further comment beyond the memo.
„The nation should not be at war without a vote of Congress,“ said Sen. Tim Kaine, the measure’s lead sponsor.
The vote was 55-45. Eight Republicans voted in favor of it: Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Todd Young of Indiana, Mike Lee of Utah, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana and Jerry Moran of Kansas.
The U.S. Senate are expected to hold a final vote on Thursday, Feb. 13, 2020 on a War Powers resolution that is aimed at restricting President Donald Trump’s authority to launch military operations against Iran.
Acht Republikaner schlossen sich der Initiative der Demokraten bereits an. Die von den Republikanern dominierte Kammer votierte mit 51 zu 45 Stimmen dafür, die Abstimmung über die Resolution zuzulassen.
The resolution underscores that Congress has the sole power to declare war, as laid out in the Constitution. The resolution also requires that any hostilities with Iran must be explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force. It does not prevent the U.S. from defending itself from an imminent attack.
The U.S. Senate has begun debating a war powers resolution, which was introduced by Senator Tim Kaine.
On Wednesday, Kaine spoke on the Senate floor, urging other members of the congressional chamber to pass the resolution to „prevent further escalation of hostilities with Iran without congressional authorization.“
Five Republicans so far have said they plan to vote in favor of the measure: Sens. Jerry Moran (Kansas), Susan Collins (Maine), Mike Lee (Utah), Rand Paul (Ky.) and Todd Young (Ind.). The resolution needs a simple majority to pass.
The U.S. Senate advanced legislation on Wednesday intended to limit President Donald Trump’s ability to wage war against Iran, paving the way for a final vote as eight Republicans joined Democrats in supporting the war powers resolution.
But the votes might be largely symbolic. The Republican-led Senate isn’t expected to take up the measures, and the White House has signaled that President Trump would veto them.
The House has approved a bill to block funding for military action against Iran.
In a largely party-line vote of 228-175, the House on Thursday passed the No War Against Iran Act offered by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.).
“The reality is that Congress needs to exercise the power of the purse,” Khanna told reporters ahead of the vote. “We need to make it very clear that Congress is not going to authorize a dime for an offensive war in Iran.”
The vote on the measure sponsored by Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) came shortly after the House approved a bill from Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) that would block funding for military action against Iran.
„One important thing to highlight: The Trump administration was briefing the Republican conference today, and several people told me that the administration made it clear that if Senator Sanders’s and my amendment passed, then it would have prevented the Suleimani strike. Well, Senator Sanders’s and my amendment had passed two months ago and was part of the national defense authorization, until it was stripped. And the lesson is that we should have fought harder to make sure it wasn’t stripped. It would have literally prevented this entire crisis.“
It’s unclear how many Republicans will support the bills on Thursday. Just three GOP lawmakers supported a war powers resolution the House passed earlier this month that was also aimed at limiting Trump’s ability to strike Iran.
Two measures aimed at preventing President Trump from unilaterally attacking Iran without Congressional authorization are to be considered Thursday by the House of Representatives. The measures had their start in the 2020 NDAA, though both were stripped out of that by the Senate.
President Trump criticized House Democrats on Wednesday over an impending vote on legislation to repeal the 2002 authorization for the use of military force (AUMF), claiming Democrats “want to make it harder for Presidents to defend America” hours after urging lawmakers to vote their conscience on the bill.
(23.01.2020)
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is leading a congressional delegation to Israel this week amid an intraparty debate over conditioning military aid to the close US ally and Democratic efforts to limit President Donald Trump’s ability to attack Iran.
“And no matter what our party — or wherever we are within our party — the fact that we have the shared values with Israel and that is one reason for our joy in the creation of Israel as a historical miracle, the greatest accomplishment of the [20th] century,” Pelosi said at a working lunch with Knesset members.
Seventy-five years into the nuclear era, we still haven’t come to grips with the destructive force we’ve put in the hands of Donald Trump.
Don’t Mistake Impeachment for a Congressional Effort to Claw Back Power
On January 9, 2020, the House passed their war powers resolution and this week it is the Senate’s turn. The vote will happen soon. Contact your Senators now and tell them to vote for Sen. Kaine’s war powers resolution! Ensure that trump can not take any further military actions against Iran without congressional approval.
Fill out the form below to send an email to your senators — overseas supporters can scroll down to sign the petition below.
The airstrike that killed Quds Force Commander Qassem Soleimani and the subsequent tensions between the United States and Iran have sparked a new debate in Congress over the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force, or AUMFs, against al Qaeda and Iraq. These nearly 20-year-old authorizations for war have been interpreted far too broadly by Republican and Democratic presidents alike. The AUMFs have been used as the justification for conducting military actions in several countries beyond what was originally intended, and it’s time for Congress to repeal them.
When President Obama used a drone strike to kill 150 people in Somalia in 2016, he justified that action under the 2001 A.U.M.F., arguing that the targets were Islamist terrorists, part of the “associated forces” of Al Qaeda against whom Congress had authorized military force.
The problem is that such justifications have become largely pro forma because Congress has not provided itself with a mechanism to reject or limit them or even to regularly debate whether they have been misused.
No matter who is president, Congress needs to re-establish its role in the use of force.
“President Trump abused his authority as commander-in-chief and chief diplomat to benefit himself,” Schiff said. “And he betrayed the interests of the American people when he did so.“
Exhibit A in their recounting was a July 25 phone call between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, ….
(17.01.2019)
Kudos to Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Todd C. Young (R-Ind.), Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rand Paul (R-Ky.) for their integrity in standing up for the resolution put forward by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) that joins the House to remind the administration that the Constitution gave Congress the right to declare war.
Democrats scold and scorn Trump for his recklessness and ignorance. But as the Iranian crisis shows once again, the party’s leaders are not willing to challenge his claim that military might authorizes the United States (i.e., Trump, as president) to dictate and enforce the rules of behavior for the rest of the world. In effect, they are letting him slip off his own hook, and may well be helping him get re-elected.
The U.S. strike that killed Iranian Major General Qassem Soleimani flouted both national and international law, according to a former lawyer who helped prosecute Nazi leaders at the post-World War II Nuremberg trials.
Benjamin B. Ferencz, 99, wrote to The New York Times this week expressing his opposition to the drone strike that killed Soleimani and several others outside Baghdad International Airport earlier this month.
What the president has already done justifies a third article of impeachment.
The junior senator from Virginia spoke to a full house of students and faculty about war powers and its history, and how we have gotten to where we are now.
We have been at war in the Middle East for nearly two decades, under authorizations for use of military force (AUMFs) that our predecessors in Congress passed almost a generation ago. Men and women of our armed forces continue to risk their lives as presidents of both parties stretch these authorizations to justify often tenuously related military engagements. Rather than debating and voting on present conflicts, Congress habitually acquiesces to the executive branch’s actions. This must change; the Constitution demands it, and the people we represent deserve it.
James Madison, the principal drafter of the Constitution, wrote that the history of mankind showed that the executive branch is “most interested in war, & most prone to it.”
For this reason, he noted that the Constitution, “with studied care, vested the question of war” in the legislature. Once initiated, the power to carry out military action does flow to the president as commander in chief. And the president always has the power to defend the nation from imminent attack. But even when the president acts unilaterally in response to an attack, that action must be brief and limited to addressing a specific threat. Any action beyond that scope requires an authorization by Congress.
We are living in serious times, but these are not serious people. The House could have reasserted itself by repealing or rewriting the 2001 and 2002 authorizations for use of military force. This would have signaled that lawmakers take their responsibility in the Constitution seriously, but still they have done nothing, and they will continue to do nothing on this.
When the Constitution was being written and debated, the framers clearly wanted to break from the British political tradition of investing all war powers in the executive (the king), but they also knew that legislatures could be dangerously slow to respond to immediate military threats. So instead of granting Congress the power to “make” war, as was first proposed, founders like James Madison changed the language to “declare” war.
Madison was no fan of executive overreach—“the Executive is the branch of power most interested in war and most prone to it,” he wrote to Thomas Jefferson—but that change of wording in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution implied that the president, as commander in chief (Article II, Section 2), retained certain powers to “make” war, if not declare it himself.
FBI officials had been expected to brief a group of House lawmakers on counterintelligence issues related to Iran on Wednesday in a separate closed-door session but those plans also changed at the last moment, according to two sources familiar with the planning. The reason for the cancellation remains unclear but the briefing was added to the calendar late last week, one of the sources said.
– The Trump administration has canceled three classified briefings scheduled for lawmakers on the situation with Iran
– The move comes amid questions about the president’s justification for killing Iranian General Qassem Soleimani
– The last round of administration briefings ended with lawmakers furious over a lack of candor by Trump administration officials
– Additionally, Senate Democrats said they have enough support to pass a war powers resolution to limit Trump’s ability to use a military response to Iran
Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Mike Lee (R-Utah) are calling on their Senate colleagues to support a proposed resolution aimed at reining in President Trump’s war powers against Iran.
The legislation introduced by Rep. Lee, H.R. 2456, would sunset the 2002 authorization for the use of military force in Iraq, originally intended to enable operations against the regime of Saddam Hussein. Seventeen years after his removal from power, this AUMF has continued to be used by administrations to justify the use of American military force in Iraq. Rep. Khanna’s bill, H.R. 5543, prohibits the use of Federal funds for military action in or against Iran unless Congress specifically authorizes it or declares war or such actions are undertaken consistent with the War Powers Resolution of 1973.
The first measure from Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) would repeal the 2002 authorization of military force for the Iraq War that has been used as justification for military action against Iran. The other, authored by Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), would prohibit the use of federal funds for military action in or against Iran unless authorized by Congress.
(1) Congress has the sole power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the United States Constitution.
(2) Congress has not yet declared war upon, nor enacted a specific statutory authorization for use of military force against, the Islamic Republic of Iran. The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) do not serve as a specific statutory authorization for war against Iran, and neither authorize any such action.
Kaine filed a draft of his resolution the day after the Iranian commander, Maj. Gen. Qasem Soleimani, was killed in a U.S. drone strike, and he has been working with Republicans to amend the measure so they would support it. As a result, the updated, bipartisan version removes all references to Trump and his administration’s statements and policies regarding Iran.
The resolution, which would give Mr. Trump a 30-day deadline to come to Congress for authorization for military action in Iran, would still need to be passed by the House. And it would be unlikely to overcome a veto from the president.
Mr. Kaine introduced the measure, which invokes the War Powers Act of 1973, as a privileged joint resolution, which allows him to force a vote on the measure and win over the support of a simple majority of senators.
Senate Democrats hoping to rein in President Trump’s ability to wage war against Iran secured majority support Tuesday for Sen. Tim Kaine’s (D-Va.) war powers resolution, but the timing of the measure is now in flux.
In a procedural snafu, Democrats won’t be able to force a vote on the measure until Tuesday at the earliest — the same day the Senate is expected to start Trump’s impeachment trial.
Lee said that the language of the resolution is unobjectionable, saying it simply states that „additional hostilities against Iran need to be authorized by Congress.“ He added, „That is a perfectly unremarkable statement. […] The fact that this would be objectionable to anyone in either political party is really saying something.“ That’s particularly true after Kaine agreed to amendments from Republicans to make the resolution applicable to any president, and to ensure that it wouldn’t force a withdrawal of troops in areas where proxy forces of Iran are present.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) is circulating a bipartisan resolution that would direct Trump to remove U.S. forces from any hostilities against Iran within 30 days of its enactment.
ADVERTISEMENT
GOP Sens. Mike Lee (Utah) and Rand Paul (Ky.) have already voiced their support for the measure, and Kaine says about eight more Republicans, including Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowski (Alaska), Todd Young (Ind.) and Mitt Romney (Utah), are reviewing it.
Congress’ refusal to act — and the ever-growing powers of the president — means endless war and anxiety for the U.S. and the world
@GOP @SenateGOP @SenateDems @DNC #TrumpsWar
“It should be voted on when everybody’s in the chamber,” he said, noting Tuesday’s presidential debate. “A, I want to pass it. But B, it is the kind of a vote that should not happen with people absent.”
Story Continued Below
Tuesday’s debate will include Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.).
“Well, I’m worried. And as a United States senator and as a voter and citizen, I have learned not to simply take the federal government’s word at face value. I mean, look, we were lied to about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. We were lied to for a couple of decades about what was happening in Afghanistan. We have been lied to about a lot of things,” Lee said.
Esper said that he was not in the room briefing the top intelligence lawmakers, but said he spoke to one of the briefers afterward.
“His assessment was …
„Der Präsident hat nicht auf ein spezifisches Beweismittel verwiesen“, sagte der Verteidigungsminister. „Was der Präsident gesagt hat, ist, dass es möglicherweise weitere Angriffe auf Botschaften geben könnte.“ Auf die Frage, ob Geheimdienstler konkrete Beweise dafür vorgelegt hätten, sagte Esper: „Ich habe keinen mit Blick auf die vier Botschaften gesehen.“
„The president didn’t cite a specific piece of evidence. What he said was he believed,“ Esper said Sunday on „Face the Nation.“ „I didn’t see one, with regard to four embassies. What I’m saying is that I shared the president’s view that probably — my expectation was they were going to go after our embassies.
Esper also said the so-called Gang of Eight, the top members of Congress’s intelligence committees, did not believe further intelligence on Iran should be shared with Congress.
Esper told CBS’s Margaret Brennan he spoke to one of the officials who briefed the Gang of Eight and that “his assessment was most if not all the members thought the intelligence was persuasive and that the Gang of Eight did not think it should be released to the broader members of Congress.”
Lawmakers looking to limit Trump’s ability to take military action against Iran face a tight time frame with little room for error after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) announced she will send the articles of impeachment to the Senate this week. Once the trial begins, all legislation is expected to be delayed for weeks.
But a resolution from Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) can come to the Senate floor as soon as Tuesday morning, and he has been trying to win over the four GOP votes needed, in addition to every Democratic senator, to get to 51 votes.
The lives of people in the Middle East and around the globe hang in the balance. The lives of those we represent — among the 140 million poor and low wealth in the United States, 43% of the U.S. population — also hang in the balance as the world teeters on the precipice of a devastating war.
(11.01.2020)
Donald Trump and the U.S. should be held accountable for war crimes for the U.S. strike against Iran, according to the Poor People’s Campaign, which has sent a letter requesting a meeting with the United Nations high commissioner for human rights to address this assertion. Bishop William Barber discusses with Joy Reid saying, ‘We were perilously close the other night to the beginning of a world war.’
Krystal & Saagar: Pelosi’s impotence on full display with War Power, Impeachment failure
(1) Congress has the sole power to declare war under article I, section 8, clause 11 of the United States Constitution.
(2) Congress has not yet declared war upon, nor enacted a specific statutory authorization for use of military force against, the Islamic Republic of Iran. The 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (Public Law 107–40; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) against the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack and the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107–243; 50 U.S.C. 1541 note) do not serve as a specific statutory authorization for war against Iran, and neither authorize any such action.
(…)
SEC. 2. Removal of United States Forces from Hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran.
(a) Removal of forces.—Pursuant to section 1013 of the Department of State Authorization Act, Fiscal Years 1984 and 1985 (50 U.S.C. 1546a), and in accordance with the provisions of section 601(b) of the International Security Assistance and Arms Export Control Act of 1976, Congress hereby directs the President to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran or any part of its government or military, by not later than the date that is 30 days after the date of the enactment of this joint resolution unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force.
He got a major break Wednesday when Republican Sens. Mike Lee (Utah) and Rand Paul (Ky.) told reporters they’d back his effort. Since then, Kaine said, he has spoken with eight or nine more senators from the 53-member GOP caucus, with more meetings planned.
He needs 51 votes for the resolution to pass. A vote could come as soon as Tuesday. Kaine said he has agreed to remove references to President Trump from the resolution — it would, of course, apply to all presidents — and to make other technical changes.
Senate Democrats are debating among themselves whether to take up a concurrent resolution passed by the House on Thursday limiting Trump’s war powers, or to stick with a proposal sponsored by Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.).
Congresswoman Tulsi Gabbard lays out her views on the Iran crisis especially with her military experience, and her thoughts on the requirements to qualify for the January debate.
Das US-Repräsentantenhaus hat für eine – weitgehend symbolische – Resolution gestimmt, die die militärischen Vollmachten von US-Präsident Trump beschränken soll. Sie fordert ein Ende des militärischen Vorgehens gegen den Iran.
The Democratic-controlled House passed the measure on Thursday by a vote of 224-194 with just three Republicans voting in support. Eight Democrats opposed the measure.
The nonbinding war powers resolution was approved in a mostly party-line vote of 224-194. Only three Republicans and one independent joined Democrats to pass the measure. Eight Democrats opposed it.
The Senate could consider a similar measure — but one that has the force of law — as early as next week, but it is unclear if it has enough votes to clear the chamber.
“For sure,” Pelosi said when asked if she thinks the existing AUMFs should be repealed.
“We will have that resolution coming up soon under the leadership of Barbara Lee,” she said.
Washington — The House is set to vote Thursday afternoon on a resolution limiting President Trump’s ability to engage in hostilities against Iran under the 1973 War Powers Resolution, as Democrats attempt to reassert Congress‘ constitutional authority to declare war amid a tense standoff with the Islamic Republic.
GOP Senator Mike Lee expresses his displeasure with the briefing about the Iran missile attack, calling it the „worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate.“ Nicolle Wallace, responding to his comments, calls the moment a „huge deal,“ as „Republicans in the Senate are. by and large, zombies, walking along as Donald Trump obliterates things like truth, the rule of law, and respect for our institutions.“
Trump faces an effort on Capitol Hill to limit his ability to strike out at Iran. We discuss with our panel.
With the expected House vote Thursday to limit President Trump’s military actions against Iran, Congress takes its latest stab at reaffirming its constitutional authority to declare war, part of a long-standing power struggle between the executive and legislative branches that has only grown murkier as the nature of global conflicts has changed.
The Polish army will take the lead of NATO’s Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) on Wednesday (1 January 2020), placing thousands of soldiers on standby and ready to deploy within days. Poland takes over from Germany, which provided the core of the VJTF’s land forces in 2019.
Barbara Lee explains her rationale for voting against the Authorization to Use Military Force in Afghanistan, citing the overly broad nature of the bill.
In response to the terrorist attacks against the United States on September 11, 2001,the Congress passed legislation, S.J.Res. 23, on September 14, 2001, authorizing the President to “use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided theterrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizationsor persons….” The President signed this legislation into law on September 18, 2001(P.L. 107-40, 115 Stat. 224 (2001)).
The main author of the resolution that limited a president’s ability to wage war, he also made overtures to the Arab world and earned the opposition of the pro-Israel lobby.
(23.07.2019)
(31.07.2019)
(13.07.2019)
Recognizing the Flaws & Failures of the 2001 AUMF ( )
Lee, who was the sole NO vote on the 2001 AUMF passed in response to the 9/11 attacks, offered another amendment to express the sense of Congress that the 2001 AUMF has been utilized well beyond the scope that Congress intended, that it has served as a blank check for any President to wage war at any time and any place, and that any new authorization for the use of military force to replace the 2001 AUMF should include a sunset clause, a clear and specific expression of objectives, targets, and geographic scope, and reporting requirements. Eighteen years ago, she feared that the AUMF would be a blank check, and that is exactly what it has been.
The amendment passed 237 to 183. 215 Democrats, 21 Republicans, and Amash voted for it. 167 Republicans and 16 Democrats voted against it.
Here are the 16 warmongering Democrats:
In the Senate in recent months, Republicans have joined Democrats to pass similar measures, but not enough to override a presidential veto.
Both Concerned Veterans for America and VoteVets have long argued that Congress needs to take back its power to declare war from the executive branch and put an end to the „Forever Wars“ by revoking the 2001 authorization for use of military force against Al Qaeda, which presidents have used to justify military operations all over the world.
The flurry of amendments to the 2020 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) moving through the House of Representatives is finally wrapping up Friday, where a series of Thursday night debates gave way to key votes early Friday on some contentious issues.
Major subjects of those debates included amendments that aim to end both the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for Use of Military Force (AUMF). The 2001 repeal passed 237-183, while the 2002 repeal passed even easier at 242-180.
Debates on the AUMF centered on concern that the authorizations could be used by President Trump or future presidents to authorize wars they were never intended for. The aim is to replace the 2001 version with something more current on the global war on terror, and to do away with the 2002 version entirely, since its main goal was to unseat the long-dead Saddam Hussein and conquer Iraq, now a US ally.
The House voted Friday to curb President Trump’s ability to strike Iran militarily on Friday, adopting a bipartisan provision that would require the president to get Congress’s approval before authorizing military force against Tehran.
September 15, 2018
Press Release
Washington, DC—In recent days, the Trump Administration has threatened military force against Syria, Russia, and Iran if they attack al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups that currently control the city of Idlib, Syria. Reps. Tulsi Gabbard (HI-02) and Walter Jones (NC-03) introduced a bipartisan resolution, requiring the President to comply with the U.S. Constitution, War Powers Resolution and U.S. law, and obtain congressional authorization prior to the use of U.S. military force.
Sign Bernie Sanders‘ petition to tell Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit military action against Iran without Congressional approval.