Ignorant Democrat Representative Claims Trump's Iran Airstrikes Are Grounds For Impeachment

[SkyChief]

Following President Trump's airstrikes on sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, AOC impulsively called the action "grounds for impeachment".

"The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." said AOC.

Predictably, another dem representative, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, took issue with the bombing sorties ordered by the Commander-In-Chief:

"[Trump] misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East."
Clearly both representatives are ignorant of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which empowers the President to order military action if the following conditions are met:

• Notify Congress within 48 hours of committing forces to hostilities
• Withdraw those forces within 60–90 days unless Congress grants authorization or declares war.

Trump notified Congress within 2 hours of the strike, and U.S. forces (bombers) were withdrawn from Iran airspace within minutes of the strike, so both conditions of the War Powers Resolution were met.

In your opinion, would it be wise for AOC and House Minority Leader Jeffries proceed with filing Articles of Impeachment?

 

[The Brad Dad]

He bragged about not notifying Dems or the Gang of 8. This was done on an emotional whim, which is precisely what the constitution was set up to avoid. Congress needs to claw this power back. And when this impeachment fails, they should file articles over his corruption. When dems take the house back in the midterms, they should impeach him every single day if possible.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

In your opinion, would it be wise for AOC and House Minority Leader Jeffries proceed with filing Articles of Impeachment?

No.
Any other questions?

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

He bragged about not notifying Dems or the Gang of 8. This was done on an emotional whim, which is precisely what the constitution was set up to avoid. Congress needs to claw this power back. And when this impeachment fails, they should file articles over his corruption. When dems take the house back in the midterms, they should impeach him every single day if possible.

Won't work. The Senate won't convict. Last time the Dems tried to impeach him, his poll numbers went up.

It's simple: Trump is imploding. Don't stop him. Let him implode.

 

[The Brad Dad]

Won't work. The Senate won't convict. Last time the Dems tried to impeach him, his poll numbers went up.

It's simple: Trump is imploding. Don't stop him. Let him implode.

I disagree. You impeached on every crime. Whether the senate convicts or not is irrelevant. his crimes should be investigated and aired publicly. That’s what impeachment does.

 

[SNOWFLAKE]

I disagree. You impeached on every crime. Whether the senate convicts or not is irrelevant. his crimes should be investigated and aired publicly. That’s what impeachment does.

Impeaching will backfire, letting him implode will work better.
There is an old adage - learn from history. The Dems tried impeachment once, should they not learn from that mistake?
I also know you are passionate, but being smart sometimes is better than being passionate. Sometimes the tortoise really does win the race,

 

[The Brad Dad]

Impeaching will backfire, letting him implode will work better.
There is an old adage - learn from history. The Dems tried impeachment once, should they not learn from that mistake?
I also know you are passionate, but being smart sometimes is better than being passionate. Sometimes the tortoise really does win the race,

What are you talking about, he lost the 2020 election. Lost it. Not win. Lost it. So even from a political standpoint, history objectively disagrees with you.

 

[Jessie C]

Following President Trump's airstrikes on sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, AOC impulsively called the action "grounds for impeachment".

"The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." said AOC.

Predictably, another dem representative, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, took issue with the bombing sorties ordered by the Commander-In-Chief:

"[Trump] misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East."
Clearly both representatives are ignorant of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which empowers the President to order military action if the following conditions are met:

• Notify Congress within 48 hours of committing forces to hostilities
• Withdraw those forces within 60–90 days unless Congress grants authorization or declares war.

Trump notified Congress within 2 hours of the strike, and U.S. forces (bombers) were withdrawn from Iran airspace within minutes of the strike, so both conditions of the War Powers Resolution were met.

In your opinion, would it be wise for AOC and House Minority Leader Jeffries proceed with filing Articles of Impeachment?

In case you've forgotten, the trumpdump had NO authority to do this without the expressed approval of congress which he DIDN'T have. So technically yes, he deserves to be impeached for what it's worth, but as long as the republicans control the congress and the house it's a moot point. To file for impeachment now would be a waste of time. Now after the midterms, that's a different story. I see a whole bunch of crooked republican law makers losing their seats, which would be the best thing to happen to this country. THEN, let the 25th ammendment rule and get rid of the worst thing to ever happen to this country...the trumpdump.

 

[Isidore]

Thomas Massie says Iran attack "unconstitutional" as Trump divides MAGA

Trump announced that the U.S. bombed three nuclear sites in Iran in a post on Saturday night.

www.newsweek.com

Democrats! Amirite?

 

[GIJane]

I swore I wouldn't vote in poll that shows how I voted, but this is such a no-brainer, I couldn't help myself. It was like Pavlov's dog.

 

[Gatsby]

The US bombing Iran directly (as opposed to letting Israel sort it out): Probably a bad move.
Allowing Donald Trump to remain president instead of impeaching him for whatever pretext is available: Also a bad move.

But I will say that bombing Iran doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense. Presidents of both parties bomb shit all the time.

 

[aociswundumho]

Allowing Donald Trump to remain president instead of impeaching him for whatever pretext is available: Also a bad move.

They don't have the votes to impeach, so it's not really worth talking about.

But I will say that bombing Iran doesn't rise to the level of an impeachable offense. Presidents of both parties bomb shit all the time.

Ain't democracy grand?

 

[dseag2]

AOC is anything but ignorant but there have been quite a few previous Presidents who have used military force without first seeking approval from Congress. Not that it's right, but I'd say let this one go. Trump has been impeached twice and nothing ever sticks. Let him bury himself.

• Korean War (1950-1953): President Truman deployed U.S. troops to Korea under the auspices of a UN Security Council resolution, arguing that it was a police action rather than a formal war. He did not seek a declaration of war from Congress.
• Vietnam War (1964-1973): While the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution provided some congressional support early in the conflict, many argue that the war escalated significantly without proper congressional authorization.
• Invasion of Grenada (1983): President Reagan ordered the invasion of Grenada to protect American citizens and restore order after a coup, without seeking congressional approval.
• Intervention in Panama (1989): President George H.W. Bush ordered the invasion of Panama to remove Manuel Noriega from power, again without a formal declaration of war.
• Kosovo War (1999): President Clinton authorized U.S. participation in NATO’s military intervention in Kosovo without seeking congressional authorization.
• Libya Intervention (2011): President Obama authorized U.S. military involvement in the Libyan intervention, citing a UN Security Council resolution and arguing that the action was limited in scope.

Has any president used military force without Congress? | [June Updated]

Has Any President Used Military Force Without Congress? A Historical and Legal Analysis Yes, numerous presidents throughout U.S. history have used military force without a formal declaration of war or explicit authorization from Congress, often citing inherent presidential powers as...

thegunzone.com

 

[SkyChief]

In case you've forgotten, the trumpdump had NO authority to do this without the expressed approval of congress which he DIDN'T have. . .

False. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 empowers the Commander-In-Chief to order hostile military actions when certain conditions are met. I posted these conditions of the War Powers Resolution in the OP. Trump fulfilled the obligations outlined in the War Powers Resolution, so no impeachable offense happened.

So technically yes, he deserves to be impeached for what it's worth, but as long as the republicans control the congress and the house it's a moot point. To file for impeachment now would be a waste of time. Now after the midterms, that's a different story. I see a whole bunch of crooked republican law makers losing their seats, which would be the best thing to happen to this country. THEN, let the 25th ammendment rule and get rid of the worst thing to ever happen to this country...the trumpdump.

I don't think that Amendment 25 will be used on Trump.

 

[Jessie C]

False. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 empowers the Commander-In-Chief to order hostile military actions when certain conditions are met. I posted these conditions of the War Powers Resolution in the OP. Trump fulfilled the obligations outlined in the War Powers Resolution, so no impeachable offense happened.

Nice try. First of all, we were actively engaged in full warfare for one. For 2, we are not under threat from an imminent attack. Do your homework before you post bullshit.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Following President Trump's airstrikes on sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, AOC impulsively called the action "grounds for impeachment".

"The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." said AOC.

Predictably, another dem representative, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, took issue with the bombing sorties ordered by the Commander-In-Chief:

"[Trump] misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East."
Clearly both representatives are ignorant of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which empowers the President to order military action if the following conditions are met:

Read the statute:

(c)Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

50 U.S. Code § 1541 - Purpose and policy

www.law.cornell.edu

• Notify Congress within 48 hours of committing forces to hostilities
• Withdraw those forces within 60–90 days unless Congress grants authorization or declares war.

Trump notified Congress within 2 hours of the strike, and U.S. forces (bombers) were withdrawn from Iran airspace within minutes of the strike, so both conditions of the War Powers Resolution were met.

In your opinion, would it be wise for AOC and House Minority Leader Jeffries proceed with filing Articles of Impeachment?

Yes, what Trump did was a violation of the Constitution. Attacking Iran required approval from Congress. This did not happen. Trump must be impeached and removed from office.

The President has discretion to use the military without Congressional approval only in 3 circumstances:

(1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

This.

Did.

Not.

Happen.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

False. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 empowers the Commander-In-Chief to order hostile military actions when certain conditions are met.

THEY WERE NOT MET!

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Won't work. The Senate won't convict. Last time the Dems tried to impeach him, his poll numbers went up.

It's simple: Trump is imploding. Don't stop him. Let him implode.

A vote should be held so everyone can know where our representatives stand. Do our elected officials support dictatorship and fascism? I want to know which of them do.

 

[SkyChief]

THEY WERE NOT MET!

Of course they were. Congress was notified within 48 hours of the military action, and the U.S. military forces deployed were extracted from the area within 60 days.

Those are the conditions that the War Powers Resolution demand. Also, keep in mind that the "conflict" that Trump got the U.S. involved in was already 10 days old, initiated by Israel.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Following President Trump's airstrikes on sites in Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan, AOC impulsively called the action "grounds for impeachment".

"The President's disastrous decision to bomb Iran without authorization is a grave violation of the Constitution and Congressional War Powers. He has impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations. It is absolutely and clearly grounds for impeachment." said AOC.

Predictably, another dem representative, House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, took issue with the bombing sorties ordered by the Commander-In-Chief:

"[Trump] misled the country about his intentions, failed to seek congressional authorization for the use of military force and risks American entanglement in a potentially disastrous war in the Middle East."
Clearly both representatives are ignorant of the War Powers Resolution of 1973, which empowers the President to order military action if the following conditions are met:

• Notify Congress within 48 hours of committing forces to hostilities
• Withdraw those forces within 60–90 days unless Congress grants authorization or declares war.

Trump notified Congress within 2 hours of the strike, and U.S. forces (bombers) were withdrawn from Iran airspace within minutes of the strike, so both conditions of the War Powers Resolution were met.

In your opinion, would it be wise for AOC and House Minority Leader Jeffries proceed with filing Articles of Impeachment?

The War Powers Act doesn't give the President the power to launch an offensive war against a country that did not attack us. Read the statute.

 

[Sabre]

Nice try. First of all, we were actively engaged in full warfare for one. For 2, we are not under threat from an imminent attack. Do your homework before you post bullshit.

The Presidents Article II powers include authority not only to order the use of military force to defend the United States and U.S. persons against actual or anticipated attacks, but also to advance other important national interests. Presidents of both parties have deployed U.S. forces and ordered the use of military force, without congressional authorization, on numerous occasions.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Of course they were. Congress was notified within 48 hours of the military action, and the U.S. military forces were extracted from the area within 60 days.

Those are the conditions that the War Powers Resolution demand. Also, keep in mind that the "conflict" that Trump got the U.S. involved in was already 10 days old, initiated by Israel.

Read the words:

(c)Presidential executive power as Commander-in-Chief; limitation

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to (1) a declaration of war, (2) specific statutory authorization, or (3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

--

This is about the President reacting to some sort of external attack.

This is not about giving the President the authority to launch an offensive war against some other country and then ask Congress for permission later.

THAT IS NOT WHAT THE WORDS SAY. READ THE WORDS.

 

[SkyChief]

The War Powers Act doesn't give the President the power to launch an offensive war against a country that did not attack us. Read the statute.

Trump did NOT "launch an offensive war" against any country. The "war" had already been established. Trump joined to help our ally, Israel.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Trump did NOT "launch an offensive war" against any country.

Trump DID launch an offensive attack against Iran.

Iran did NOT attack the U.S.

And launching a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities is the same thing as starting a war against Iran.

 

[Linc]

In terms of House elections, three Democrats in Illinois of their 14-3 delegation will have to answer for this asinine idiocy from this regressive leftist.