Trump Wins Over Democrats in the Senate on Powers as Commander-In-Chief | Beaufort County Now

The president's veto upheld in the upper chamber, the bill dies there and does not go to the House. lifezette, donald trump, democrats, senate, powers, commander in chief, may 8, 2020
Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19)

Trump Wins Over Democrats in the Senate on Powers as Commander-In-Chief

Publisher's note: This post appears here courtesy of the LifeZette, and written by Polizette Staff.

    The Senate tried to stop President Trump from defending this nation from Iranian terrorism and aggression on Thursday. They were defeated by presidential veto, as it takes a two thirds vote to override a veto and pass such a limitation. However, several GOP Senators voted against the president on the War Powers Act bill.

    The War Powers Act of 1973 is unconstitutional and certainly unworkable. Many if not most constitutional scholars agree to that. After the Democrats had spent many years working with the North Vietnamese and the Viet Cong against the U.S. in the Vietnam War, they passed this travesty over the objections of a scandal-ridden President Richard Nixon so they, not he, could play the role of Commander-in-Chief. Then they proceeded to that so well in South Vietnam and Cambodia. No problem at all in those places after 1973. Not a peep.

    The Act mandates that the president seek congressional approval if U.S. forces are committed in an action for 60 days. It can be extended 30 days to cover a withdrawal period. The president also must inform Congress if U.S. forces are engaged within 48 hours of a military operation. 435 Commanders-in-Chief. Oh, that makes a lot of sense.

    The War Powers Act is unconstitutional simply because the Constitution spells out clearly that only the president is in command of the armed forces. It does give Congress the power to declare war. But the U.S. has not used that formality since WWII. Since then presidents generally have just ignored the War Powers Act, as the length of many operations have fallen well below the 60 day limit. Though some chief executives have sought congressional and even international sanction for their military actions.

    However, in this day of immediate threats and thus immediate military opportunities, there is no time to ask a dithering and leaking Congress for permission to uphold American interests across the globe. Which brings us to the current situation. The president saw a defensive opportunity, after U.S. troops were attacked by Iran in Iraq, and took it. He ordered the killing by a drone-delivered Hellfire missile of Iranian terrorist general Quasem Soleimani. Certain members of Congress got nervous, completely ignored the threat Soleimani posed to the U.S., and then came up with this idiotic ploy.

    Trump said after his veto was sustained and he won the vote, "The few Republicans who voted for it played right into their (Iranian) hands. Contrary to the resolution, the United States is not engaged in the use of force against Iran." He is correct. It was a very surgical strike that did not lead to further conflict, yet.

    There has merely been 111 successful veto overrides of all bills in U.S. history. 93 senators voted Thursday and they needed 62 yeas for it to become the 112th, but fell far short. They got 49.

    Republican senators who voted against the president: Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Todd Young of Indiana and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. GOP Senator Jerry Moran of Kansas allied with the Democrats in passing the war powers resolution in three months ago, but did not vote on Thursday. GOP senators said their votes were not against Trump, but to strike a balance of power between Congress and the president. They were mistaken, as there should be, and is, only one Commander-in-Chief.

    "The resolution implies that the president's constitutional authority to use military force is limited to defense of the United States and its forces against imminent attack," the president added. "That is incorrect. We live in a hostile world of evolving threats, and the Constitution recognizes that the president must be able to anticipate our adversaries' next moves and take swift and decisive action in response. That's what I did."

    Democrats disagreed, "What I find so notable about that statement is that the president could not see Congress expressing an opinion about war through any lens other than himself and his reelection," Democrat Senator Tim Kaine, D-VA, said before the vote. Leave it to a Democrat to bring up pure politics when the president spoke of national security and did not mention politics, nor his campaign, even once.

    A GOP senator defended the president, "I think this has been twisted around in a way to make the president look bad," Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma said. "He knew what he was doing."

    He did indeed, and he got it right.


Back to Top