Really just a question and using the recent drone attack as an example: if a president thought that conducting a drone attack was in the country's best interest and if the president needed to get congressional approval, how does the attack retain the level of secrecy and surprise that such an attack would likely require? I don't ask this as a defense of the actions taken in this particular situation. Between leaks, rumor, news and fake news, I'm sure that the discussion would become public knowledge and the "country's best interest" would be subverted. I would also note that while the "country's best interest" may be upholding the rule of law, all you need is one member of congress to share the secret and all is lost. thanks.
11
@tj if members of congress cannot be trusted for the minimum 48 hours notice required in the War Powers Resolution, and any of them is found to have leaked information jeopardizing a mission, they should be held accountable.
Remember, Article I powers is part of the constitution. Are we to abandon the constitution because we don't trust our own lawmakers?
Also--think about it--with the enormously disproportionate power the US has, do you think this will ever be decisive in the bigger picture if a war is found--through proper approval and authorization--to be necessary?
8
@tj
The secrecy rule has been working for years.
3
@Kaveh Thanks. I didn’t mean to suggest that the president should have such uncontrolled power. In fact, I think that the president has too much power. I suppose that my question, at its core goes to the question in your second paragraph: do I trust our lawmakers? Perhaps my answer with regard to both sides of the aisle is no. Unfortunately. Again, thanks for your response
3
I don't feel a lot better, but I do feel a little bit better.
We all know that Trump (and all Republican presidents for the past three decades) were put in office by a minority of voters.
It's members of that minority who have the power, and it only requires a minority of that minority to fundamentally change one of the balances of power: that's the balance between radical right-wingers (or whatever full-blown Trumpists are) and what Republicans used to be.
Recently we've heard the profoundly moving words (to me and to many others I know) of Mitt Romney. William Barr is standing up for himself and for the integrity of the job he accepted. A small, but significant, group of Republicans have now stood up this war powers resolution vote.
I am grateful to these Republicans. In the past, we may have had discussions about substantive issues, perhaps the national debt or minimum wage, and found ourselves in respectful disagreement. A lot of these kinds of Republicans have been driven from office, but many are still here.
It only takes a minority of you to change things. It's time to make decisions about which is most important, simply holding power or how that power is used once held.
1
Barr is clearly lying to prevent the rest of the DOJ from resigning.
This president and his cronies will be the end of our democracy.
2
"Insane"? "Un-American"? "Unconstitutional"? "Wrong"? I'm assuming that these Senators were present during the impeachment trial and still voted for DJT. Like Barr's less-than-award-winning performance with ABC News yesterday, this expression of "concern" rings hollow. Barr advocated a shorter sentence; the measure will be vetoed; Trump's Revenge Rampage will continued. And they remain enablers however insane, unAmerican, unconstitutional, and wrong the administration's actions continue to be.
2
We should adopt a policy of pacifism across the world. Deweaponize, demilitarize. No US military abroad or at home. Only through peace can peace be achieved. And when the tyrants and the religious fundamentalists come knocking on our door to subjugate us, we will turn the other cheek to show our commitment to peace. And they will kill us and there will finally be peace in the world that they desire.
Incredible. They attack our embassy, Trump sends in the marines to secure it and kills Suleimani. Obama and Bush before him traded the lives and limbs of our military as well as a lot others, so that Suleimani could live and continue the killing and maiming. Who would want the Senate or House to run our military? Now they are upset because Suleimani is dead. So they pass something so other Suleimanis can take his place and continue his murders. Trump has shown restraint. He didn't over react to the shooting down of the drone or the attacks on shipping in the Gulf of Oman. The Senate wants to give Iran a free rein. Definitely a veto is on the way. Trump didn't start a war. He struck back at someone who was killing and maiming our military. But now Iran has been given a strong message that they needn't worry about Trump. They have the U.S. Senate on their side.
So our wisely mandated system of checks and balances can be vetoed by the very person they're meant to check? It's that easy? And he can pardon his crony who was doing bad stuff on his behalf, too?
How many more of our government's protective measures are just, you know, polite suggestions? Because it's beginning to feel like there is literally nothing to stop our president from acting like a dictator or king. Where am I living??
5
Laughable that there's anyone who will stop Trump now from doing whatever he wants. America now has a Dictator not a President.
4
Presidents Bush (41 and 43), Clinton and Obama were a lot more pro-war than this president and a lot less effective. Last June Trump called off a strike but this gets little acknowledgement in the Alt-Left press. But when Trump does call a strike, he gets the job done. Let that sink in and let him be the great duly-elected president he is...leave him alone.
The only thing Trump is better at than anyone, let alone the three competent of four Presidents you named, is failing. Despite being (illegally) given almost a half a billion dollars, Trump managed to drive six businesses into bankruptcy. His only real success in life was acting like a successful businessman and that’s only because someone else wrote the script. He doesn’t get kudos for calling off a strike that should’ve never been called to begin with. This shouldn’t even be an issue. Our Constitution explicitly states only Congress can declare war. Just because current technology makes it possible to inflict the damage that once required an entire army, doesn’t change this. The only reason Trump is getting away with his Unconstitutional acts is because the co-equal Branch that is supposed to act as a check on his power is refusing to do so. In case you’re not paying attention, that is the GOP in the Senate. The same collection of incompetent fools that acquitted him of blatant criminal and Unconstitutional activity. Instead of burning incense to whichever petty demon it is that holds him in such high esteem, Trump is proclaiming his innocence (just in case you too are confused, he’s guilty as sin) and seeking vengeance on men that did no more or less than obey their subpoena summons and tell the truth under oath. Apparently Trump thinks this is bad. He’s either amoral and evil, or mentally deficient. At this point I don’t care which; I just want him and his enablers to go.
5
Ultimately, adherence to such congressional oversight will all depend upon the integrity of people in the Pentagon. We have seen the executive branch/DOJ consistently defy the rule of law throughout this presidency so who is to say that the military might not just do the same? Dictatorships generally depend upon a captive military and that captivation generally occurs illegitimately.
Please, this resolution has no teeth as the president will veto it and we all know the republicans will not override the veto. This is just a voting ploy to show their moderate constituents that they're not kowtowing to Trump when they really are.
1
Sparks of hope ... tiny cracks in the incredible Trump Wall. Senators Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Todd Young of Indiana voted with the Democrats. The GOP can ostracize and humiliate one or two Senators. It can't afford to ostracize eight. You can criticize Trump if you can find seven senators to agree with you. Kelly and Bolton, out of office, have reproached him. Even Barr, still in power, has found fault with his tweetstorms. I am hoping for An Outrage Too Far.
1
The JCPOA provided a framework for dialogue with Iran while stopping its nuclear weapons development.
Trump abandoned JCPOA while Iran was fully compliant and was not developing nuclear weapons (CIA testimony to the Senate Intelligence Committee January 2019). U.S. ability communicate with Iran has been curtailed, other than thru military strikes like the Soleimani killing. Iran's options have been curtailed and hardliners that press for nuclear weapons have been encouraged by Trump.
There is no plausible channel for negotiations to begin between Trump and Iran. Consequently, Iran will be increasingly likely to press for nuclear weapons.
Perhaps this is the strategy - Iran achieves nuclear capability and Trump responds with a tactical nuke attack - the first in the world. No positive results are plausible from Trump strategy that is putting global stability at increasing risk.
3
I am sure that the margin of approval of the bill was calculated by the Teapublicans' to fall well short of the majority needed to override a veto. They are simply trying to provide nominal cover for themselves in the upcoming elections.
4
Whatever happened to Trumps campaign promise,” if we have to fight their wars went want half their oil”?
@Ted should read “ we want half of their oil”. Odd these changes to double checked messages.
Why aren't the Republican senators who voted for the measure named, and the Democrats who voted against it? No reference to help interpret what has happened.
1
The Republican Senators who voted for this bill, like Susan Collins, can use this as an example of how they are "independent thinkers" who are willing to stand up to Trump. This is theatre to the same degree as is Barr's recent statement that he can't work under current conditions.
3
Dear Republicans,
You created this Frankenstein monster named Trump who currently occupies the oval office. You thought you could control him. He was a useful idiot with a pen who could sign your tax cut bills, deregulate your Fortune 500 companies, and appoint conservative judges -- with no collateral damage.
Your Frankenstein monster is out of control. You can't stop him. You created him.
You broke it. You bought it. As Colin Powell said.
The rest of us Americans will see you on November 3.
We've had enough. And we will take our country back.
29
It is becoming beyond question that Trump will be seen as the worst American President, ever. He is arrogant but clueless; he has no insight into human nature. He is already responsible for many unnecessary deaths; that number will continue to grow until the United States wakes up!
5
"Sen. Graham ... said. 'I want the Iranians to understand .... all options are on the table'.”
The US has already tried all its options against Iran, except invading that country. But before debating that, let's ask how well the US has done in Afghanistan.
The US occupied Afghanistan 19 years ago, but has yet to defeat Taliban. As of this writing, Taliban control 70% of the country and to force a US withdraw are attacking US bases non-stop. The US military has tried every non-nuclear weapon in its arsenal (including the largest bomb it has ever built) to bring Taliban to the negotiation table, but to no avail.
If the US invades Iran, it will face a terrain similar to the Afghanistan’s. Iran’s land mass is 2.5 times larger than Afghanistan and has one of the longest borders of any country in western Asia. It borders 7 countries and 2 large bodies of water, offering many options to Iranians for cross-border movements in an asymmetric warfare. In contrast, Taliban cross-border moves are limited to Pakistan.
Iran has a population of 82 million, 4 times Afghanistan population in 2001. Iranians and Afghans are racially the same people and possess the same "warrior genes." Yet, Iranians are better educated and have a well-equipped, experienced, military.
The question to ask is then: how the US military, which has miserably failed against the ragtag Taliban, can conquer a warrior population that is 4 times larger, much more clever, in a country that is 2.5 times bigger?
9
@Eddie B. another question being, why would the US need or want to do so. aside from being insane, there is no reason for us to get into a war with iran.
1
The Constitution says only the Congress can declare war. Let's stick to it.
12
Elsewhere Sen Cotton is reported to have almost scuttled this whole thing with a “poison pill”. Those intimate with him know he is a favorite of Israel’s right wing government. And he is a AIPAC favorite too. He is the prototype of politicians who will provoke war and lead us to more Iraqs. Not to our benefit .
8
This was a Republican--I can somewhat sleep at night now- Vote
1
What happened to Declarations of War voted upon by the Senate?
How can the Executive Branch take action and only afterwards have the Senate vote on approval or not?
It is time to end this absurdity - no more 'War powers'. Go back to requiring a formal declaration of war by the Senate - voted on in open debate.
Our Founding Fathers would have been appalled at having this power in the hands of ONE person. They did all they could to prevent the concentration of power in the Executive Branch.
12
Aww, look; isn’t it sweet! Collins, Murkowski, and Alexander pretending to have integrity! Just when it will be utterly meaningless.
14
We should adopt a policy of pacifism across the world. Deweaponize, demilitarize. No US military abroad or at home. Only through peace can peace be achieved. And when the tyrants and the religious fundamentalists come knocking on our door to subjugate us, we will turn the other cheek to show our commitment to peace. And they will kill us and there will finally be peace in the world that they desire.
Who wants to join and be an Eloi? Me? I'd rather be a morlock.
1
After abdicating Congress's authority by failing to vote for impeachment (on the Republican side) and conviction, now Congress believes it can assert any strength? Can't have it both ways. Office of the Executive is now stronger than the Congress.
5
Trump enjoys the power that he has because Mitch McConnell supports him in the Senate. If Republicans loses their majority in the Senate, watch what happens to Trump’s power then.
7
Incredible. They attack our embassy, Trump sends in the marines to secure it and kills Suleimani. Obama and Bush before him traded the lives and limbs of our military as well as a lot others, so that Suleimani could live and continue the killing and maiming. Who would want the Senate or House to run our military? Now they are upset because Suleimani is dead. Biden condemns the killing. So they pass something so other Suleimanis can take his place and continue his murders. Trump has shown restraint. He didn't over react to the shooting down of the drone. or the attacks on shipping in the Gulf of Oman. So the Senate wants to give Iran a free rein. Definitely a veto is on the way. Trump didn't start a war but Iran has been give a strong message that they needn't worry about Trump. They have the U.S. Senate on their side.
1
@Ron Apparently, you have trouble grasping the fact that the President is profoundly mentally ill and any restraint put on his power may help save the World.
5
@Ron the "they" that attacked our embassy were NOT iranians, and the action was provoked by the US military attacking iraqis while occupying that country against the wishes of the people there. please try to keep track of who attacks the US and why before going to war against the wrong country.
1
Who are the Senators that did not vote to rein in Trump?
4
It's not about a political party. I was drafted during the Vietnam war in 1970, and we knew the war was wrong. Johnson and Nixon still sent the working class kids to war. Both Democrats and Republicans have blood on their hands. For those of you who deny that there is a deep state, I can only ask if the CIA is still looking for WMDs in Iraq. Pleas stop sending our working class children to war.
4
@Pepperman I agree about working class to war, but the Deep State that Trump talks about is supposedly against him. The Deep State you suggest with Iraq was doing the vice president's bidding at the least. So who does this so-called Deep State work for. It seems to morph pretty readily depending on who wants to claim it exists.
4
What this presidency has shown is that presidential powers need to be reined in. The system of checks and balances has been exposed by Trump as ineffectual, he can go around them, ignore them, deride them, with no fear of reprisal.
9
We're already at war with Iran. Would Congress cut funding for the war in Syria?
2
Too late GOP Senators!
10
The Iran War Powers Resolution is such an important guardrail for Trump for it to pass with only a 55-45 margin - which is 5 short of over-riding a veto - is a sign of how emasculated the Republicans in the Senate have become.
It is a sham of a fig leaf of a sham.
And, by the way, if Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Todd Young of Indiana think think they get any "points" for standing up to Trump in this case, think again. You had your chance to be a good steward a week ago.
Unless you recruit another 5 Senators to override (after Trump vetoes it), you are just posing on the bank as our democracy drifts downstream towards a waterfall.
11
The Iran War Powers Resolution is such an important guardrail for Trump for It pass with only a 55-45 margin - which is 5 short of over-riding a veto - is a sign of how emasculated the Republicans in the Senate have become.
It is a sham of a fig leaf of a sham.
And, by the way, if Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Mike Lee of Utah, Rand Paul of Kentucky, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, and Todd Young of Indiana think think they get any "points" for standing up to Trump in this case, think again. You had your chance to be a good steward a week ago.
Unless you recruit another 5 Senators to override (after Trump vetoes it), you are just posing on the bank as our democracy drifts downstream towards a waterfall.
3
Let’s pretend that Iran’s bellicose Ayatollahs, their army of Revolutionary Guards, and their regional militant allies aren’t itching for a bigger war and don’t pose an existential (nuclear) threat to their neighbors and beyond.
Remember 1938? Apparently the international community doesn’t. “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”...
4
@Susanna well, so far, they haven't attacked anyone but the US, and that was in retaliation for us killing their general. whereas the US has bombed several countries in the region for decades now and occupied several. who is the greater aggressor here ? pretty obvious to anyone keeping track that it is the US that is the major aggressor in the middle east
1
NY Times, you buried the vote tally. That should be the lede.
Republicans who voted for this resolution include:
- Paul (R-KY)
- Lee (R-UT)
- Alexander (R-TN)
- Cassidy (R-LA)
- Collins (R-ME)
- Moran (R-KS)
- Murkowski (R-AK)
- Young (R-IN)
55 for (47 D + 8 R); 45 against (45 R).
Those numbers, and who the Senators on each side, is what we need to see reported.
8
No more wars.
6
The record of DJT has been crystal clear. He has shown restrain against N. Korea and Iran and has done everything possible to avoid any new regime change war. Not only that he is doing everything possible to end the endless wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen that were initiated during the first 16 years of this century by the 2 preceding presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.
The bipartisan bid to restrain DJT after doing what needed to be done against Iran should not restrain him from future hostile action from Iran, deserving a fitting response and a deterrent. As we now know that Iran's tit for tat response both inadvertent firing of 2 Russian SAM missiles at a civilian passenger plane as well as the deliberate missile attack on the Iraqi base housing US troops was disproportionately brutal to several US troops receiving head injuries which could result in permanent disability as well as PTSD along with the severe structural damage to the hangar.
Iran wars powers resolution may make 47 Dem. senators and 8 GOP senators feel secure but does it really not send a signal that DJT is so committed to peace with Iran that he should let Iran do what it likes. DJT has been made aware that a war with Iran does not have support of the American people and if a war is initiated by DJT that will not sit well with his base or with the independents. But neither his hands being tied by the congress. This resolution is an attack on the peace through strength policy.
2
@Girish Kotwal
I have read your comments before. You think Donald Trump is an anti-war president. You also support Tulsi Gabbard for the same reason. I agree with you that the United States should stop the endless wars.
Donald Trump has sent more troops to the middle east. Donald Trump is pressing the buttons of Iran to provoke a war. Donald Trump has been a Chamberlain-type appeaser of Kim Jong-un in North Korea, enabling his nuclear weapons build-up, justified by their love letters.
Meanwhile, Donald Trump just proposed the biggest U.S. military budget in history.
Wake up, my friend. Donald Trump is not stopping the endless wars. He is moving us closer and closer to WW III.
15
@MidtownATL I am wide awake knowing facts not partisan nonsense. The biggest military budget is part of peace through strength. In case you are not aware, the highest budget for any Department is for the DHHS.
Which is America's longest war started by George W. Bush? The Afghanistan war. A war against a country that brought Alexander the not so great to his knees, sent the colonial British packing out of their country and the mighty Soviet's puppet Afghan Nazibullah hanging at the main square in Kabul. USA under president DJT could well be the first formidable power to leave Afghanistan honorably before Nov. 2020. You are right I am against useless regime change wars and I am thankful you remember me from my earlier comments.
Do you really believe that Trump is moving US closer to world war III? That is is something only someone with TDS will say because they want the world to overlook the best that has happened during the past 3 years. I am no longer continuing to respond to outlandish talk of world war III. If anything DJT has ended world war III, what I consider the global war on terror.
I have been feeling like I have failed in convincing the world that DJT presidency is really not that scary if you follow his actions and the results of his presidency.
https://www.amazon.com/-/es/Girish-J-Kotwal-PhD-ebook/dp/B084NSTBWH/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_es_US=%C3%85M%C3%85%C5%BD%C3%95%C3%91&keywords=djt+presidency%3A+best+of+the+union+and+girish+kotwal+j.&qid=1581623207&sr=8-1
2
@Girish Kotwal- You say “only folks with TDS overlook the best he has done in these 3 years”. No. We are not overlooking that. It is buried under his lies, cheats and steals. It is hard to see what “good” he has done. I’m really trying to think of one single thing that is making life better for us all.
I’ve got nothing.
8
Hurray for Republicans who have the courage and integrity to do the right thing.
1
Yeah? Where were they 2 weeks ago?
2
The question now is will trump comply with the limitation or undermine it and daring anyone to stop him?
3
@KaneSugar
He will veto the bill, which needs 2/3 of the House and the Senate to have the force of law to constrain him.
2
Wow. The one thing dictators around the world respect — a loose cannon with nukes and a bad temper — and Congress takes it away. Brilliant. Maybe Congress can try focusing on the instability caused by other dictators instead of those caused by our own baby dic.
1
Don't be disappointed if America is not shouting, dancing, and toasting the Senate with fine champagne. Nor for the proverbial crumbs from the table. His Heinous will certainly issue yet another Executive Order, should the time come, when he, and he alone, decides to escalate hostilities with Tehran. You valiant Republican senators can then just "assume the position:" you know, lying face down on the floor as Trump walks all over you.
Hip hip hooray for you. Not really.
9
Potus should bot have any powers let alone war powers. He knows nothing about geography history actually anything in a book.
5
@Yo Apparently he needed to have what happened at Pearl Harbor explained to him. You are correct about him not knowing history.https://abcmedia.akamaized.net/rn/podcast/2020/02/lnl_20200212_2240.mp3
3
So.... what was the actual vote count and who voted what way — essential factual info somehow missing from the article.
It's President Trump, not Mr Trump.
@Becky: He was already referenced once as President Trump, consistent with journalistic practice. It is not disrespectful to call him ‘Mr. Trump’ for the rest of the article.
Have a read: https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/08/reader-center/why-does-nyt-call-president-mr-trump.html
7
He hasn't earned either honor. He's not a President or a man, but a petulant punk who must constantly beat his chest to convience himself otherwise.
14
@Becky You give respect you get respect. He’s a liar and a cheat. I can’t let my children here him speak because he’s a vulgar bully. I call him tiny trump.
4
Shame on these lying, hypocritical Republicans. They voted against hearing witnesses and evidence at Trump’s impeachment hearing making a mockery of our Constitution and our democracy. Now they spill their seed on barren ground in a pathetic attempt to show they are still virile. How can they look themselves in the mirror without cringing to see the jokes for human beings they are?
7
Our Child in Chief has no idea that there are responsibilities that come with power. Instead he just plays with it, like a cat with a mouse. Shame on those who did not vote for this. They are bound to regret it one day.
8
This action is worthwhile even if it does not prevent Trump from precipitous action in the future. What is also worthwhile is that as a nation we face up to the many wrong and unbelievably destructive actions we have taken in starting wars and destabilizing governments. It is time to confront our military budget and the egregious surveillance on American citizens. After Trump these problems are still with us and we must unite to fight global warming not other countries.
5
After the last week of the Trump era, it's dawning on the Republicans that Trump's craziness is not an act or pose; that seeing something sufficiently annoying to him on TV could trigger a nuclear attack on Iran. Like Elvis shooting his TV when Robert Goulet came on.
4
I don't understand why a Senator (regardless of party line) would vote down on this bill. It literally gives Congress more oversight on the office of the President, which is a win for Congress. Why would they not vote to give themselves more power?
2
@Kaylee. They’re terrified of retaliation by Trump. And everything Trump does demonstrates that they should be afraid.
3
@Jordan F what exactly has he done to make them afraid?
2
Meanwhile, the revelations that the CIA and NSA have been spying on the diplomatic cables of governments around the world for the past five decades (through the CIA’s secret ownership of a global security firm based in Switzerland) demonstrates that American imperialism has long operated as a law unto itself in world affairs.
This also moves US hypocrisy of lamenting of threat of Russian or Chinese spying into stratosphere of insanity.
And while all of the candidates of the Democratic Party accept the unproven allegations of “Russian meddling” in the 2016 elections, not one of them has commented on the Washington Post’s latest revelations of US spying and meddling on behalf of the American giant corporations and big banks.
And then there’s the ‘Bethlehem Doctrine’ with it’s new definition of “imminent”.
Don’t be fooled by this War Powers Resolution.
The Dems are arguing that Trump can’t veto it because it is a joint resolution. They are also saying that it is binding (even though it doesn’t say so because war powers are a special case). The courts (Trump’s courts) will have to decide these basic issues, so this is really nothing more than Dem posturing.
I’d like them to vote against ANY attack on Iran, and to pull our war crimes syndicate back from all its wars, assisting wars, drone killings, black ops and other violence worldwide.
Dismantle the Pentagon-Industrial-Surveillance-Hegemony complex.
3
Well, now Trump has to veto it and start a war to prove who’s boss.
Lovely.
9
This attempt by these 8 Republicans is laughable.
Sorry Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski et al, you had your chance to get rid of this monster in the WH- and you caved.
This is a purely symbolic gesture with about as much clout as you have a spine- which is zero.
You’re nothing.
24
Thank you to the Republicans who did the right thing, here at least, by supporting the measure and trying to keep our people and our homeland safe.
They had a chance to eject him and blew it. It's all on the Republican senate now, whatever this maniac does next.
2
I agree with Mr. Lee--following our own Constitution shows strength, not weakness.
Too little, too late. Trump is wallowing in a power frenzy. He ignores rules, laws, and certainly ignores his advisers. He should never have been elected; but since that did happen, he should never have been allowed to trample the constraints of his office as he has. Nevertheless, here is where we are today. It doesn't look like he's going to slow down or stop. We can expect mind blowing acts of totally chaotic 'decisions' until something brings him to a shrieking halt. Will it be us, the voters? Can we even wait that long? As you sow, so shall you reap. We're reaping, folks.
7
It's a reminder of the 45 Republican Senators that do not deserve to be in office any more. Vote them all out, either this election or their next.
6
Even if all 100 supported Senators supported this bill, Trump would call every attack as preventing an mminent sttack, as he did with Suleimani.
4
Grateful for the eight Republicans who joined but how sad is that? Only eight?
5
This is all window dressing. The key problem with the imperial presidency is the concept materialized out of thin air by minions at the DOJ that a sitting President can not be indicted. From that flows he can commit any illegal act as he can not be impeached and convicted provided he withholds al, documents and prevents testimonies of his subordinates.
10
We Agree!!
2
For his next trick, Donald Trump just made his political foes vote to defend Iran, which has been at war with the U.S. since 1979.
3
@Arundo Donax Trump's political foes are not voting to defend Iran. Senators and Members of Congress are voting to uphold the Constitution of the United States. If Donald Trump wants to commit acts of war against Iran, let him address the Congress as FDR did on December 8, 1941, and ask for a declaration of war.
18
Trump with his hands tied would be a move in the right direction. Iran can’t destroy the United States. Trump is well on his way to doing so.
149
Iran has been perpetrating wars, proxy wars, and terrorism across the globe (and against their own pro-Democracy citizens) since their so-called islamic Revolution, circa 1979. And the ‘global community’ turns a blind eye to their aggressive nuclear ambitions because...oil.
No doubt, the ‘global community’ will one day regret their breathtaking collective cowardice.
2
@Susanna You de realize that Iran had a democracy for a while until early 1950's when the US and British combined to instigate a revolution to overthrow the democracy and re-instate the Czar.
This was because the Iranian government wanted to nationalize the oil industry so they could keep the profits instead of such profits benefiting overseas interests. Of course the US and Britain didn't appreciate that so they sent in Alan Dulles to co-ordinate an uprising.
The rest is history.
1
Not too hard to included the names of GOP Senators who voted for it. At the least include link to votes.
You have heard of hyperlinks at the NYT's haven't you?
The article names the Republican senators that voted for the bill.
2
@Joan
Sometimes you just need to re-read to find info you missed initially ( I know!)
You missed this:
"They [Mike Lee and Rand Paul] were joined on Thursday by six other Republicans in supporting the effort to curtail Mr. Trump’s war powers: Senators Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Todd Young of Indiana.
2
Veto in 5...4...3...2...
Call me when the GOP grows a backbone.
3
Rudderless, immoral republicans support dictatorial powers for Putin's lap dog, but now they balk at his yipping and snapping? Just when you thunk you'd seen it all....
3
Not sure why Republicans would try to stop Florida Man. They wanted him as president and got him. They should be happy. Funny thing is no matter how much they disapprove of his actions and try to limit what he does, they will still vote for him next year. He's got them wrapped around his stubby little finger.
4
Barn door’s still open, horse long gone
4
GOP has become Putin's goons. It's just pathetic.
4
@Y-F and you are all knowing and wise.huh
By all means send them soilder to die in another war they ain't gonna win!
Saudi Arabia thanks you for your service boys.
Go forth and spend those tax dollars for your master and chief.
2
Republicans had their opportunity to put restraints on this president and failed, and after that failure, Sen. Collins said she thought President Trump had learned his lesson. Well that didnt happen and now we are looking into the abyss as our democratic institutions are being dismantled with surgical precision. Republicans need to come to terms with what is happening in America and I'm not sure there are many principled Republicans remaining to do that.
2
I believe these authorizations generally expire and need renewal. Trump will veto this. But just don't renew the authorization ever again.
2
It's good that Congress is taking some responsibility. Even if as a consolation prize to all America for having caved on removing Trump. And they're very quiet about Trump's post trial revenge tantrums.
Just think what might have happened had those Senate Republicans voted Trump out. Well we'll have to do it our selves.
Vote Blue No Matter Who. 2020 Blue Wave.
1
Senators: stop doing symbolic rebukes and own your authority to exert control over this out of control President. You might actually take some responsibility for grave matters of foreign policy.
2
Incredible. They attack our embassy, Trump sends in the marines to secure it and kills Suleimani. Obama and Bush before him traded the lives and limbs of our military as well as a lot others, so that Suleimani could live and continue the killing and maiming. Who would want the Senate or House to run our military? Now they are upset because Suleimani is dead. Biden condemns the killing. So they pass something so other Suleimanis can take his place and continue his murders. Trump has shown restraint. He didn't over react to the shooting down of the drone. or the attacks on shipping in the Gulf of Oman. So the Senate wants to give Iran a free rein. Definitely a veto is on the way. Trump didn't start a war but Iran has been give a strong message that they needn't worry about Trump. They have the U.S. Senate on their side.
1
I'm sorry, after all I've seen, I can't take this as a serious gesture. Some vulnerable senators negotiate with Mitch McConnell - hey, we want to look good to moderates, permit us this photo-op vote - no worries, it's below the supermajority threshold.... thus Republicans get their cake, and get to eat it too.
2
Another exercise in futility following collapse of shamimpeachment.
I want to live the day when this War Powers Act is repealed and consigned to dustbins of history.
I say that because Congress - in an attempt to either punish or tarnish a POTUS - Nixon that is - passed this resolution because of Vietnam and Cambodia.
Nixon vetoed the resolution and rightfully so.
Unfortunately, weakened by gathering Watergate storm and other mischiefs - Congress easily overrode the veto.
So, what did we get?
I respectfully suggests nothing.
Since the resolution - a POTUS got at least 3 authorizations from Congress - Iraq/Kuwait, Afghanistan post 9/11 and Iraq again.
And POTUS including Obama used one of these resolutions to wage another war all together. And Congress did nothing.
If Congress thinks Article I is so important why this paper exercise.
They have a better way - an oversight and a string on the purse.
I think when Congress one day under Article I actually exercises this power to stop a POTUS from continuing an armed conflict - yes, I will buy that Article I is supreme.
Heck, the recent shamimpeachment proved that words in the Constitution for an impeachment are still being debated.
So, let's not have this parade of senators telling us how they have now preserved the constitution.
1
@Neil If you wish to have at least a semblance of credibility in defending King Donald, I suggest you take an honest look at the evidence supporting removal. There was not a single witness presented who testified that Trump did anything other than attempt to extort Ukraine into investigating a political rival. And, if the Senate knew of any such witnesses, all they had to do was allow witnesses.
If you want to defend the Senators who voted to acquit, you had best try the defense of it being wrong but not impeachable/a basis for removal. If you choose to make this defense, remember a significant majority of Americans disagree with you but, soldier on.
The old country gospel song says, "Everybody wants to go to heaven, but nobody wants to die."
Republicans apparently want war with Iran. But not one wants to introduce a resolution declaring war.
1
55 to 45 says more than the bill itself.
we are transitioning into a banana republic.
2
You must be kidding.
Do you really thing Trump cares about what the Senate and the House of Representatives tells him he can't do?
Or that he will bow down and acquiesce to the Senate and House of Representatives?
HIghly doubtful. After the kangaroo court (ie Impeachment fiasco) Trump now knows he can do anything he wants.
4
Yet more proof that cowardice is the primary prerequisite to be a republican senator or congressperson.
5
Trump tweeted, complaining about Democrats, but there were at least eight Republicans who voted for this bill. Some Republicans complained this bill "shackles" Trump, but if ever a president needed shackling, he is it. The House will pass the bill and Trump will veto it. Will enough Republicans in either house decide to override him? Probably not, but he is at least on notice.
61
@Barbara Incredible. They attack our embassy, Trump sends in the marines to secure it and kills Suleimani. Obama and Bush before him traded the lives and limbs of our military as well as a lot others, so that Suleimani could live and continue the killing and maiming. Who would want the Senate or House to run our military? Now they are upset because Suleimani is dead. So they pass something so other Suleimanis can take his place and continue his murders. Trump has shown restraint. He didn't over react to the shooting down of the drone or the attacks on shipping in the Gulf of Oman. So the Senate wants to give Iran a free rein. Definitely a veto is on the way. Trump didn't start a war but Iran has been give a strong message that they needn't worry about Trump. They have the U.S. Senate on their side.
@Ron
Nobody’s upset Suleimani’s dead, and ridiculous to think so.
That’s regurgitating Trump’s nonsense to fool his flock of blinkered followers.
It’s about Trump over-reaching the powers of his office and nothing else.
The general public are quite easily able to tell the difference.
9
@Barbara
"At least he is on notice".
He's been 'on notice' before, of course. But this time a few more leaders of his Republican power base are endorsing the notice's power. And the same is happening in the brouhahas surrounding how he has used (simplicitudinous? superficial? fascist?) hyperbole in the Tweets that are one of the habitually reactive ways by which he cons people into giving hum support -- as the recent Barr complaint against his tweeting is now plainly showing.
"Bipartisan", right, on a pointless symbolic vote that they know will get vetoed. We've already seen where each of these Republicans stands when it counts.
59
and that is . ?
give credit where credit is due
1
I feel a lot better now. A new law to be ignored and stepped over.
43
This resolution should be drafted to apply to all presidents and to all countries across the globe (not just Iran). Congress is accorded by the Constitution with the power to declare war. Any commitment of American military troops against any country must be approved by Congress. Anything else is unconstitutional. Congress cannot abrogate its powers. So any further military interventions on the part of the US should have to be approved on their individual merits by Congress. This resolution, in its universal aspects, makes perfectly good sense, in its particular framing it is nothing more than partisan politics.
11
Why does anyone actually believe that these individual Republican senators are making their own decisions? Is it because there has been no real reporting around the other thousands of "luncheons" where McConnell "got the party in line" for some partisan confrontation or another? (News flash: That impeachment luncheon wasn't a special event.) Are we all so focused on fearing the President that we forget who owns him?
14
Even if the resolution passed with a veto proof vote ... what would Congress do if Trump defied them? Impeachment (again) & removal from office? Not likely.
10
@James Cunningham Actual question if the resolution passed with 2/3rds approval, is there some stop gap authority to not circumvent getting congressional approval by the prez, say the commanders in chiefs of the armed forces not allowing the military to respond directly to trumps whimsies without congressional okay.
1
This is another masterful display of political manipulations by the Senate majority leader to ensure that the GOP stays in power. The bill would not have been up for a vote (note the stack of bills that are sitting in Senate) if he didn't know that he could pass it without a veto-proof supermajority.
Symbols are no longer meaningful in a country where facts and data are constantly ignored, and past events are forgotten within hours. The GOP can now make claims to those who don't follow closely enough that they have made an attempt to check this President, while in real actions they continue to take advantage of this regime for re-elections.
Until the country unites again under solid values instead of fear-based rhetoric, there will be no end to this type of manipulations and behaviors. I think we have lost our souls.
24
Skeptic, that's not true. The Senate was obligated to vote on this bill under the War Powers Resolution. Mitch McConnell could not keep the Senate from voting on this kind of bill. As this article clearly states.
2
@Skeptic
Yes like Barr putting on his act of independence. Buy that one and I'll sell you a bridge.
3
This is the least they could do.
5
There was recently an opportunity to restrain Trump more than merely symbolically ... starts with an “i” ... slipping my mind right now.
26
Meaningless act by a Senate infested with feeble minded, weak wiled, ethically corrupt Republican Senators. At least Graham has started telling the truth about their unwillingness to support the Constitution of the United States by checking Trump. Gardner, Tillis, McSally and Ernst, though. What a spectacular collapse of patriotism!
18
The only real way to "restrain Trump" from ongoing illegal activity that's harmful to the nation is to remove him from office, bring him to trial on multiple charges, and restrain him in a nice, cozy jail cell.
But the Senators utterly failed to do that!
And Schumer utterly failed to persuade more than a single, solitary Republican senator to vote for impeachment! This seems like more face-saving window dressing from him...
7
One suspects that Trump is one rash act away from veto-proof majorities in both the House and the Senate.
Obviously, the nation is entering into a scary phase of its post-Second World War history which was predicated upon tamping down and avoiding widespread conflagration.
But what does a country do when widespread conflagration is the president's agenda?
8
Gee, they could have restrained him by convicting him in the impeachment trial. Kind of late to the party now. Or, even, only had him escape his just punishment by one vote.
7
Where were these "courageous" Republicans last week, when they all voted against allowing testimony at the impeachment trial, much less voting to convict the criminal in the White House?
16
Oh well, Trump will just have his media and cyber-warfare teams go after the GOP defectors, then the party base will organize to vote these guys out in their next election cycle.
Next!
5
If a Democrat drafted the resolution why did you report that "Democrats join 8 Republicans" and not more truthfully "8 Republicans joined Democrats"....? Also why underscore that the House didn't achieve a two-thirds majority, when the requirement for the House is a simple majority. Only the Senate needs 2/3 to overcome a veto. Please let's not twist ourselves into pretzels trying to give Republicans a break on their terrible positions--they don't earn or deserve it.
21
This is a message is from a registered Republican and directed to Republicans, specifically Senators Lee and Collins and the 50 other Senate Republicans, excluding Senator Mitt Romney whose collective act of cowardice and deceit was as sinister
Do not think for a second that this act of "defiance" in any way absolves or insulates you from full responsibility for every lie, every violation of American standards of decency and reputation, every vile tweet, distortion of the law, betrayal of the office and criminal conspiracy personally carried out by Donald Trump.
No amount of Kabuki Theater concern can protect you from the awful truth. When you had the chance to stand for something noble, like a free press, you chose instead to follow orders given by a madman capable of almost anything.
30
Alan Dershowitz says that executive privilege/power gives the president the right to do anything he feels is right for himself and right for the country.
The majority, minus one, GOP senate has agreed; this vote means nothing.
16
Of course he will veto the bill. He wants total power. He just can't stand it when either of the other three branches challenges his power. This is dangerous.
9
@Doug
Dangerous??? It gives me chills. Every day and very night.
4
The jig is up everyone knows it is all sizzle and no steak until it is 60-40 or 67 -33 or sometimes 51-49. There will be more unqualified judges ,more corrupt cabinet appointees and pretense of being a democracy. Russia has a constitution and is a country of law and divided government.
What is the difference between a brave journalist in Saudi Arabia, Russia and the USA?
The Saudi journalist dies in prison or Saudi Embassies, the Russian journalist dies in traffic while crossing the street and the American lives and dies in obscurity.
9
Even the good news turns out to be meaningless these days.
7
"[A]n unusually large number of Senate Republicans crossed party lines in an attempt to claw back their authority to weigh in on matters of war and peace."
. . . . .
But this is NOT an ideological issue where the parties may fairly hold different ideas as to what is best. It is simply an attempt to recoup Congressional powers that were foolishly abdicated decades ago. If a Democrat was the president, EVERY Republican would hop on board. That so many Republicans have once again chosen party loyalty (or more accurately, obsequience to their deranged leader whom they all fear), demonstrates that those cowards should all be booted out in the next election.
When do the Republicans finally figure out that the 'leader of their party' is a not really a Republican at all...but is simply a party of one - his crazed self ?
9
Trump didn’t wage war, he killed a terrorist responsible for countless deaths of allied troops and Iraqi civilians. How is this any different than Bin Laden? I don’t remember Obama asking permission. What about all of Obama’s drone strikes, some against American citizens? I didn’t hear the left wanting to restrain presidential powers then. The only thing different is it’s Trump.
1
@JOSEPH Imagine if the Russians assassinated General Mattis. That's what Suleimani was to Iran. Also what about all the neo-Nazi terrorists shooting up Wal-Marts and synagogues? Why isn't the right doing more about them? A pointless and irrelevant question. Also the left very much wanted to rein in Obama's drone strikes. But that's neither here nor there.
7
@JOSEPH He ordered the assassination of a uniformed military leader of a sovereign nation. That is an act of war.
How is this different from bin Laden? On September 18, 2001, one week after the deadliest terrorist attacks in U.S. history, President George W. Bush signed into law the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF). The AUMF authorized the President: to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons. There is no legal, moral, or ethical question that killing bin Laden was well within the authority granted to the President.
8
@JOSEPH So, you don't remember Obama asking for permission to kill Bin Laden? Obama had a private consultation with the Republican and Democratic leaders known as the Gang of Eight, all of whom approved.
There is one other difference, i.e., Bin Laden was not the leader of a Country. He was the leader of a rogue terrorist organization that was self-admittedly responsible for 9/11. Suleimani was not okay by any stretch of the imagination but, he was essentially one of the leaders of a sovereign nation. If you want to change the rules, you had best be prepared for the other side playing by new rules.
People who defend Trump need to at least try to get their facts straight if they wish to have a scintilla of credibility. But, frankly, it doesn't seem to matter to them.
Congress, you should have impeached and removed Trump when you had the chance. Now you're going to have to follow him around with a dustpan and broom for the rest of the year and hope he doesn't create even more damage than the horrific deeds already done.
14
Trump is systematically destroying himself, as usual. He will succeed, but only if the Republican Senate wakes up from the partisan stupor they allowed Mitch McConnell to connive and cajole them into.
If they all stand up to Trump the demagogue, everybody on the planet wins. Mitt Romney showed them the light. Some are now following.
Too many remain on a dark, twisted and traitorous path. They claim to be God fearing christians, or, the like. They need to take their own advice: Ephesians 5: "The things which are done in secret are things that people are ashamed to even speak of; but anything illuminated turns into light."
I am not a 'true believer' but I do know that The Bible and similar works are a compendium of behavioral norms that are hard won lessons from the preceding 25,000 years of humanities transition into permanent dwellings, villages and towns.
3
These people were sent to DC to make these tough choices.
Abdicating their responsibility as members of House and Senate is lazy and unpatriotic.
But I'm spitting in the wind...
6
First of all, for those of you readers frustrated that the only news that's fit to print apparently thinks that the bill numbers for legislation don't matter - the bill passed today is actually S.J.Res. 68. So when you call your Senators today or tomorrow, you can actually tell the staffer the official information for the action you're calling about.
I'll be calling Richard Burr and Thom (with an h) Tillis to criticize once again their unconditional surrender of their awesome Article 1 powers, especially when it comes to war.
11
Nothing but beltway theater.
Caligula will just ignore it if he wants to do it.
It takes a 2/3 vote in both houses to over-ride a presidential veto, which I expect Trump to do just as he did with Bernie’s (and Mike Lee) Yemen resolution.
Good luck trying to find that many Republicans.
And liberals have no moral authority to stand on. After Obama bombed Libya into the stone age, slavery became rampant there:
"West African migrants are being bought and sold openly in modern-day slave markets in Libya."
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/10/libya-public-slave-auctions-un-migration
Yet, Liberals remained silent as Obama committed one atrocity after another.
They must have thought the Obama’s star spangled democracy bombs are designed by Raytheon to spread peace and justice and universal happiness, in an ethical and politically correct way, with due regard for diversity issues.
In Libya, Syria, Yemen, Sudan, Somalia
If the neocons, the CIA, Pentagon hawks or Israel or some other Iran opponent can engineer some sort of false flag incident, Congress will not stop Trump from starting war with Iran.
3
Liberals forget President Obama's Terror Tuesdays, where he went through a disposition list and decided whom to drone.
"Who would have thought it? I'm really good at killing people."
- Dear Leader Obama, on Terror Tuesday
1
What! Restrain President Trump?
Sounds like collusion or some kind of conspiracy.
I'll bet those Socialists are behind this. Let's investigate Hillary!
3
This Caesar must be stopped.
NOW!
Every day Trump and his enablers’ crimes against our system of government and rule of law, further destroys and destabilizes the public trust in every area of our public life. We can no longer afford to sit by and hope that our now vastly crippled governmental oversight and electoral system to bring an end to this tyranny.
This monster simply must be removed - and his cohorts with him. The day of reckoning must come immediately or we will not soon recover from the devastation this self-appointed king has wrought to every corner of the Republic that his diseased eye has fallen upon.
We are past the stage of metastasis. Democracy is on life support. The Trump cancer has eaten away at the marrow of our every democratic principle, every ethical standard devastated by his and his cronies’ willful wrecking balls.
This cannot be allowed to go on. Our voting systems are insecure and questionable, yet once more the Republican traitors have voted against their being secured, and their questionable integrity investigated and secured.
We simply cannot wait for the illusion of what’s left of our democracy’s checks to stop this disgraceful criminal coup d’état to go on leveling our public life, and the safety and dignity of our people.
This petty, vulgar, mentally deranged, and whimsical tyrant’s devastation of our country must be stopped by any means possible. Drastic times call for drastic measures. Every law has been thwarted. End this!
4
In Bipartisan Bid to Restrain Trump, Senate Passes Iran War Powers Resolution
Better (and truer) headline:
In Feeble Bid to Restrain Trump, Senate Passes Toothless Iran War Powers Resolution
3
They had their chance. They blew it. They didn't even bother to see any evidence or hear from any witnesses. They cannot go back, and it's just going to get worse. The GOP, with the help of Fox News Propaganda, Inc., has sunk the knife in America. We've entered a bottomless black hole in civility, order, and law, and the worry is that the farther this goes, the sliver of hope that there is going to be a civil way back to the norms we once had, recedes. I'm torn between the thought of advocating and pushing to save what we have, and letting it all go to hell so America 2.0 can rise from the ashes like a Phoenix. But America 2.0 only happens if we all actually learn from this, and the GOP doesn't seem to be learning anything. We need a new constitutional convention when this is all done...Trump has shown how flawed our current constitution is.
2
Dear 8 republicans: you are too little and too late. You should be holding your heads in shame!
4
A previous Congress in 1973 gave the president power to take military action, called the War Powers Resolution. In that case Congress overrode Richard Nixon's veto to restrict his right to wage war. Whether Congress had the right to restrict the commander in chief in this way is debatable.
Barack Obama flagrantly violated the War Powers Resolution in Libya, and arguably in other cases as well. Donald Trump followed its terms with regard to Iran. That Congress wants to further restrict the power of the president in the specific case of Iran seems unlikely to overcome a court challenge, even if it overcame a veto.
Congress has the power to declare war, but the president has the power to wage war. The president needs to be able to take military action short of war without waiting for open debate and congressional lawmaking. It's just not practical to do that. The War Powers Resolution recognizes that. Best to leave it alone, rather than make it more strict and limiting.
1
@John Smithson assassinating a general officer of the army of a sovereign power is an act of war. Article 1 of the Constitution gives the authority to declare war to the Congress. Article 1 of the Constitution also gives the authority to appropriate money to the Congress.
In summary, the President is not Caesar. He cannot commit acts of war just because he thinks it's a good idea. If he could, we may as well dissolve the Congress.
5
Kevin Brock, you are focusing on words rather than realities. Killing Qassim Soleimani was a drone strike like hundreds carried out by the Obama administration. Two drones were launched from Qatar and controlled from Nevada. The attack killed 7 people, and was over minutes after it began. No further attacks are planned. We are not at war with Iran.
We are not at war with any country. The last time Congress declared war was December 7, 1941 when we declared war against Japan. The wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and again Iraq, were all undeclared. If Congress believes it has the power to declare war and the president can't go to war without that, it sure hasn't shown it.
No president will ever accept the notion that he or she is not allowed to commit an act of war unless Congress had first declared war. No one with any sense would either.
1
Mr Trump was correct in viewing this legislation as a personal affront. He has already shown himself to be the proverbial loose cannon Commander-in-Chief even if he has been restrained in his actual use of the military to begin new conflicts. Nevertheless the way he makes impulsive decisions without weighing all the intelligence does make us worry about how he might behave if some world leader insulted his very fragile ego. Even if Congressional majorities are not sufficient to prevent a presidential veto, Trump has gotten the point, at least for the present..
4
The “bipartisan bid to restrain Trump” ship has sailed, along with whatever credibility the senate GOP had. Impeachment was the chance to do the right thing for the nation. The GOP failed.
55
@Maple Surple I agree--it was difficult to choke down "55/45" as anything more than a staged Republican show to offset the bad breath of their acquittal votes.
2
If the Senate can pass a bipartisan resolution as a symbolic "rebuke" of Trump's actions vis a vis Iran, why not add some riders to the resolution also "rebuking" Trump for pressuring foreign leaders to interfere in US elections, for interfering with cases being handled by the Justice Department and for generally acting in a manner that is inappropriate for the President of the United States?
12
Now they want to restrain him? The Senate created this situation and sold their soles. The president will do whatever he wants since he knows that Congress will not stand up to him. This is not a democracy. There are not equal powers among the branches of government when the legislative branch fails to do its job. These are scary times and getting scarier.
11
@Ilana Drummond
Sold their soles...to let the President walk all over them.
1
As much as I appreciate Sen. Kane's puny nod to demagoguery, the majority of congress will have to bow to the president's veto power. On the flip side, Republicans have wasted too much of their credibility kissing the president's ring. Whether Trump wins or looses in the fall, the aging GOP will remain permanently divided, if not politically nullified in this nation's future considering the mathematics of population change and evolution.
5
@Doug There are very few Republicans left.
Trumpsters, yes; Republicans, not any more.
Senator Graham said it succinctly. This president will not abide by any limits placed on him by Congress because he simply does not believe they have that authority. With every fiber of his being he knows that Article 2 gives him unlimited power, and he has an entire echo chamber that reminds him of it every minute of every day. And he can, really. The only real question isn’t will he cross a line that even the GOP can’t stomach, how far will he go?
9
Doesn't matter. Trump can get away with anything he chooses. The Republican senate proved this when they chose to ignore all the evidence of the crimes he's already committed. It's really in the hands of the military at this point. We all know how spiteful he gets when he's told "no". Trump will defy congress. The military will have to be the ones to say "no", but they don't play by the same rules as the government and will probably fire indiscriminately like the weapon they are. Republicans wanted a king, well here he is.
8
Iran’s going to like the fact that Trump now has one hand tied behind his back. It’s probably still not going to be a fair one however.
@John Doe
So, is that a firm 'Yes' & .No'?
Plausible scenario: Trump vetoes the legislation but, remaining untethered, blunders into a clearly ego-driven and catastrophic conflict. We're all hurt.
If it's painful enough, Republicans might be driven to recognize their delusional state ("What were we thinking?") and rejoin Democrats in reasoned government.
Doesn't matter, Trump will do what he wants and dare Congress to impeach him, again.
2
Bipartisan? What a joke. Trump will veto and there will be no override. If those Republicans really wanted to restrain Trump they could have done so during his trial first by voting in favor of witnesses and then by voting guilty.
5
I see the Hand-Wringer of the Senate, Susan Collins, in the picture. Why is this war powers legislation necessary? Has Donald learned his lesson yet? Ellie Wiesel coined the term “the banality of evil.” Susan’s our poster child for that banality along with the Our Gang cast of characters, Alexander, Murkowski, McSally, ad nauseam. Only Romney escaped the temptations of Trump-land and now we lavish praise on Mitt for doing what our parents always said was minimally expected of us. To be honest.
Trump is the worm in their wooden-hulled Republican world. They own him just like he owns them. Larry David is prophetical. He has a bit wearing a MAGA hat to serve as a people repellent. We are so repelled that by 2050 a Republican will be as rare as a Whig is today.
7
The war powers resolution will annoy Trump but not stop him. Trump, with Republican complicity, got away with his illegal and unconstitutional Ukraine deal-making and assassination of Suleiman. The House Democratic majority and handful of Republican Senators that object are impotent. Democrats, the media, and most Americans don’t want to admit it, but Trump’s control of the Republican Party and their disregard for the Constitution gives him effective one-man rule over U.S. foreign policy.
In a moment of frustration, Schiff went hyperbolic and called Trump a “dictator.” He’s not a dictator yet, but his purge of Vindman and protection of Stone show he’s on that road. Defending the Constitution is no longer about legal procedures like impeachment or resolutions but a struggle for power, and Americans who uphold the rule of law need to come up with new solutions.
3
The Senate's attempt to "rein in" Trump's ability to wage war was, or should have been, symbolic simply because Trump does not have the "absolute right" to declare or wage war without the consent of the Congress. Even George W. Bush had to seek Congressional approval before beginning his foolish war in Iraq. While Trump may think he can veto this piece of legislation it does stand as an impediment nevertheless. Can't imagine the Generals and Admirals whom he has already disrespected in many ways going to war with any country on Trump's order alone.
3
I fully expect all the GOP senators who didn't vote to have Trump seek congressional authorization first before initiating war with Iran to submit a list of their own child or another close relative who would be required to serve immediately in that war.
Never mind... I was momentarily in another universe.
1
some republicans crossed over, I give credit to Romney for showing THEM how to actually cross over and thrive.
1
A big thank you to the eight Republicans who had the courage to support this measure. We'll need more, to override General Bone Spur's veto.
1
This is toothless. The Republican Senators had their chance to restrain this President once and for all and they blew it.
4
This is a nice gesture, but ultimately an empty one. When we have a renegade president who routinely defies laws, scorns norms and defiles his oath, he ends up doing, as proclaimed repeatedly and bombastically, "anything I want."
And who will stop him? ("What are you going to do, impeach me?") Overriding a veto requires the same vote as removal from office: a two-thirds supermajority. After watching that farcical "trial" in the Senate, does anyone really think that's possible for as long as this horrifyingly loose cannon remains, as hard as it is to say, "commander in chief"?
Whether the tally of "bipartisan" votes be 55 or some other figure, the magic number is still 67, and Trumpublican gutlessness puts that in the realm of fantasy. (Go ahead, make a list of 19 GOP senators -- in addition to Romney -- who put country over party.)
What happened Thursday amounts to a slap on the wrist. And when the bully at the beach keeps kicking sand in the face of 97-pound weaklings, that's hardly a deterrent.
As it stands now, Congress has essentially been emasculated. We can only hope that Election 2020 will bring a repudiation of Trumpian cultism so massive that the government can cobble together some semblance of sanity and proceed effectively with the business of the American people.
The chances of that happening, however, are ... well ... you know. Meanwhile, what we advertise as democracy is looking more and more like despotism.
4
When you see Trump’s intellect on display, in his tweets, and most recently at the Prayer breakfast and later in the East Room, it scares me to death that the man who “fell in love” with Kim Jong-un has more unilateral ability to start a war. Iran’s retaliation after the Soleimani assassination was far worse than Trump admits. 109 soldiers suffered traumatic brain injury, with 76 returned to duty. What did Trump say?.... “I heard that they had headaches and a couple of other things”. Where do you think we’d be right now if, say, 50 soldiers had died? .....war!.....with Iranian backed hit squads pursuing American assets far and wide.
1
We actually need a permanent bipartisan war act where NO President will EVER be able to do ANY type of act of war however small without the approval of the House and Senate. Period!
As it is, anytime you have a President who does as they please you create a precedent that sends a message to future Presidents that they can do as they please.
30
@Beth Grant-DeRoos
I thought that "permanent act" was the constitution that states that congress needs to declare war rather than a unilateral decision by the executive.
1
We need to seriously consider that our nation has reached a crossroads. Either we continue to go down the path of allowing our leaders to ignore the basic values established by the Constitution or we seek a Constitutional amendment to insure that a president and legislators can be directly recalled by the People for dereliction of their Constitutional duties to act as a check on the abuse and concentration of power. We have witnessed our Legislative branch refusing to perform the solemn job of impeachment and refusing to standup to a self-appointed monarchial president for purely political reasons, inconsistent with every tenet of the Constitution. He has control of the Supreme Court to insure his grip on power, and expressed confidence that his federal court appointees will back him, threatening them if they don't.
We need an additional check on our representatives when they do not take their constitutionally-mandated responsibilities seriously to Preserve, Protect, and Defend the Constitution. I see little evidence of this. It is daily being trod underfoot. We have a man in the White House who intimidates the very representatives meant to serve the People, and corrupts justice to serve his own purposes.
Haven't we been affronted long enough? Recall-power with a popular vote for Constitutional abuses would sober our representatives that once in power, they are not beyond the pale of accountability and justice.
16
Graham says that if this was passed, Trump (or any president) wouldn't abide by it. He also refuses to hold the president accountable. So Lindsay Graham is not going to pass laws, or exercise oversight. Add onto this their failure to actually vet the presidents appointees, and I wonder what exactly he sees the role of the Senate as?
22
@Ryan Its time for Mr. Graham to retire to Mira Lago.
5
@Ryan
Maybe it is time to stop reading something into it. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and sometimes Lindsey Graham is really the zombie we see on the screen.
2
“The Senate voted on Thursday to require President Trump seek congressional authorization before taking further military action against Iran.”
This is absolutely unnecessary resolution.
Only the Congress has authority to declare the war.
There is no need to be repetitive.
Any law authorizing the president to attack any foreign country is unconstitutional.
There is such a law enacted in the aftershock of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
That law was used to launch the longest wars in the US history - the bloody conflicts in Afghanistan and Iraq.
It’s shocking this law hasn’t been revoked.
No tiny Cabinet should be allowed to launch the foreign wars. There is no doubt that 535 elected officials are smarter, more balanced and more capable to fully understand the scope of problem that the hand-picked members loyal to incumbent president.
The Authorization for Use of Military Force became the law on September 18, 2001, authorizing the use of military against those responsible for the 9/11 attacks.
It is obvious that neither the Afghan people nor the Iraqis participated in orchestrating, preparing, financing or perpetrating the 9/11 attacks, meaning the War Authorization was misused to launch the wrong, harmful and unnecessary wars. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia was the ideological, organizational and financial cradle of the Al Qaeda.
The Congress should revoke this unconstitutional law.
5
@Kenan Your whole premise is that this was an act of war and it can easily be defended that it was not or that it was. The laws give extreme latitude on this for a President to act.
An October Surprise featuring Iran may well be Trump's backup plan, if the planned resolution of the artificial trade 'war' with China doesn't work to bolster the economy for November.
3
Once Trump is out of office, this year or in 5, maybe Washington can get down to filling all the holes in our laws and the Constitution that Trump has exposed as serious, ongoing threats to the successful survival of the American republic. That will never get done while Trump is President, because much of the problem lives in how much power a President has that is effectively unchecked by statute, and the personality cult of Trump won't allow that to be challenged while he wields that power.
The only thing that might make this different is if the Democrats took veto-proof control of Congress in November, but I don't see that happening.
3
@Barry Williams
If there is one good thing Trump has done for us is exposed just how flimsy the "gentlemen agreements" conventions and norms are that underpin governing in this country. We need to have real laws, with real teeth to ensure that we are indeed a nation of laws. A future president who ignores legislative oversight and tell members of the executive to ignore subpoenas should be liable to much more than public baying.
1
As usual Trump is wrong and can't even read the simplest of langauage.
"require Trump to seek congressional authorization BEFORE TAKING FURTHER MILITARY ACTION AGAINST IRAN.
What does what we are now doing or not doing in Iran have to do with anything?
How long are we going to put up with someone that doesn't have a clue what he is doing, as president and got us and the whole world close to another all out war.
In fact were war to break out, do we really want Trump who is not capable with working with anyone, as President?
10
Unless or until someone removes Trump from office — physically and legally — he will largely do as he pleases, legally or illegally. Who’s really going to stop him from striking Iran...or Montreal, for that matter. So much of the active military is recruited from Trump-supporting areas there’d be no trouble with them. And the top commanders are always up for shooting something.
We have the most unstable monster in the Oval Office in our history.
7
Cool.
But it's all for show.
The moment Iran sneezes our way, any one getting on the way will be labeled as siding with the enemy.
Since Politicos are only interested in re-election, being labeled as siding with the enemy is a huge tool to get them to loose votes. Any Politico interested on replacing any of the current crop will run with that line all the way to the bank.
Because Politicos only think of their own skin, none of them will ever say no when Trump or any president says 'we're bombing right now'.
Thus it's for show, but has no actual value.
Airmen, soldiers, sailors and Marines who, when given an order that is clearly wrong and which violates international codes of war, have the responsibility to report said order and the right to not follow such order. This is in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. The commander-in-chief is bound by this legal mandate, too. As for ethics, Mr. Trump has none.
5
Please bring back the original photo, the one with Susan Collins.
I've got my darts now.
3
I am not sure where to write this - my sentiments on Trump coverage, but here goes: For just one day, yes, one full day, 24 hours, can we PLEASE have NO TRUMP NEWS. I know I am not alone in this feeling. Ever since he was elected President, the news media has reported his tweets, his outrageous pronouncements, and full coverage of his raping of the American way of life, as we knew it. I hope someone reads this. Thank you for letting me vent.
12
Of course he’ll veto it...Iran is part of the reelection strategy...worked great for Bush...
2
I don’t read anything anymore with trump’s name attached to it or with his read head visible. Why set myself up for a bad mood?
2
The decision to kill Suleimani was the right decision. I applaud Trump for his bravery and I question the wisdom of the Democratic candidates who criticized it. No other action has made America safer.
Obama assassinated bin Laden and al-Awlaki neither of whom represented an imminent threat. There is no "evidence" the assassination of either made America safer. Yet the Republicans supported these actions. al-Awlaki was an American citizen who only expressed his opinion. Politics ends at our nation's shores governed Republican responses.
The Iranian response was weak inept and demonstrated their government's mendacity. Far from unifying Iran, the Suleimani strike demonstrated the Iranian people want this tyranny gone. Nothing could have made America safer.
The Democratic responses were at best foolish and at worst treacherous. Buttigieg's response saying there is no evidence it made America safer is bald-face stupidity; what evidence is even possible? Biden said only diplomacy is valid. I'm sorry did Obama every consider using force and of what value is diplomacy without the threat of force?
Warren questioning the timing to divert from impeachment was disgusting. They attacked our embassy and killed an American contractor. And Bernie saying it's a war crime is borderline treason. No Republican ever criticized Obama to the extent he should have been tried by the Hague.
Trump does not need his war powers restrained. The Democrats need a lesson in patriotism.
1
Republicans are fools to think they can rein in thee most corrupt administration in America history. He played them like an old piano.
5
Hello world! We are in a bad spot right now and need your help in helping us right our foundering ship. Even our dogs are in a foul mood! We are literally terrified of this man. Sending out an SOS, Sending out an SOS, Sending out an SOS...
1
Important for people to also see this.
Why You May Never Learn the Truth About ICE
The National Archives is letting millions of documents, including many related to immigrants’ rights, be destroyed or deleted. By Matthew Connelly
Dr. Connelly is a professor of history at Columbia.
Feb. 4, 2020
The abuse of immigrants at the border is being purged from the archives. Human rights abuses being erased.
ICE Detainee Records Schedule Nears Completion
Press Release ·
Friday, June 21, 2019 - Washington, DC
Immigration and Customs Enforcement schedule will include additional permanent items
https://www.archives.gov/press/press-releases-2
Contact your congressman and tell them to protect this information. Trumps administration must not be allowed to hide their human rights violations.
2
I have 2 questions for the Republican Senators who voted against Trump on this bill:
1) Why did sanity suddenly invade your brain?
2) Why didn't this happen months, if not years ago?
3
Our Founding Fathers crafted a Constitution that provided for a very powerful President. Not surprising - when you realize that the only national leader they had ever seen, was George Washington - a man was reputed to have never told a lie.
Even the true geniuses among them, like Benjamin Franklin or Alexander Hamilton, were powerless to search into the future, to the year 2016...
1
This is a brick short and a day late.
.
The man pardons war criminals.
He obstructs investigations by refusing to submit to the investigatory powers of a prosecutor and of House committees.
He makes baseless claims of privilege and immunity.
He intimidates witnesses by firing anyone who stands up for the difference between right and wrong.
He interferes in sentencing of convicted criminals.
.
And only eight Republican Senators vote against?
.
A day late and a brick short.
.
Gosh, he'll really learn his lesson now ...
27
This could have been a good bill if it did not take affect until the next inauguration. Now it is a political talking point, properly done it would have been good legislation.
7
If this measure is vetoed a little backbone and spine may required to defeat it.
9
@WWoodJD Backbone and spine is non-existent with the current gaggle of those in the GOP who have submitted their values, morals and ethics to Trump in the House and Senate.
3
Enough of these "symbolic" moves - we need to actually check the power of the different branches of government. Susan Collins voting against party lines in this vote does not achieve anything. Unless the president is blocked from doing something he wants, he will not be bothered, even.
17
Leo, the problem is that a previous Congress in 1973 gave the president power to take military action, called the War Powers Resolution. In that case Congress overrode Richard Nixon's veto to restrict his right to wage war. Whether Congress had the right to restrict the commander in chief in this way is debatable.
Barack Obama flagrantly violated the War Powers Resolution in Libya, and arguably in other cases as well. Donald Trump followed its terms with regard to Iran. That Congress wants to further restrict the power of the president in the specific case of Iran seems unlikely to overcome a court challenge, even if it overcame a veto.
Congress has the power to declare war, but the president has the power to wage war. Military action short of war should not be done only after open debate and congressional lawmaking. It's just not practical to do that.
1
They should also pass a resolution against coronavirus. Probably more effective than this one.
11
@Jin
While they are at it they can repeal the law of gravity. It should make the space program a lot easier.
3
Nobody except Trump and his military/industrial coalition wants war with Iran. We need to tell our Senators to back up this resolution and stop Trump's push to attack Iran.
11
@dutchiris President Peace Prize ordered more drone strikes than any other by a literal order of magnitude, while Trump's has demonstrably been the most peaceful presidency in modern history.
Come on; show me all this war mongering he's done? All these conflicts he's started that weren't inherited from President Peace Prize? Show me how he's more in bed with the military industrial complex than Presiden Peace Prize?
You can't, because it's not true.
1
@dutchiris
The last thing we need is another forever war in the ME. The military-industrial complex relies on continuing wars to continue with their large share of the Federal Budget. I was impressed with Gates when he stated in his Congressional appearance that the military was not responsible for all weapons requests made by Congress; in fact, some weapons systems were neither needed, nor used. Empty military bases in each Congressional District fall under this category, requiring funding for 'protection'. In the meantime, there are budgetary restrictions put forward on school lunch programs which might feed some kids who do not qualify for free lunches. How about we make a basic school lunch free for all kids, eliminating who 'qualifies'. The GOP often drags us into the weeds with pointless, even mean discussions. If we can afford to spread our military all over the world, we can afford to feed our kids; this might even include some military kids.
1
@dutchiris
Amazing.
There is no evidence whatsoever that Trump wants war with Iran.
Why some people actually believe he does is odd.
1
Great. Now what if Trump disregards it and orders a strike or military action ? He learned that he can get away with anything.
13
Now, if only the Senate could pass a mostly symbolic rebuke of the president for interfering with the sentencing of his cronies, for firing career professionals who dare to tell truths disagreeable to our prez, and to generally stop acting like a mob boss. Better yet, a resolution with teeth passed by a veto-proof majority of Senators.
15
Fuggedaboutit! The Republicans know they will sustain a veto. And Trump will get away with whatever. We will remember in November.
11
Those with TDS still today do not understand why the president was elected. He has a clear political mandate that he has implemented. Three main promises where bring back manufacturing jobs from the third world like China, Mexico and others, enforce US border laws and stop endless wars in the Middle East but he has also stopped the craven and dangerous appeasement of dangerous expansionist dictators like the CCP-China in the Asia-Pacific and Iran in the Middle East. Trump's killing of the Iranian general was a measured pushback on a terrorist state that plans to try to take over the Middle East as hegemony. It did not cause war but also put a price on Iranian expansionist policy.
3
Massive loss of the popular vote is not a clear political mandate.
3
@Silence
People (bots?) like this are why we can't have nice things, like a functioning democracy or sustainable economy.
@Eric If the Democrats want Trump out of office, the only way that will be accomplished is by presenting a candidate that doesn’t cater to the far left. I voted Democrat my entire life until this last presidential election. MANY southern democrats feel the Democrat party abandoned us & no longer represent our beliefs or interests to ANY degree. We got tired of far left liberal policies being shoved down our throats & our children’s throats so we defected. Our votes weren’t FOR Trump, they were AGAINST the ultra liberal Democrat party that has taken over & abandoned us. Present us with a reasonable candidate, we will vote Democrat again. That’s probably not what you want to hear but sometimes a compromise has to be made & I sincerely believe that’s the only way democrats can win in November. With the candidates I’ve seen so far, it looks like I’ll be voting for who, I have decided, is the lesser of two evils AGAIN.
So, Mike Lee and Rand Paul "stood up" against the schoolyard bully. This time. How come they couldn't have done so during the impeachment? And, who were the other "courageous" six? Was this a secret ballot with Lee and Paul being the only two willing to go public?
Eight Republican Senators. Nowhere near enough to salvage the reputation of their party.
12
Glen, the version of the article I'm looking at now names the other six: Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Todd Young of Indiana.
This vote on war powers has nothing to do with the impeachment vote. Different issue entirely.
1
The fact that we need a resolution to state what is already in the Constitution, and that most republicans will not support it, demonstrates how far we have fallen, and how close to a dictatorship we are.
39
The Dems have no teeth. They continuously fumble any attempt to restrain Trump. The only Republicans who are willing to speak out are those who are leaving office or retiring.
When will this nightmare end?
5
@DJM
When we take to the streets to fight for the end of minority rule.
The wanton criminality of the American state is making even some in power nervous, uneasy.
2
Wish the story were more informative. Who were the eight republican senators that voted for the resolution?
4
It is amazing how many people are so willing to ignore or even flout the Constitution for their own personal agenda. And that includes the citizenry.
2
Great. Lots of stuff passes in the Senate only to fall into the black hole that is the House of Reps. This country needs a serious Blue Tsunami to right so many wrongs.
4
@Yogasong Sorry but you have this wrong. The House will pass this as soon as they get it. The Senate is the body that ignores whatever the House passes.
Look at McConnel's desk, I suspect it's littered with House bills he will not consider.
4
@Yogasong
You've got it quite backwards, the House has passed some 300 bills that languish in the Senate at the desk of majority leader and self-proclaimed grim reaper mitch mcconnell.
3
@Yogasong apologies to one and all. I hastily typed and I got things backwards. Congress comes first and then the senate. So, miraculously, this now goes to the WH to undoubtedly be vetoed and die, unless of course, 2/3 each of the house and senate vote to override. Historically, fewer than 10% of vetoes have been overridden so I’m guessing this very sensible bill will unfortunately die.
3
Too little, too late. Trump now fully owns the Republican Senators (except Romney). No matter what Trump does they roll over on their backs and submit.
I view the Senate with a mixture of disappointment and disgust watching their fearful, weak and submissive behavior towards this president. Trump will do whatever he wants because the Senate is no longer a coequal branch of the government.
3
Do you think these Republicans know deep in their conscience how despicable they really are and that history will not be kind to them?
5
History is written by the victors. Whatever the spoils. They have shown themselves immune to any regard for the great men and women of our own history and spat in the faces of our founding fathers sacred idea of creating a government for the people and by the people.
They don’t give a good damn about history.
1
Too little, too late for the Fab Four (Collins, Murkowski, Lee, Alexander). The voters are waiting for y'all.
12
Aww, hey, look at Mike Lee getting a taste of the Trump treatment! He doesn't like it!
Bitter pill when it's being shoved down your own throat, huh?
4
Too little waaaaay too late
4
Another cheesy photo op, another out-of-state donation to Gideon. Enjoy your Senatorial retirement Ms. Collins.
2
Worst. Congress. Ever.
7
More hand wringing by a toothless congress.
7
Good move Senate. And to readers who say "symbolic," you are wrong. This awful brick wall of Republican support for Trump no matter what is unlikely to come down with one big blow. Rather, brick by brick we are going to reach the centrist Republican voters (the few who will swing a red or purple state or two). Romney and these Senators are showing that his support is not fool proof and the Democratic nominee will exploit all of these points. Patience will win this and get him out of office, not aggression.
78
@MTHouston yes symbolic. If sincere it would have enough votes to block The Trump veto.
7
Let's hope.
1
@MTHouston uh-huh. These people have had many opportunities to stop Trump and have passed every time. They only go against him when they’re certain it won’t stop him.
6
Trump believes he can do anything he wishes, despite Congress's action to prevent actions..in this case, attacking Iran.
But, what if he just does it anyway and orders strikes on Iran?
What could Congress do? Impeach him? This is what goes on in this man's criminal like mind. Trump says to himself..what can they do to me..I will just Twitter them to death.
Ladies and gentlemen..we have a dictator of sorts in the White House and a danger to world peace.
71
@RH
Isn't it necessary for Congress to declare war? If not, then any President can declare war on any country, imminent threat or not? Would a majority of Americans support a declaration of war against Iran? Syria? We have a history of destructive actions in the ME; e.g. the take down of a popular elected leader in Iran, Mossadegh, replaced with a corrupt sergeant in the military who claimed to have royal forbears. He fled the country after causing a revolution. Trump, the draft dodger, 5 times bankrupt, appointed by the Electoral College after losing the popular vote, is a Commander in Chief who pardoned an officer who was reported by his Seal cohort, because he murdered an old man and young children on their way to school. His name was Gallagher; Trump invited this war criminal to the WH. Trump upended a decision made under military guidelines. It is difficult to see Trump ranting nonsense, bragging about himself at staged rallies, using AF One and the Secret Service for weekly golf trips to Mar-a-Lago, and ridiculed behind his back at world leadership events. His taste in furnishings is garish; the WH is classic and well furnished with genuine antiques. Trump called the WH a 'dump'. He has dragged us down to that, our historic President's home considered a 'dump' by a man who lives on hamberders.
Trump's hands tied would be a decent step in the direction of "bound and gagged and locked in a closet", which is where we need to be with this dangerous madman.
What's it going to take, Republicans? What is it going to take?
32
Nothing is going to stop King Trump. People who think November will save them need to wake up. Kings do not resign their power. He will not leave the WH no matter what. Trumpists have betrayed America. It's okat tho, the world can now be guided by the Russian and China super powers.
13
I think it's sweet how Trump lets Susan Collins pose for photo ops involving pointless gestures.
15
Reign in Trump with a Senate resolution? Sounds like a skit from Monty Python with Terry Jones (RIP) playing Susan Collins as she explains that the resolution has taught Trump a lesson.
15
The proposed law is not much good if it only affects Trump. It should also apply to whatever Democrat succeeds him as President. Why would you believe that they should not be limited?
1
Talk about shutting the barn doors
12
We keep reading these articles in Europe as well, we keep wondering, what ever happened to the USA?
your grandparents stormed the beaches of Normandy, to free us from German occupation, we have been very gratefull for that for a long time, the gratefullness is over, I taste a bitter anti-America sentiment in The Netherlands, we feel like the guide country no longer is that, it has fallen prey to powerhungry people who put their very conservative views above all, as long as enough trump judges get votes in, democracy is a 2nd thought.....
I am very much aware a minority of Americans support this soon to be dictatorship, but it is a very big minority and its scares me BIG time!
47
@Chris We keep asking ourselves the same. We're stunned that Christians and Racists have formed a pact to keep rich white men in power. Sickening, really.
Keep your chin up, though. There are a bunch of us who are fighting back against this tyrant. I'd expect a civil war if he wins another 4 years in office.
8
@Chris
No offense, but I suspect the “bitter taste” would be gone the moment that Russia said “Boo!”...
2
@Marcus Aurelius
Doubtful. Even more doubtful, that Trump would actually act against Russia in support of NATO allies.
Europeans have long memories, unlike Americans.
1
Congress has forgotten they represent one-third the power of this government. When we hear them talk, now, as to how they can't manage 45, we think "well, you gave him free rein for three years". We understand how you want to keep the power, but it is to the detriment of this democracy. You abdicated your oath. In doing that, you gave 45 to us, and we do not want him. Uncle Sam does not want him. A reality celebrity in a rumpled suit, phony hair, face makeup, with a brain full of snide remarks. This is what you support? This is what Bilious Bill Barr, supposedly the AG for this country, the personal prop for 45, is now working?
We do not appreciate what you have done. You are dust and sand and ash. A suit and hairdo cannot hide that.
7
Symbolic rebukes is all the Senate has got. Sad.
10
These are Congressional baby steps. Trump has proven himself, time and time again, as being impulsive, chaotic and irrational. Trump is being abetted, for reasons known only to themselves, by Mitch McConnell and the other white supremacists in the Senate and Mark Meadows and the rest of the Tea Party / Freedom Caucus members of the GOP in the House. Why do they condone Trump's madness & his propensity to destabilize the world?
4
I weep incessantly. I continue to wonder what be the sentiments of the close kinfolk of Senators. Are they keeping well out of the public eye of late. I would, from embarrassment.
8
The GOP created their Golem and there is nothing they can do to stop him from running amok.
15
I can't wait to see Sen.Collins lose along with a lot of other republicans in the upcoming election along with their Emperor Trump.
27
No we wouldn't want to "tie the hands" of an unhinged megalomaniac toddler with the nuclear codes. A ''symbolic" rebuke will be totally ignore by this madman.
13
so what. trump has learned the collins lesson - he really can now do whatever he wants for he owns the republican party after they acquitted him. this vote is useless for comrade trump will veto it. he is already on his revenge tour, or have you not noticed.
5
A few Republicans cautiously dipping their toes into Trumps' lake of fire. They knew their votes would not prevail but might cast some light on just exactly how far Trump has gone into total vengefulness. It is like poking a helmet on a stick just above the lip of the trench to see if it will draw fire from the crazed enemy. Will he turn on them and call them disloyal traitors? Horrible? Disgusting? Other Republicans of less courage cringing are cringing down below, hanging back, to see what happens to these sacrificial lambs.
1
Didn’t Tim Kaine run on the same ticket as someone who promised to “totally obliterate” Iran even if it didn’t attack the US? Why yes, yes he did.
6
Looks like more showboating in Congress and no real courage.
I guess they don't care about the 100 plus American military troops who have traumatic brain injuries because of Iran's attack on our military base. Where are the patriots that want to protect our military from a tin-pot dictator?
14
@Jacquie Lonely are the Brave. Great movie, but no current live person could play the title role. Republican senators, with one lonely exception, are cowards. All of them.
2
Republican crossovers actually think *this* resolution to restrain a President in foreign policy is *more* urgent than his domestic abuse of power and assault on our Constitution? Am I reading The Onion or the New York Times?
5
Senate Republicans now is your opportunity to educate your president about checks and balances and that we live in a democracy, not a dictatorship.
4
Sorry, GOP, that ship has sailed.
You rigged the ship, launched it and gave it a God Speed.
I will never forgive you, and I vote.
Remember in November.
20
@JW
Your vote won't matter. This will end in the streets, or not at all.
2
The impotence of this legislative branch is depressing.
5
The Republican party is already an embarrassment.
4
Let’s see if the spineless Senate will override his veto
I doubt it
Wimps
5
@Franco
Don't bemoan innaction from the Senate. They're just doing what their voters want. We can't keep pretending Republican voters are decent people, that's irrelevant. They are enabling the destruction of the country - politically, economically, and socially. What are we going to do about it?
3
Think of all those republicans that joined the party for their various reasons and have to sit idly by and watch one man and his accomplices destroy it. Something that is like a religion to them and they have to watch it be destroyed. Vindman and his twin brother (who did not testify) are both kicked to the curb after all of their years of service and Marie Y as well. They ample soul in shave is doing nothing but creating more enemies those people have family and friends and they have family and friends. So many will either vote Democrat or not vote at all. Why the GOP is on this path of destruction is beyond me?? They seem to think that there's going to be some light at the end of the tunnel. But we have seen so many times the likes of Hitler McCarthy and even Rome rose but they all fell. Every. Single. Day. DonCon is testing his boundaries, trying to gain more and more power and one day he will do what they all do, that one last thing that will lead to his ultimate downfall. Only he will not go down, it'll be his accomplices. He will be back in luxury at Maralaimo. The rest of us made to pay the ultimate price. If only America was outraged enough to stop him.
We already have a law in place where Congress is supposed to make that decision. But they have given that power to their Lord and savior in the White House, so it begs the question why are they even there? Vote Blue. Let's get back to work.
I am a democrat and I am tired of my democrat leaders doing stupid things.
Why do we take actions that cannot win?
Every time we do that we just make President Trump stronger.
3
@Paul Schejtman
I'm sure the Founding Fathers heard a lot of that, too.
1
@Paul Schejtman
The alternative is doing nothing at all, which means he will grow stronger by default.
1
NYT Please Advise: Given...
...the perilous trajectories of our country and planet,
…the criminal acts committed by Trump,
...the impeachment of Trump in the House…
...the sham trial of Trump in the Senate,
…and Trump’s new level of lawlessness…
...at what point does the NYT take the lead, as one of the nation’s most respected news organizations, and call for Trump’s resignation (without the benefit of a Pence pardon)?
Thank you.
+++++++++++++++
FYI: A bit of history from Wikipedia:
Impeachment Process Against Richard Nixon
On November 4, 1973, Senator Edward Brooke became the first congressional Republican to publicly urge President Nixon to resign. That same week, several newspapers, including The Atlanta Journal, The Denver Post, The Detroit News and The New York Times, published editorials also urging him to resign. Time magazine, in the first editorial in 50 years of publication, did so as well, declaring that the president "has irredeemably lost his moral authority" to govern effectively, and that Nixon "and the nation have passed a tragic point of no return."
1
Voting yes were Republicans Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Jerry Moran of Kansas, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Todd Young of Indiana, Mike Lee of Utah, Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. I wish the names were in the article. And I hope I never hear another lazy media source call Rob Portman of Ohio "serious," "thoughtful" or "moderate."
26
@Dave Scott: A list of names would have been an important media step. The overwhelming amount of physical labor could have been minimized by setting forth GOP pro-sayers seeking to be honorable and "all the rest" of GOP nay-sayers.
2
@MAX L SPENCER
The list of names was in the article.
1
Why doesn't the article list or have a link to the vote so we can see for vs. against?
20
@chair
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.
1
@chair Yes! In this day and age of the information revolution, it's still amazingly hard to quickly find roll calls of Senate and House votes.
2
I guess this is the token bone Republicans threw to the Democrats for that impeachment fiasco.
6
@Covfefe It's a demonstration that while the Democrats may be a partisan monolith, the Republicans are individuals with the autonomy and ability to sometimes cross the isle.
The downward spiral for Lindsey Graham that began with the death of John McCain continues.
38
Oh puh-lease. They created and unleashed their Trumpenstein monster, now they want to control it?
17
"If my hands were tied, Iran would have a field day."
Why...Iran might even feel empowered to launch a missile strike resulting in more than one hundred traumatic brain injuries among our brave troops?
https://www.npr.org/2020/02/11/804785515/109-u-s-troops-suffered-brain-injuries-in-iran-strike-pentagon-says
7
Republicans: DO MORE!!! STAND UP, SAY SOMETHING! Your president is out of control!!!
62
So where was congress when Obama decided to take out Muammar Gaddafi?
4
Any symbolic waste of energy and money. Until they can override a veto this is stupid stuff
3
Hi guys, you had your chance to restrain Trump and you blew it. You are the worst Senators of all time. Thanks.
86
I'm sure the ayatollahs must be happy to hear that they are free to do whatever they want because the Great Satan won't be able to stop them.
1
No supermajority no big deal.
SS/DFD
1
Total nonsense and not worth printing. Gee, why didn't this sort of bill get passed when Obama was killing hundred of people with drones?
4
You cannot both object to the bill and condemn Congress for not passing a similar one to curtail Obama.
3
Thanking all who are condemning Trump. Sometimes I feel all alone in another world. Please vote him out in Nov. and pray his continued screw ups can be corrected by sane humans.
28
Although the measure will surely be vetoed by Ceasar, maybe the Senate will finally start back on the way to legitimacy. Let's not be too cynical or forlorn......the ides of March approach.
11
This vote was all for show on the part of the Republicans. It gave Susan Collins a photo op and another chance to appear moderate when there is zero chance of it passing. She needs to be voted out the next election. I am sending a donation to her Democratic opponent.
92
If the Senate finally had the backbone to oppose Trump, they should have the votes to override a veto. If he does veto the resolution, then Senators, do it.
11
'“grounded in a faulty premise” because the United States was not currently engaged in any use of force against Iran.'
Right we should wait until hostilities begin at which point we'll be told that we're at war & it's unpatriotic to question the administration's moves.
Trump can veto it but now the Congress has gone on record. One hopes that will help at least a little.
12
This is purely symbolic. To wit: there will NOT now be a war with Iran for the simple reason that the US has deterred them from further action that would tempt escalation. After our strike on their terrorist mastermind Mr. Soleimani -- a move that was so high up the escalatory ladder that the Iranian decision making calculus has been shaken to its core -- the Iranians have absolutely NO IDEA how we will respond to their next provocation. That is the essence of deterrence. It is not accidental that Iran has retreated into its shell.
Mr. Trump does NOT need congressional approval for a range of other, covert and clandestine operations that the US can employ to further weaken and confuse Iran.
3
How many of these Republican Senators, knowing there are not enough to override a veto, are running for reelection and wanted cover for the ways they voted during the impeachment trial. Once again they know the final outcome and it's safe to vote for restraint.
5
How many?
Virtually all of them.
1
Much better to leave the military decision making to the Executive Branch under the leadership of the President. To date, Trump is doing a fantastic job with foreign policy across the board.
Congress isn't equipped to handle such decisions with most either grossly ill informed or disinterested in foreign affairs, especially the democrats.
3
@GDeLuca I think you got it completely backwards. IF we had a thinking, intelligent president your argument might work, but ....
rump isn't equipped to handle such decisions, being that he is grossly ill informed and disinterested in foreign affairs. NOW it's correct! Your statement about him doing a fantastic job with foreign affairs is laughable. We are a laughing stock and most of what he does would be seen as amusing if it weren't so dangerous.
1
@Leah Reitz Spoken like a true member of the resistance.
1
Nothing is going to curb Trump from doing whatever he chooses to do. The House has powers that are limited and dependent upon a senate that is frozen with fear of personal retribution, or whatever. This is week one after the senate’s decision to let Trump reign free. We are under attack by our President.
This is getting more serious by the hour. We have become what we used to observe as a government of a third world nation. We are not equipped with an ability to overthrow our Leader. But none of us have ever watched a President trample the Constitution including taking over the DOJ. What will happen tomorrow. How long will we watch this before a line is crossed that touches enough of the psyche of the population and there is rebellion.
60
Wanda, you say, "none of us have ever watched a President trample the Constitution including taking over the DOJ." But every president has always been in charge of the Department of Justice. It's part of the executive branch, which the president heads. No Constitution-trampling about it.
@John Smithson, The President's office oversees the DOJ. This President is using the DOJ as his personal enforcer. I don't know who's in charge of the IRS but I don't think he or she should be allowed to cheat on their taxes just because of their title.
2
Unless they get 67 Senators, this is a no-go. Trump will (rightly so) veto this. It will take a super majority to override his veto. The fact is, the War Powers Act gives the President 100 days to do whatever he wants militarily. That is how it is. That is how it will stay.
6
Ah, I see Susan Collins is once again 'concerned' about something. Well, until the president actually decides on further military action against Iran without bothering to seek congressional approval, that is. Then she'll have to lean on the old canard that "...hopefully the president will have learned a lesson for the next time..." Such a terrific example for all modern Republicans.
60
Only Trump could think that crushing the economy of a country and getting less than zero out of it, is "doing well." Of course that's what he's done to his businesses and that's what he's about to do our own country. Unfortunately, it's a little too late for the Republicans to stand up to Trump now. And they, of course, know he'll veto this limitation to his power, so it'll all be irrelevant. We just have to hope that Trump doesn't get us into a war before he gets booted out of of office by the vote.
32
I thought that 60 votes was enough to avoid a presidential veto, not 2/3 of the Senate.
1
@The Sanity Cruzer
The power of the President (or impersonator, in trump's case) to refuse to approve a bill or joint resolution and thus prevent its enactment into law is the veto. The president has ten days (excluding Sundays) to sign a bill passed by Congress. This veto can be overridden only by a two-thirds vote in both the Senate and the House.
https://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_index_subjects/Vetoes_vrd.htm
1
@The Sanity Cruzer
60 votes is nothing but a Senate rule to cut off debate, the anti-filibuster rule. It's not a law, it's not in the Constitution.
The Constitution requires a 2/3 vote to override a Presidential veto. It's in Article I, Section 8.
1
@The Sanity Cruzer
60 votes to get past filibuster. 67 to override veto.
1
This is a start. Our Senate has been and will be again an August deliberative body populated by good and decent people working for the growth and preservation of our union. These past three years have seen our upper house paralyzed with fear of a White House bully, the recent impeachment vote serving as a glowing example. But eight Republican Senators have now come to understand that total allegiance to a brute and bully can only lead to further out of control behavior at the highest level of government. So, good for those eight. It’s a new beginning.
8
Those same eight Republicans ignored the evidence against Trump and refused to vote him out of office.
I don’t have any hopes pinned on any Republicans to do the right thing, nor on many establishment Democrats, either.
2
@Unaffiliated I sure wish I shared your optimism. It may be dawning on a few of them that things will only get worse now, thanks to them. I guess I'm just an old cynic and think this was nothing more than an opportunity for them to try and look like they care and aren't petrified of losing their jobs. They surely know that it won't work.
Notice the attempted "self-rehabilitation" Susan Collins is attempting to avoid being kicked out of office in November. If she's lucky, meandering verbal performances haven't gotten the attention in Maine as it has in the so-called mainstream media. I've given once to her opponent and plan to do it again.
I must congratulate her though; her masterful deceit during the Kavanaugh confirmation was worthy of an advanced acting class act.
39
I must agree, be it Pres. Trump or any other President these military actions must be curtailed.
The constitution is quite clear Congress must declare war, not the President.
Yes the president can take immediate military action when the nation is at peril, but should go to Congress to continue.
As the Constitution states "To declare war" and that is what we are at call it by any other name, War. When you have the entire military of a nation involved on foreign soil, and American service people coming back in body bags or wounded, that is noting but war. Full stop.
7
As this article notes but does not emphasize, this issue of presidential war powers goes well beyond Donald Trump and Iran. It has been around for a long time.
That's why Republican senators like Mike Lee and Rand Paul voted for the bill. Not that they have anything against Donald Trump, in particular, but against any president waging war without specific authority from Congress.
Calling this a rebuke of the president is, therefore, hyperbolic. Indeed, Donald Trump's actions have been in line with his words on the campaign trail. He wants to stop foreign wars, not foment them. His killing of Qassim Soleimani was designed to do just that.
In Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq, Donald Trump has done everything he could, often in the face of resistance by generals and even then-Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis, to get our troops out of war. He should be commended for that, not rebuked.
1
@John Smithson may I ask why you are OK with a president who is a convicted thief?
Two months ago, trump was fined $2M by a judge for fraudulently keeping money collected at his rallies for veterans charities. And he was ordered to repay the whole amount (another $2M).
Why are you OK with a national leader who stole from veterans charities? To me, this latest example of trump's dishonesty and lack of basic integrity renders him completely unfit for elected office of any kind. Why do you see it differently? Why are you OK with a president who is a thief?
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/07/777287610/judge-says-trump-must-pay-2-million-over-misuse-of-foundation-funds
2
Better something than nothing - - even a symbolic something is better than just letting his behavior slide by.
6
All the republicans who voted to block witnesses in the impeachment trial are guilty of obstruction of justice and should be voted out of office. Sorry Susan, too little too late.
34
I see no mention of the fact that Trump's justification for taking out that Iranian official are very questionable. According to the Iraqis, the rockets that killed the US contractor were launched from a Sunni Muslim part of Kirkuk Province notorious for attacks by the Islamic State, a Sunni terrorist group, which would have made the area hostile territory for a Shiite militia like Khataib Hezbollah, which is allegedly back by Iran.
So yes, Trump needs to be harnessed before he provokes a war with Iran ... not that a few retrumplicans backing such legislation is for any reason other than optics.
5
About time GOP did something to reign in this outlaw.
GOP Needs to Reject:
1.Trump's interference in convicted Stone's sentence
2. Trump's dictatorial pronouncement all new fed buildings to be in classical style;he's gone full-blown dictator
3. Trumps ongoing assault on EPA regs; he's pouring poison into our waterways because he's an oligarch, a corporate loyalist, and is not interested in our Democracy.
9
@sandra Maybe have a nice cup of tea and have a lie down. 1. Under the US constitution the elected president can hire and fire the cabinet including the head of the justice department. The president can also legally pardon people and political activists on both sides of politics should be free to do their jobs in a real democracy without political persecution. 2. You need to do some reading on what a dictator is and travel to those countries like China and Iran to see the real suffering of their people. 3. If private companies are really "pouring poison into the waterways" where is it happening? What is the name of the companies and responsible executives so a free press can report it. The NYT should be doing that journalism job properly instead of endless reporting on a partisan impeachment non story that was NEVER going to happen.
2
Maybe some Republicans are starting to wake up to the dangers posed by a post-impeachment Trump. We need to make every effort to keep Smaug firmly chained inside his cave.
10
“Still, indignant at the administration’s handling of a drone strike in Iraq last month that killed a top Iranian official”. So a few GOP Senators crossed party lines to cast ‘Meaningless Votes’ to show the meanie, Trump, that they do have courage. There is just one problem. There are not enough votes to overcome Donnie, the Menace’s expected veto. More empty symbolism from the Quisling Senate.
4
The Senate is delusional if they think they can get their traditional Checks and Balances back after they, voluntarily, relinquished that Constitutional prerogative two weeks ago. If he decides to wage war in Iran, Yemen or, even Canada, what are they going to do about it, impeach him? I think not and they have proven through their cowardice and political calculations that they will not. I find the whole practice of passing laws to be quaint and naive in the era of Trump.
24
As long as the majority of the Senate GOP continues to ignore Trumps abuses, he will simply veto anything he wants - and they will not stop him.
This act is completely meaningless and toothless.
5
Surprised at the Republicans who chose to buck Trump.
2
Would this vote have been necessary if President Pence was sitting in the Oval Office? Nancy Pelosi gave the GOP a ‘Get Rid Of Trump FREE’ card and they blew it.
4
The cowardly Republicans only make "courageous" moves when they know it will be vetoed. People, we need to vote the Republicans out of office while we still have a democracy--vote in the next election, please!
22
If only more Republicans would have stood up to Trump, McConnell and the enablers during the impeachment trial an out of control Trump regarding many issues which include policies and procedures regarding war crimes, which the want of pilfering oil fields is, and someone drunk with power, a walking "timebomb" empowered and emboldened by a weak Congress and Senate could be considered admirable if not for their re-occurring cowardice yet they allow him, his advisers to not constrain him more even for what in his mind he defines as "imminent" giving him power to really overrule today's actions, with his ego, do you really think he would stop and confer with the Congress, at 65years I never thought I would return to the books of fantasy.
3
Does anyone else think that Trump is itching to start a war with Iran just so that he can say you have to vote for me because the Democrats could never win this war?
He has said it before and he actually accused Obama of trying to do it. Congress needs to take away his authority to wage war, and they need to do it quickly or lots of innocent people on both sides will die.
8
Bravo to the Republicans who voted to restore Congressional authority over one particular war making decision.
Those Republicans who voted no and will support Trump's vetos are voting for Trump's right to kill voters' children and grandchildren on a whim. Keep that in mind when it comes to vote in November.
5
finally some bipartisan work getting done now maybe the GOP will restrain number 45 from trying to get his cronies off on charges from witness tampering and sleazy working with the campaign violations and those kinds of things this was anybody else they would be in jail he threatened to judge number 45 is boohoo him about his poor friend throw the book at him and Rodger Stone should be given the full nine years or however much the judge wants to give him more even he threatened her life.
After Trump's Roger Stone maneuver maybe now the GOP understands he didn't really "learn his lesson"
95
@northeastsoccermum Trump learned a lesson; that the Republicans will enable his doing as he pleases and that their constitutional responsibilities take a back seat to their partisanship.
12
@northeastsoccermum
He never will "learn his lesson" as, according to him, he already knows everything there is to know. Unfortunately there are those who believe him.
We are now up to our noses in that swamp traitor trump promised to drain. If, God forbid, he is re-elected we will surely drown in it.
Every sane citizen must vote this November to get rid of the abomination that sometimes occupied the white, now black, house.
8
You had your bipartisan bid to curb Trump, Republicans. It happened during the impeachment trial when you blocked witnesses and documents. You’ve failed us completely.
432
@Hannah , we all need to vote them out.
9
This attempt at curbing Trump should extend to so much more. He is dangerous to our democracy. MPR had a lengthy piece this morning about the gutting of Poland's judiciary. It is happening here in the justice department, and with the Republican Senate's assent.
98
@William
There will be no curbing of Trump while this Republican Senate is in control.
As shown, anything that Trump doesn't like, he will veto - and the Republicans will always give him veto power, they will never give a two thirds majority to overrule him.
Congress can pass any law they like - they have 300 so far - and they all stop at McConnell's desk if he doesn't like them, or they are detrimental to to Trump.
McConnell is the gatekeeper - until he goes and is replaced with someone ethical, nothing will curb Trump.
26
Great.
Some republicans crossed over, but not all or enough to prevent a veto.
So now the republicans can have it BOTH ways.
"We are making it LOOK like we are checking this president, but we're really not"
186
@DKM You don't "prevent" a veto, you overturn one. Overturning a veto isn't impossible. As we've seen demonstrated here, unlike the Democrats, Republicans are not a monolith, and are not bound body and soul to their party line, they can, and sometimes do, cross party lines to vote for what they believe in, and voting to overturn a veto that stops Congress from regaining some of the power it willingly sacrificed, isn't the most ridiculous thing we've seen bipartisan support for.
1
Finally the Congress decides to take back its powers. Hopefully, it won't stop with this legislation. Hopefully, they'll reign in Trump when he commits abuses of power or pushes the limits into the realm of Congress.
15
@Tenkan
That's what the impeachment was about, Congress did pass it but it failed at Senate level - as everything always does these days.
Until the Senate goes to the Democrats, or the Republicans have enough ethical and non self serving Senators, it will always be this way.
The real danger is if Trump ends up with both Senate and Congress Republican controlled - then is power will be unstoppable.
3
Congress abdicated its war powers by passing the AUMF in the wake of 9/11. Since then, executive authority under AUMF has only gotten broader--so broad as to be seemingly without limit. It's well passed time that Congress reassert itself as a co-equal branch of government, and this is a good first step. Hopefully we can all get past blind allegiance to our respective parties and recognize the dangers of executive branch excesses. E pluribus unum.
55
Frankly, I'm more interested in some Republicans joining Democrats on Congress to reign in Trump's march to dictatorship. Whatever harm might come from a future Trump initiative against Iran, is less dangerous than what he's NOW doing to the rule law and democracy in America.
When Congressional Republicans show they understand this and stand up against Trump, then I'll be impressed.
219
Siddenly the Republicans are concerned about Trump abusing his power. it's a little late for that, isn't it?
207
@Kristin They're not worried about Trump abusing power to get re-elected. They're worried about the power he is usurping from Congress. He stepped on their toes and they don't like it. However, it's apparently okay if it's out of their Constitutional powers.
10
Better late than never......
3
@Tenkan
The Senate has trained him well.
Calling this 'mostly symbolic' shows the author does not understand the intent of passing such resolutions even if they will just be vetoed. Precedents like this can be used against Trump in court if he ever takes action outside of congressional approval.
45
@Ron If it’s vetoed there is no precedent set. This is a purely symbolic act. Taking him to court would do nothing. The courts would side with the President. It’s within his powers as Commander in Chief to do what he did. All you have here is Trumps opposition posturing during an election year. Nothing more. There is no nobility being shown with this vote. It’s political grandstanding.
5
@Ron
You mean like the border wall resolution rejecting the "national emergency?
We no longer have a government operating by the principles of its Constitution, esp. Articles 1-3.
"...All men...are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
2
@Ron. In court? Doesn’t that presuppose that we have partisan-neutral courts?
Let the tweet storm begin.
33
Why does Collins even bother?????
As they used to say "everybody's hip to her tricks."
163
Donald Trump clearly does not have the mental capacity to do anything about War in this country. The Senate must support the country’s people.
68
Hey Sen. Collins - a photo op with Kaine and other Democrats on this will not save you.
I had dinner with my Maine relatives last night - they have voted for you ever since you were first elected to the Senate.
But they are done. They think that you do not have a political core. No convictions. Just expedience. They're choosing Sara Gideon.
551
let‘s hope a lot of republican voters in maine do the same as your relatives... all spineless republican senators must be kicked out...they have missed their chance and a little bit of cosmetics doesn’t change that fact
@cousy
34
@Cousy
Photo op is right, because as always when Collins votes against GOP leadership it's only when it won't make any difference to the outcome. Being short of the requirement to override a veto, this vote is just a PR exercise.
49
@Cousy Interestingly, among the 8 Republicans aligned with Democrats, Romney wasn't there. He did not vote to restrain Trump. Damage control, perhaps?
10
Every senator should have supported this bill. Presidential authority to wage war and take aggressive measures has been growing since before Trump. Congress needs to re-establish itself as a co-equal branch of the federal government.
292
@Hastings congress can't and won't re-establish itself as a co-equal branch of federal government because it doesn't WANT to.
It would be easy to do so: a super-majority or so would simply have to support that. But roughly half of the senate is quite content to play lapdog to the president.
It's quite amazing if you think about it: people with ostensible power choosing to surrender that power.
For what?
13
@larrea
For the power and money that comes with the job and after the job ends. I wish our representatives would do the right thing and not worry so much about getting reelected. They could actually do the duties they were elected to do, instead of spending most of their time raising money for reelection. If our elected (I can't say representatives because they have ceased to represent all of us) officials actually put in 40 hours a week working for the people, it would be amazing.
7
@catlover Well said. This is one of MANY reasons to think hard about term limits. This work shouldn't be a lifetime career.
8
Nice to see at least a handful of Republicans showing some backbone and doing what is right. Too bad their colleagues are still in Trump's bed with him.
44
@Jeremy I wouldn't say it is "backbone", more like cartilage.
...short of the two-thirds supermajority needed to override a promised veto by Mr. Trump.
As usual, no teeth, symbolic, Trump will claim victory and a deep state conspiracy.
350
@cretino It will give him more "enemies" to go after when he's finished firing all the impeachment witnesses.
66
@cretino Yes, meanwhile Trump will continue to say over 100 American troops just have a headache instead of brain injuries from the assassination attack in Iran and the attack on our military base.
Trump cares for no one but himself and could care less about the innocent lives lost on the Ukrainian flight or our own military.
19
@Frank
No he won't. He's probably knows about and is agreeable to this fake show because he knows he will win in the end.
4
Symbolic rebuke. In other words: just useless.
260
@TheOtherSide But at least it's more than most Republicans did with the Impeachment. I'm surprised any of them crossed the line on this at all, frankly. I suppose they were feeling guilty after their shameful show with Impeachment. Too bad they couldn't get to 2/3s majority. Trump's going to get us in a real war, if he stays in office much longer.
7
@TheOtherSide - Not totally useless. Every outrage opens more eyes. The tipping point is coming. Drip. Drip. Drip.
15
@TheOtherSide The photo says it all with Susan Collins pretending to actually care about the fact that the President has not learned his lesson.
9