Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) announced this morning that he would oppose the introduction of his war powers resolution on Iran if the ceasefire holds. He described the resolution as a moot point if peace is restored. That is clearly not going to satisfy colleagues like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) who is struggling to maintain her call for impeachment.
Rep. Ocasio-Cortez seemed a tad adrift when asked about the ceasefire, offering a rambling explanation on why it does not change a thing in terms of impeachable conduct:
“I think that the president of the United States, admitting that he unilaterally brought the United States into a war without congressional approval, is a very grave public admission. It is illegal. It is unconstitutional…And, and so for me, while the president is posting something about a ceasefire, I think what he also posted was an official acknowledgement that this was war. And I think that is something that should be taken into very serious consideration.”
It was an obvious blow to many democrats. You get all dressed up for an impeachment and then peace suddenly breaks out.
If it is any solace, there was never a plausible impeachment in the making. If so, you could have impeached presidents going back to Thomas Jefferson. Barack Obama dropped over 26,000 bombs in 2016 alone from Syria to Libya to Somalia to Pakistan to Afghanistan to Iraq. Democrats did not rise up and demand impeachment after Obama was hitting targets around the world.
Nevertheless, you could also taste the palpable disappointment for many. However, Marisa Tomei may have put it best for some when peace suddenly broke out in the middle of an impeachment effort (warning foul language):
Nevertheless, you could also taste the palpable disappointment for many.
Frankly the shtick that AOC, Alex (but you call him Jose) Padilla, Karen Bass, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, all of the US Senators at their circus Senate hearings, et al, are orchestrating, brings Americans endless schadenfreude. Many hope Dems/MSM never let up. Maybe they will push the pedal to the metal and just go for it
Schadenfreude
Definition –
“Pleasure derived by Democrats from Americas misfortune, whether real or not.”
Estovir,
Seems to me they have already gone off the cliff but are in denial they did.
As Thelma (Schumer) turns and says to Louise (AOC) half way down,
“So far, So good!”
Impeachment seems to have become nearly the default position for any who are upset with any POTUS for any reason. I am one of those old fogies that thought it should be reserved as a last resort so that it is not discredited by the smell of partisanship. Likewise, the claims of “constitutional crisis.” We are cheapening the actual constitution by overuse of its authority. If what some actually want is the possibility of overturning a government with a joint congressional resolution, then propose that as a 28th Amendment and let’s see if enough want it. I don’t.
“We need to terminate parts of the Constitution.” – Donald J. Trump
Yawn… Like O-dumder did using the IRS to attack anyone who used their rights
Whatever Trump sez, huh idiot?
Incredible! Just when I begin to think that you cannot possibly be any more ignorant, you post non sequiturs. Here’s what your lord and master, Obama, the traitor, said about the Constitution. “generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. It says what the states can’t do to you. It says what the federal government can’t do to you, but it doesn’t say what the federal government or the state government must do on your behalf.” HE, like Woodrow Wilson, wanted to do away with the thing that stood in his way of “fundamentally transforming America”.
Yes, quite amazing. His name is dust. Just dust.
LOVE it, Jonathan… While this teeny-bopper (How is she still around?) kicks and screams and the Democrats still believe in her stupid-ass voice… I mean EVERY other country has to laugh at the all-powerful USA having to deal with this s__t in the middle of atomic bomb threats by a ROGUE nation. Ultimately this is why Trump is “damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead…” Trump is the only man of the hour who can actually deal with all this BS and still have a major impact on the major and minor players worldwide…
He doesn’t even read his briefings and he’s running a market manipulation/extortion op. He fully earned his 3rd worst president ranking last time and is going for absolute worst this time. He’s an incompetent A hole. Watching you guys dance around in denial about him is pathetic.
Boy, this article has brought a lot of responses! I go back to the first paragraph wherein Massey explains his voting position.
In this & all other instances- are congresspeople even interested in what their constituents think or want anymore-or do we have to go on suffering under this paternalistic nonsense?
Congress, the nonsense, and impeachment based on presidents’ dropping bombs when such a precedent has long been set: “Precedent” means that “a prior decision is considered to have furnished example or authority in a similar case or situation.” In other words, a certain course of conduct is followed, which serves as guide for future conduct.—If Congress has repeatedly allowed this, and has never taken the time to CHALLENGE and change it, then the precedent prevails, and there is NO impeachable offense.
Let’s pray this peace holds, if only to spare us the AOC-actress’s shrill kabuki theater.
As an aside, I was actually dismayed to learn that there is not, -and never was,- a “red phone” in the WH.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/there-never-was-such-a-thing-as-a-red-phone-in-the-white-house-1129598/
Back to tin can–kite string technology, I guess. At least that might prevent those pesky leaks.
The clip from My Cousin Vinne should have been longer. The conversation is appropriate here. Vinnie wins big, but he’s peeved that he has to say thank you. The Dems win by having the “unconstitutional” actions stop, and peace breaks out, but they’re peeved because of TDS.
And it would be a nightmare to them if they ever had to say “thank you” to President Trump.
stupid comment, as usual.
Only to you.
Are you referring to yourself again?
Why on gods green earth would the Ds thank Trump for violating the Constitution?
Did he? If you think that, then poor O-dumber is in trouble
As the good professor correctly points out, Obama did the exact same thing. Yet, where were Democrats screaming Obama violating the Constitution? Here, I will answer the question for you: “When we do it, it is A-okay!”
facts, and include those facts where obama and clinton both did the same thing with nary a peep from the demented dems.
OldManFromKS,
Right?
I just read your posting of the note from the NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. Seems like there are a lot of our allies who are thankful for Trump’s actions. And maybe that is why Democrats are so mad.
LoL – My Cousin Vinny!
I Creamed my Jeans when I saw that 🤣
When are Women going to bring back ‘Big Hair’ like that again?
That’s so Hot 🔥
https://truddie.com/big-hair-hairstyles/
It’s moments like this that bring pure joy to my life…. in part because peace is a good thing for everyone (I pray it holds) and because I can envision the blue people gnashing their teeth and ranting at the heavens.
Hopefully Prof. Turley will address the question of international law, rather than American law. Presumably, we still beleive in international law. My understanding of the United Nation’s Charter is that military action against another country is justified only in case of self-defense. Iran does not threaten our self-defense at this point, and probably never will. Our actions in the Middle East show that the Nuremberg Trials were a bit of a farce. If you are a strong, or at least the stongest, country in the world, you can drop as many bombs on as many counties as you want, killing as many civilians as you want, and you don’t even need to say “sorry.” Thomas Massie seems to be only man of courage in Congress.
“International Law” is largely a figment of the imagination. The UN is not a world government. Additionally, your “self-defense” assessment is absurd. Under your definition of self-defense, the United States intervention in Europe during WW2 was illegal. The Nazis did not threaten the US and probably never would. The Nazis did, however, threaten our allies. Intervening in a war to aid an allied nation is quite normal. Israel is an ally, and is threatened by Iran. On top of that, Iran’s proxies in Yemen have attacked Americans, both civilian and military ships in international waters.
I’m curious, were you as upset when Obama attacked Libya (amongst others), or is this yet another “It’s only illegal when Trump does it” things?
Anonymous,
Isn’t “international law” an oxymoron, kinda like “rules of war”?
The great Rush Limbaugh said two truisms which have been true since the beginning of time:
1. “Ours is a world governed by the aggressive use of force and the aggressor sets the terms of engagement.”
2. “The purpose of a military is to kill people and break things.”
Iran has been at war with us, via their proxies, for the last 46 years now — Saturday night was just some long overdue carma.
International Law technically exists in a limited form. It is more properly a set of treaties. Once ratified by the Senate, treaties are part of US Law and is bound to them. Other countries have similar systems. Once a critical mass of countries have signed the same treaties, it is effectively considered “international law”. This set of data is quite limited (and most of it is maritime practices for international shipping), but there are many people who wish to stretch the idea far beyond this for bother ideological reasons or to gain advantage in a particular area.
How is the us bound to international law ?
Again there is no world government
Agreements are not law
Law is FORCE
Iran agreed to the nonproliferation treaty
They violated it
Is The Hague or the UN going to arrest and jail the Iranian government?
No the US and Israel bombed the schiff out of them
That is “international law”
Just as nations deciding to do nothing
The constitution makes space for treaties
But not ones that modify the constitution or violate it
The courts have some power to enforce treaties
But not all that much
No nation is bound to international law in the same way that individuals are bound to law
Many like to claim there is no working exampl if libertarianism
But the relations between nations are functioning anarchism capitalism
Anonymous 10:57AM. Actually there was discussion if the US could indeed legally attack Germany after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor. Germany, however, solved that problem by declaring war on the United States on 12/11/1941 to uphold it’s treaty with Japan which was a mutual defense pact.. Some in Germany counseled against the Declaration of War against the US because the Japanese had attacked the US and not vice versa but Hitler went ahead and declared war. After which the US promptly declared war on Germany.
Question of intl law? Why don’t you address it, yo thin k you’re so smart. Show us.
“. . . the question of international law, rather than American law.”
Fortunately, the power-lusting, collectivist globalists don’t (yet) rule Americans. Our Constitution does.
Ahhhhhhhhhhhh, Ukraine?
“My understanding of the United Nation’s Charter is that military action against another country is justified only in case of self-defense.”
Plain and simple you are wrong. The US has plenty of justification for attacking Iran under International Law. Iran is responsible for the deaths of Americans, threatens America’s survival, supplies aid to proxies who close sea lanes, etc. No more need be said.
There is no such thing as international law
What is called international law is just voluntary agreements between nations that they can back out of st whim
It is time to remove the lifer politicians and their minions!
time to remove ignorant commenters and their minions.
Iran is at war via proxies with Israel for decades which justifies Israel’s actions under international law as self-defense. Iran has also committed acts of war against the US by delivering IEDs to the Shi’ites in Iraq. Moreover, Khamenei has made statements about having sleeper cells in the US that he could activate: clearly a threat with violence. Given Iran’s decades long threats and rhetoric, taking out their nuclear capabilities makes common sense and is justified. As to Trump’s actions, this is not a war but a military action of short duration. The Dems and Massie are simply wrong to call this is a war, and the President was legally allowed to take this action. I am glad he did not inform Congressional leadership because, I bet, the mission would have been leaked!
“Leaked”? it would have been sent directly to Iran.
The Dems hate Trump so much that, if he keeled over dead today, they’d impeach him, simply because he died.
Nah we’d actually just piss on his face.
First of all Congress’s power is merely to declare war. It is firmly established law that no declaration is needed for a state of war to exist.
Second, the War Powers Act is not the constitution, and while Congress believes it to be valid, every single president since it was passed had maintained that it’s invalid. They have all complied with it voluntarily, as Trump does, but they have all reserved the right to violate it should the need ever arise.
Third, all this is moot because there IS a declaration of war in effect. In 2001 Congress declared war on every person and organization involved in any way with the attacks of Sep-11-2001, or with harboring such persons. And it authorized the president to determine who exactly those persons and organizations are. It’s been established in court that Iran was involved, and that it harbored al Qaeda members who were involved. Thus we are at war with Iran and have been for 24 years. Congress declared war and that declaration is still in effect. No further congressional action is needed.
Milhouse,
We’re talking about Congress. Wasn’t it Congress, albeit a different bunch of hombres, who ran a good chunk of the Vietnam war? Remember how that worked out?
Americans lose when politicians choose.
@Milhouse,
Uhm not quite.
Remember the Constitution gives the power to declare war to Congress.
The WPA of ’73 was written specifically to stop a POTUS from circumventing declaring war without actually going to Congress. This is what happened in Viet Nam.
What some of the Dims in Washington think is that the WPA stops POTUS from taking military action without getting Congressional approval first.
That is not the case and were it so.. then the WPA would be unconstitutional.
-G
Be serious. You probably think men can be women.
So Massie, who likes to claim he is always acting only on the highest principles, is just as utilitarian and results-oriented as is everyone else.
Principle gives way to results. That is fine, but he should stop pretending he is the reincarnation of Sir Thomas More.
Massie is an egotistical opportunist. It is easy to be on the highest plain when others have to vote on compromise bills, but it is also just moral preening and empty virtue signaling. Guys like Massie are a joke, just an over inflated ego causing him to think he is the only moral person in Congress and probably in the world. Primary him, he doesn’t vote with the party anyway, we just need an R next to someone’s name in order to keep Hakeem Jeffries out of the Speaker’s seat.
I think we need to take a deep breath, wait and see what happens. Till then, no need to panic, or flip out. As the good professor notes, no one went into a panic or flipped out when Obama was bombing several countries around the world.
Upstate
And when O-dumber turned Libya into a (black) slave trader nation.
A black Prez did that and the dems said zip!
My intuition ? (By full disclosure, yes, female). Peace IS going to break out, whether the left shall like it or not. He who underestimates Trump, had best like eggs. That includes the Never Trump, the naysayers all sides.
True peace will never break out for several reasons – the human tribal nature resists it and as long as there is one muslim left, we will never have peace as their ultimate goal is a world wide caliphate which will not (despite their claims) result in world peace.
The best we can hope for is a very tight control on islamists into the distant future along with radical communists, socialists and academic progressives that continue to preach hate (I think they preach that because they truly are not qualified to teach a true academic subject)>
So true. Iran is run by people how hate and nothing more.
It’s emotionalism. It’s 13th century. It’s horrible in reality and a form of Stockholm syndrome.
Hmmm, peace breaks out? For three and a half hours? Tad premature, Professor, in scorning the critics?
Also, if you apologise for foul language in the needless clip, what about the President’s foul language with the press pack?
It’s no different than you yo-yo’s calling a three hour operation a “war”.
Who cares. The dem party has been dropping the f-bomb since Prez Trump was elected.
Short memory?
It breaks my brain a little to think AOC is charged with writing our laws, but has no idea how to read them.
aside from breaking your brain it should produce a cold chill down your spine that such a mis-educated tool has ANY power whatsoever.
Right after that “explanation”, AOC went off on a rant about killing gorillas to make duct tape and glue.
Whig98,
Good one!!! 😀
Nice MCV reference.