Trump Has Violated Constitution

All I am thinking is with all the scrutiny on Assad, why would he choose this path knowing he would face the consequences? We have been through this before.

My guess is the struggle with the islamists is much more precarious than we thought and Assad had little choice but to deploy chemical & biological weapons on the front line.
 
Rep. Tulsi Gabard is a clear thinker. Too bad Trump did not see fit to appoint her Sec. of State.

She provides the obvious counterpoint to the war fever that has seized the media and both parties.

 
Sen. Rand Paul: McCain's stupidity interefering with resolution in Syria. Gloves are off between these two it appears. Paul is not stupid. He sees an opportunity to pick up Trump's alt right supporters.


 
Exclusive–Sen. Rand Paul: Would an Originalist Unilaterally Bomb Syria?
9769
11

Rand-Paul-John-LamparskiGetty-640x480.jpg

John Lamparski/Getty

by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY)7 Apr 20179,469

7 Apr, 2017 7 Apr, 2017


Today, I cast the 51st vote to confirm Justice Neil Gorsuch to the Supreme Court.It is a vote I am proud of, and I hope to remain proud of for decades to come.
Republicans fought hard to confirm Justice Gorsuch, and with good reason.The reason many of them gave the full strength of their support was because they believed Justice Gorsuch would follow the Constitution – adhering to the original text and meaning. He is from a group of legal scholars who consider themselves “Originalists.”
Window

While many Republicans fawned over this quality, they displayed remarkable cognitive dissonance when it came to applying it to a very public event the very day they approved the Gorsuch nomination.

You see, too many of my colleagues have forgotten what it means to be an “Originalist” on the matter of going to war.


Our Founding Fathers found this to be one of the most important discussions at the time, and they were quite concerned about giving the power to declare war to the President.They were concerned an executive with that kind of power could choose to rule like a King.

Before sending our young men and women into battle, we should have a thoughtful and honest discussion about the ramifications, authorization, and motivations for war.

That could be done if we were all Originalists; not just for the court, but for our legislative duties as well.


Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the Constitution grants the Congress and Congress alone the power to declare war. The President is given the power to direct the military only after the Congressional declaration has been passed.

This is our law and was generally our practice.However, like in many areas, we began to abandon our founding principles for expediency. We have not declared a war since World War II and we have too often used our military without even a more modest Authorization for the Use of Military Force.

This is dangerous.As Madison wrote, the Constitution supposes what history demonstrates, that the executive is the branch most interested in war and most prone to it.The Constitution therefore, with studied care, vested that power in the legislature.


I salute the nomination and confirmation of Justice Gorsuch and his Originalist views.

I salute and applaud my colleagues for their work to get him to the bench, and for the words they used attributing their vote to his views on the Constitution.

But I can’t say I don’t find it ironic that on the very day they did these things, they also turned a mostly blind eye to an illegal and unconstitutional military strike.

I will hold politicians of both parties and both branches accountable.I ran for office to protect our Rights and swore an oath to uphold the Constitution to the best of my ability. That means defending the Constitutionally granted power to declare war as one belonging to Congress, just as our Founding Fathers intended.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-govern...and-paul-originalist-unilaterally-bomb-syria/
 
its odd that cruz has let rand paul take the lead as the most intelligent and most consistently reliable politician in the country.
But... I am sure glad Rand Paul is there.
 
AAAintheBeltway said:
The Constitution gives the congress the exclusive right to declare war. Over the years there has been a vast erosion of this power as the Legislative branch ceded much of its Constitutional authority in his area to the Executive.

One of the few times the republican congress stood up to Obama was when he wanted to attack Syria. Conservative talk radio whipped up its base and they demanded that republicans in congress assert the requirement for a vote before starting hostilities against a country that had not attacked or threatened us in any way. Such approval was not forthcoming, as the public wanted no part of more pointless military interventions. Neo cons were furious and mocked obama for his weakness. Obama had been foolish to draw "red lines" he couldn't enforce, but deferring to the congressional war declaration authority was one his brighter moments as president.

We heard plenty during the campaign from "constitutional conservatives" about what a danger Trump was because he did not worship the Constitution to the degree they did. Well, I'm waiting to hear from them now. Trump has clearly committed an act of war against a country that not only has not attacked or threatened us, but which denies culpability for the supposed gas attack. There has been no congressional declaration. There are no exigent circumstances mandating preemptive action.

Trump has recklessly committed an impeachable offense that could have landed us in WW III if Russian airmen had been killed. This is a sad day for me because Trump had been so steadfast against getting involved in this kind of adventure.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected and pulled reckless stunt like this, we would have been outraged and with good reason. I hope wiser men like Rand Paul can pull Trump back from the edge. Failing that, they are going to have to oppose him on this, which will no doubt set Trump off and further poison relations with his base.

Thanks a lot Kushner.
More...

While I disagree that we shouldn't play a part in Syria, I commend you for not following blindly your preferred candidate on an issue you feel strongly about and remaining steadfast on those beliefs no matter who is in the white house. I find it sickening that many opposing Obama when he brought the issue before congress are now cheering Trump because he's in their team. Even when I feel that aiding in a military campaign against Assad is the right thing to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top