AOC said bombing Iran was unconstitutional. Is she right?

[mudwhistle]

Nonsense. In the span of seventy-two hours, the Trump administration has managed to simultaneously bomb Iran, fracture its own political coalition, humiliate itself on the global stage, and vaporize billions of dollars in advanced munitions, all while declaring victory. It takes a certain kind of brilliance to orchestrate a fiasco this comprehensive.

We begin with what Trump insists on calling a “complete and total obliteration” of Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

Operation Midnight Hammer: The $6 Billion Empty Hole

As Trump’s cartoonish Iran strike unravels, America stumbles from world leader to Netanyahu’s punch-drunk bouncer, while Xi Jinping waits for his next desperate phone call.

marygeddry.substack.com

You don't have to convince me that the media is trying to discredit the military....even though that same media claims Trump insulted our soldiers. Our media cannot keep their stories straight it appears.

Biden helped vaporized billions in USD along with a lot of our stockpiles of bombs in the Ukraine war, so you can save that happy horseshit as well.

LOL....I cannot believe you're trying to get away with this absolute nonsense.

 

[sealybobo]

You don't have to convince me that the media is trying to discredit the military....even though that same media claims Trump insulted our soldiers. Our media cannot keep their stories straight it appears.

Biden helped vaporized billions in USD along with a lot of our stockpiles of bombs in the Ukraine war, so you can save that happy horseshit as well.

LOL....I cannot believe you're trying to get away with this absolute nonsense.

See what you do? Try to say we are discrediting our military. Sorry if we caught your king in a lie, *****.

 

[mudwhistle]

WRONG!

You corrupt media quickly jumped to the conclusion that we didn't do anything but damage a few cave entrances.

Now that a more skilled intelligence assessment has been done, the media is having to backtrack on their obviously dishonest knee-jerk reporting.

 

[blackhawk]

In an instance like this the President no matter who it has been Trump, Biden, Obama, Bush, Clinton had to inform Congress within 48 hours I believe after the attack. Trump did that so it is not unconstitutional if Congress doesn’t like this change it and if they weren’t concerned when a President other than Trump did this they can spare us the phony concern and outrage now.

 

[marvin martian]

There was no threat to our national security.

^^^The Iran/Russia supporters are so mad that we took out the threat.

 

[mudwhistle]

There was no threat to our national security.

You say that only because Trump ordered the bombing.

You cannot fathom that he might do it out of necessity.

 

[Blaster]

AOC is never right.

Matter of fact, her voters support her because she's an agent of chaos.

They don't want her to actually be right or come up with solutions.

She never read the constitution.

 

[the watcher]

No. The President wasn't declaring war, but acting as the Commander-in-Chief of all US Armed forces and reacting to what he considers a threat to national security. AOC is a complete dumbass and has no idea what the Constitution says.

Deciding what a threat is apparently all encompassing.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran​

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s decision to bomb three of Iran’s nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president’s actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution.

It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in academia. Constitutional experts told us those who are claiming the president’s decision was unconstitutional may be correct according to an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. But Congresses over the last several decades have allowed presidents some latitude to engage militarily without prior consent from lawmakers.

“A lot of people over the next few days are going to argue with confidence that President Trump violated, or didn’t violate, the Constitution when he bombed Iran over the weekend without congressional authorization,” Jack Landman Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School and nonresident senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote in a June 23 op-ed headlined, “Was the Iran Strike Constitutional?”

“You might think that the Constitution would provide a clear answer to such a momentous question. But it doesn’t,” Goldsmith wrote.

Although the military hostilities involving Iran, Israel and the U.S. have ended, numerous Democrats have continued to press the issue, and have proposed legislation to try to rein in the president’s military reach.

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran - FactCheck.org

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three of Iran's nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president's actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution. It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in...

www.factcheck.org

IMO, ambiguity over such a momentous question needs to be resolved.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress holds the power “To declare War.” Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution establishes the president as the commander in chief of the armed forces. So, at what point and under what circumstances would the president need congressional approval before launching military activity?

“I think this is a tough question because practice has strayed so far from the text and original understanding of the Constitution,” Kermit Roosevelt, a professor and constitutional expert at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, told us via email.

Repub Reps Khanna and Massie have introduced a resolution on the specific matter of attacks on Iran. Should it be expanded to give Congress sign off authority on any strike? How much would that hamper a prez's ability to respond quickly if military action were called for?

She’s correct

Sadly, the Constitution has been steadily eroding

Again:

Our record with constitutionally declared wars is 5-0, and 0-5 including and since Korea

 

[citygator]

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran​

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s decision to bomb three of Iran’s nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president’s actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution.

It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in academia. Constitutional experts told us those who are claiming the president’s decision was unconstitutional may be correct according to an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. But Congresses over the last several decades have allowed presidents some latitude to engage militarily without prior consent from lawmakers.

“A lot of people over the next few days are going to argue with confidence that President Trump violated, or didn’t violate, the Constitution when he bombed Iran over the weekend without congressional authorization,” Jack Landman Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School and nonresident senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote in a June 23 op-ed headlined, “Was the Iran Strike Constitutional?”

“You might think that the Constitution would provide a clear answer to such a momentous question. But it doesn’t,” Goldsmith wrote.

Although the military hostilities involving Iran, Israel and the U.S. have ended, numerous Democrats have continued to press the issue, and have proposed legislation to try to rein in the president’s military reach.

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran - FactCheck.org

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three of Iran's nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president's actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution. It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in...

www.factcheck.org

IMO, ambiguity over such a momentous question needs to be resolved.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress holds the power “To declare War.” Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution establishes the president as the commander in chief of the armed forces. So, at what point and under what circumstances would the president need congressional approval before launching military activity?

“I think this is a tough question because practice has strayed so far from the text and original understanding of the Constitution,” Kermit Roosevelt, a professor and constitutional expert at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, told us via email.

Repub Reps Khanna and Massie have introduced a resolution on the specific matter of attacks on Iran. Should it be expanded to give Congress sign off authority on any strike? How much would that hamper a prez's ability to respond quickly if military action were called for?

Illegal but common.. and not just to Trump.

 

[hadit]

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran​

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump’s decision to bomb three of Iran’s nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president’s actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution.

It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in academia. Constitutional experts told us those who are claiming the president’s decision was unconstitutional may be correct according to an originalist interpretation of the U.S. Constitution. But Congresses over the last several decades have allowed presidents some latitude to engage militarily without prior consent from lawmakers.

“A lot of people over the next few days are going to argue with confidence that President Trump violated, or didn’t violate, the Constitution when he bombed Iran over the weekend without congressional authorization,” Jack Landman Goldsmith, a professor at Harvard Law School and nonresident senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, wrote in a June 23 op-ed headlined, “Was the Iran Strike Constitutional?”

“You might think that the Constitution would provide a clear answer to such a momentous question. But it doesn’t,” Goldsmith wrote.

Although the military hostilities involving Iran, Israel and the U.S. have ended, numerous Democrats have continued to press the issue, and have proposed legislation to try to rein in the president’s military reach.

Examining Whether Trump Had the Constitutional Authority to Attack Iran - FactCheck.org

In the aftermath of President Donald Trump's decision to bomb three of Iran's nuclear facilities, numerous Democrats claimed the president's actions were unconstitutional and a violation of the War Powers Resolution. It is a contentious and hotly debated issue not only in Congress but also in...

www.factcheck.org

IMO, ambiguity over such a momentous question needs to be resolved.

Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution states that Congress holds the power “To declare War.” Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution establishes the president as the commander in chief of the armed forces. So, at what point and under what circumstances would the president need congressional approval before launching military activity?

“I think this is a tough question because practice has strayed so far from the text and original understanding of the Constitution,” Kermit Roosevelt, a professor and constitutional expert at the University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School, told us via email.

Repub Reps Khanna and Massie have introduced a resolution on the specific matter of attacks on Iran. Should it be expanded to give Congress sign off authority on any strike? How much would that hamper a prez's ability to respond quickly if military action were called for?

The question naturally becomes this:

1. Why is it all of a sudden a big concern?
2. Why does it only become a problem when Orange Man does it?
3. Where were all these "legal scholars" with their constitutional concerns when all previous presidents ordered the military to bomb other countries?

They would have more credibility with their concerns had they not discovered them only because Orange Man and reasons.

 

[ColonelAngus]

The question naturally becomes this:

1. Why is it all of a sudden a big concern?
2. Why does it only become a problem when Orange Man does it?
3. Where were all these "legal scholars" with their constitutional concerns when all previous presidents ordered the military to bomb other countries?

They would have more credibility with their concerns had they not discovered them only because Orange Man and reasons.

Yep.

Obama KILLED AN AMERICAN WITH A DRONE STRIKE. No due process.

Not a peep from the Lefties.

This is political noise. They are full of shit.

 

[Kondor3]

If AOC told me that Day was light and Night was dark, I'd get a Second Opinion.