The Constitution makes offensive military action without congressional approval unconstitutional. The War Powers Resolution is unnecessary but consistent in that regard. Don’t fall for the lie that the WPR grants authority for “limited” offensive action without approval. Thread:https://twitter.com/justinamash/status/983506478605701120 …
-
-
Given that our congress can't accomplish anything in shorter than months, sometimes years - I'll take results over process. Fix your house and make it functional and maybe we can begin to follow the process again.
#MAGA -
I’ll take process first any day. Favoring results over process is the same as holding that the end justifies the means. Process versus results reflects the main difference between America (process-focused) and despotic regimes everywhere (results-focused).
-
Yep - I understand your position. In this instance, I 100% agree with the chemical weapon response and know it would have never happened if debated and ultimately voted upon. Congress is too slow and political as it stands now - totally dysfunctional.
-
Unilateral offensive military action against a sovereign nation by the exec. branch without congressional approval is illegal, unconstitutional, and undermines coequal branches of govt. These types of actions have gone unchecked too long. Time for some accountability
-
I hear this stated every time it happens, which has been many times. Is there any action in the courts to decide this issue once and for all? If not, why not?
-
Agreed that it’s a broken record, happens over & over with impunity under Dem & Rep admins alike. Law is written clearly, nothing to decide, rather just enforce the law as is. The rest of congress needs to grow a backbone and demand just that
-
This can't be true. If this were a clear cut violation of the constitution then the Dems would be bringing impeachment up today. They are focusing on impeaching this president, which is one of the reasons this congress is so inept.
-
Congress is inept because it doesn’t want to be held accountable for military action that might later be viewed as unpopular. That’s why they let the president do it - so they don’t have to explain themselves for making the wrong decision during reelection season
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Did you make the same appeal when Obama did it? What about Bush or Clinton? Were you offended then? Cause all presidents have taken military actions. They only need congress to approve a war, not a sporadic action.
-
Bad question for
@justinamash - he'll now post the tweets where he objected to all the events you list. He is VERY consistent on this issue. I just wonder why he doesn't push for a Supreme Court ruling on this power. Seems like he would rather just object each time. -
Something, cause congress can’t agree on what to have for dinner! Much less agree on what powers the prez should have. I don’t like that we are bombing again either. I may not have voted for him, but no one is respecting the office of the prez.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Wrong-o. 1) war powers Resolution is as unconstitutional as Obamacare. 2) the president has authority under the 2001 & 2002 AUMFs to continue Operation Inherent Resolve. Still in effect & same AUMFs Obama used. Stop obstructing your president.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You’re a broken record.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.