Re: [PoliticalForum] Trump's Syria Strike Was Unconstitutional and Unwise

[MJ]

I pointed out the USURPATION Marshall perpetrated.
You seem to CONFUSE the Constitution with Court decrees, unconstitutional legislation and the like -- but THAT is what the State WANTS.

You FAILED to provide Constitutional citation (article, section and clause or amendment). Instead, you point at a Judicial decree. a Judicial decree is NOT the Constitution.
There are no powers to 'bomb' located in AIIS2.

Jefferson and others referred to an 'educated electorate'. THAT had very little to do with being housed in a government school and eventually given a piece of paper.
Too bad the State has taken great strides to extinguish the educated.

Regard$,
--MJ

It isn’t a war against Libya, it is just “a time-limited, scope-limited military action” or a “kinetic military action.” The government calls its non-wars wars, like the war on cancer, the war on drugs, the war on tobacco, the war on terror, and the war on childhood obesity, but refuses to call an act of war by the United States a war. -- Laurence Vance






At 04:11 PM 4/10/2017, you wrote:

Michael;

I’m sure you’re aware of Chief Justice John Marshall’s decision in Marbury v. Madison wheren Justice Marshall defined the Court’s power of judicial review  and the Court’s ability to review the Constitutionality of federal or state laws (and/or other governmental actions); thereby laying the foundations of federal constitutional jurisprudence and review.

Whether you like it, or don't like it, "It Is~~What It Is".  "It Is" and has always been since the turn of the 19th Century within our Nation.  You go on to say:

"support your claim -- point to the Article, Section and Clause or Amendment
Good Luck!"

Likewise, in the same, "Whether You Like It Or Don't Like It" Category, Article One, Section Eight, Clause Eleven grants to the Congress the power to wage war; (and to grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal); (In the "Same Church~~Different Pew" Category!);  and firing a hand full of Tomahawk Missiles at a directed target, to get the attention of a renegade asshole, is by no means a declaration of war...Far from it! Â

There is no continuous ongoing engagement or conflict;  there's no designation of troops or anything more than a one time engagement which falls into the powers designated to the President under Article II Section 2 of the Constitution.   To interpret the action by President Trump in any other fashion would literally be Unconstitutional....

On Sun, Apr 9, 2017 at 9:07 PM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:

Chief Usurper Marshall proclaimed it was the Court's power/authority to "say what the law is".

The Constitution does not provide any such thing.

No idea if it has come before the Court.

I *do*, however, find it curious that MOST decisions are not BOTH predictable AND unanimous. That they are not demonstrates that it is a charade ... a myth to maintain the master-slave/serf relationship.

Regard$,

--MJ

"You seem ... to consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions; a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy. Our judges are as honest as other men, and not more so. They have, with others, the same passions for party, for power, and the privilege of their corps. ... Their power [is] the more dangerous as they are in office for life, and not responsible, as the other functionaries are, to the elective control. The Constitution has erected no such single tribunal, knowing that to whatever hands confided, with the corruptions of time and party, its members would become despots." -- Thomas Jefferson, The Real Thomas Jefferson, p.499

At 06:02 PM 4/9/2017, you wrote:

This could be challenged in court Michael. That is its proper function. Has it been?

On Apr 9, 2017 7:18 AM, "MJ" <micha...@america.net> wrote:

That the government does as it pleases has NOTHING (per se) to do with whether its actions are constitutional.

Regard$,

--MJ

"The term "national security" isn't even in the Constitution. It means whatever public officials want it to mean." -- Jacob Hornberger

At 10:23 AM 4/8/2017, you wrote:

We were engaged in Vietnam without the declaration of war for years along with the entire Middle East debacle. Although I think our policies in the region are misguided this missile attack is permitted the president can make military strikes until he runs out of money.Â

On Apr 8, 2017 7:51 AM, "MJ" <micha...@america.net> wrote:

ROTFLMAO!

[pssst ... you contradicted yourself]

Regard$,

--MJ

“The Constitution vests the power of dececlaring war r with Congress, therefore no offensive expedition of importance can be undertaken until after they have deliberated upon the subject, and authorized such a measure.†-- George Washington

At 03:19 PM 4/7/2017, you wrote:

I believe in the three powers of government; and I am also a stickler for an act of war being declared only by Congress.

In this quick, decisive instance, Â Rand Paul is misplaceed. Â (And Lil' Marco was actually correct for once!) Â TThe Presidennt does not need a Congressional blessing in order to give an order to rain down a battery of Tomahawk Missiles! Â

The concept is ludicrous.

On Fri, Apr 7, 2017 at 10:13 AM, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:

07 April 2017

Trump's Syria Strike Was Unconstitutional and Unwise

The military intervention solved nothing, while bypassing Congress, betraying the president’s non-intenterventionist st supporporters, and highlighting his hypocrisy.

CONOR FRIEDERSDORF

Early the morning of August 21, 2013, six densely populated neighborhoods in Syria “were jolted a awake by a seseries o of explosions, followed by an oozing blanket of suffocating gas,†the Washiington Post reported at the time. “Unknown toto Syrian offificials,s, U.S. spy agencies recorded each step in the alleged chemical attack, from the extensive preparations to the launching of rockets to the after-action assessments by Syrian officials. Those records and intercepts would become the core of the Obama administration’s ¢s evidendentiary case linking the Syrian government to what one official called an ‘iœindiscriminate, inconceivableble horrorÃor’Ã‒‚­the use of outlawedwewedwed toxins to kill nearly 1,500 civilians, including at least 426 children.â€

Days later, President Obama declared that he was ready to order a military strike on Syria to punish its leader, Bashar al-Assad, for using chemical weapons while waging civil war, but added that as “president of the w worldÃââ‚⢂¬™s oldest est t constitutional democracy,†he would consultt Congress. LLegislators never didd vote to approve a strike, in part because the American public did not want to intervene militarily in Syria.

And a bitter Obama Administration critic, Donald Trump, took to Twitter to weigh in. “If Obama attackcks Syria and d innocecent civilians are hurt and killed, he and the U.S. will look very bad!†the reeal estate developer wrote. “WhWhat I am saying is stayay out of Syriaia,†Trump added days later. Ãƃ¢€œAGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLILISH LEADER,â†he emphasiized, “DO DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA - IF YOUOU DO M MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!â€

Most importantly, Trump Tweeted this:

 Â Â

Trump explicitly understood that a military response would require congressional approval. Yet Thursday, Trump ordered a strike on Syria without seeking that approval, citing a chemical weapons attack by the Assad regime. “Fifty-nine Tomahawk mimissiles were e fired d from American destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean at Al Shayrat airfield,†The New York Times reported.The cost in missiles alone was roughly $50 million.

There are those who supported the presidentâ€Ã¢„„¢s ac ac actions.

Prior to the strike, various members of the military-industrial complex, hawkish pundits, and social-media users outraged by killings of Syrian civilians demanded that Trump do something in response to the abhorrent slaughter of innocents. But Trump never swore to slake a vocal minority’s outrage. He swore to up uphold the ConConstituttution. And if his 2013 statement on bombing Syria left any doubt as to whether he understood the proper role of Congress, he had lots of reminders prior to Thursday.

Back in 2013, “more than 100 House lawmakersrsâ€ÃƒÂƒÂ¢€Ã¢€œ–at le t le least 98 98 Republicans and 18 Democrats––signed on to a le letter formallallally requesting thathat President Obama seek congressional approval for any military response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria,†the Washingtton Poost reported. “The letter, first written by Rep. Scott Rigell (R-Va.), suggests that failure to seek congressional authorization for military strikes would be unconstitutional.â€

That warning was reasserted this week. Senator Mike Lee, a Utah Republican, put it this way:

 Â Â

Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican, said â€Ã…Å“thehe president needs congressional authorization for military action as required by the Constitution, and I call on him to come to Congress for a proper debate." He added, "Our prior interventions in this region have done nothing to make us safer and Syria will be no different."

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker told CNN’s s s Jack Tapper that Presideident Trump should “certaiainly comeme to Congress†before acting in Syria..

And elected officials were not alone.

“If f Article I, Section 8, Clause 11 of the UnUnited S States Constitution means anything, it means that the president must obtain congressional approval before taking us to war against a sovereign nation that has not attacked the U.S. or its allies and is not threatening to attack the U.S. or its allies,†declared National Review’s DavDavid French, w, who serserved in the Judge Advocate General's Corps during the Iraq War.

“Thehere is no reason to forego congressional d debate e now, just as there was no reason to forego congressional debate when Obama considered taking the nation to war against Syria in 2013,†he expplaineed. “Congressional approval l is not only constitutionanal, it t serves the public purpose of requiring a president to clearly outline the justifications for war and his goals for the conflict. It also helps secure public support for war, and in this instance it strikes me as reckless that we would not only go to war against a sovereign nation, we’d also court a possibleble military encounter er with ah a great power.â€

Other commentators made a substantive case against a strike. Robert Farley was especially succinct:

 Â Â

Combine all of these factors:

Strong substantive arguments against a strike.

Risk of escalation into a major powers conflict.

Dubious legality.

Multiple members of Congress preemptively expressing skepticism about the legality.

The president himself formerly declaring congressional approval would be necessary for such a strike.

If there are no consequences for a president who unilaterally orders military action under all those conditions, what use is a Constitution that vests the legislature with the war power? Yet much of the political press acts as if the war power is not even contested.

Take David Sanger’s news analysis in the Ne New YorYork Times, , “ Striking at Assad Caries Opportunities, Risks for Trump.†The article confidently asserts that â€ÅÅ“the Syria action gives the Trump administration an opportunity to demand that Mr. Putin either contain or remove Syria’â„¢s leadeader, , Bashar al-Assad, or else Mr. Trump will expand the limited American military action­and quicklyklyšÂ­if theif the Russian president fails to do so.†(Did the strike give Trump that opportunity? No evvidence is presented for that conclusion.) The construction frames future interventions in Syria as if they are Trump’s ¢s prerogative. Even the part of of the article dedicated to the risks that Trump assumed in striking does not so much as mention the matter of legality.

Why is that critique ignored even as elected officials make it?

 Â Â

And why did so many in the media call the Syria strike “surgicalââ¢â‚¬ ?

r>

r>

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/850256936041762816

As I've explained before at great length, that characterization is Orwellian propaganda.

Congress erred by doing nothing when Obama waged war illegally in Libya. It will compound that error if there are no consequences now for Trump.  Every legislator whowho has expressed the beelief that it would be illegal to strike Syria without their permission should start acting like they meant what they said. Given what recent presidents have been permitted, impeachment over this matter alone would understandably lack popular legitimacy. But I wouldnâ€ââ„¢t mind id if anti-war ar legislators created a draft document titled “Artiticles of Impeachment,â†wrotee a paragraph about this strike at the top, and put Trump on notice that if he behaves this way again, a coalition will aggressively lobby their colleagues to oust him from office.

The alternative is proceeding with an unbowed president who is out of his depth in international affairs, feels entitled to wage war in ways even he once called illegitimate, and thinks of waging war as a way presidents can improve their popularity.

Or as Trump himself once put it:

 Â Â

Today, Trump is desperate. He is flailing from failure to failure in domestic policy, with dismal approval ratings and no clear way to increase them­except by tryirying to exploit the Ameerican public’s s s historic tendency to to rally around a president at war. There has never been a stronger case for preemptively reining in a president‬™â„¢s ability to unilaterally launch military strikes on foreign countries that are not attacking us.

To allow a man of Trump’s character to retretain th that power, , after its expansion by decades of presidents who pushed it beyond the bounds of the Constitution, would be folly.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/04/president-trumps-syria-strike-was-unconstitutional-and-unwise/522228/

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="27f0dbd7.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="27f0dbd7.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407101326.16e83...@america.net.6>

X-Attachment-Id: 7ad51e9b4305c26f_0.2

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="27f0dc16.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="27f0dc16.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407101326.16e83...@america.net.9>

X-Attachment-Id: 7ad51e9b4305c26f_0.5

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="27f0dbf7.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="27f0dbf7.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407101326.16e83...@america.net.7>

X-Attachment-Id: 7ad51e9b4305c26f_0.3

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="27f0dc06.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="27f0dc06.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407101326.16e83...@america.net.8>

X-Attachment-Id: 7ad51e9b4305c26f_0.4

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="27f0dbc8.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="27f0dbc8.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407101326.16e83...@america.net.5>

X-Attachment-Id: 7ad51e9b4305c26f_0.1

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="292c700d.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="292c700d.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407155555.16e83...@america.net.9>

X-Attachment-Id: c9d74236c62eb51c_0.5

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="292c6ffd.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="292c6ffd.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407155555.16e83...@america.net.8>

X-Attachment-Id: c9d74236c62eb51c_0.4

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="292c6ed4.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="292c6ed4.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407155555.16e83...@america.net.5>

X-Attachment-Id: c9d74236c62eb51c_0.1

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="292c6fde.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="292c6fde.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407155555.16e83...@america.net.6>

X-Attachment-Id: c9d74236c62eb51c_0.2

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="292c6fed.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="292c6fed.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170407155555.16e83...@america.net.7>

X-Attachment-Id: c9d74236c62eb51c_0.3

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2df07f31.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2df07f31.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170408140900.0e036...@america.net.6>

X-Attachment-Id: 38105638e38684df_0.2

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2df07f60.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2df07f60.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170408140900.0e036...@america.net.9>

X-Attachment-Id: 38105638e38684df_0.5

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2df07f12.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2df07f12.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170408140900.0e036...@america.net.5>

X-Attachment-Id: 38105638e38684df_0.1

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2df07f41.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2df07f41.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170408140900.0e036...@america.net.7>

X-Attachment-Id: 38105638e38684df_0.3

Content-Type: application/octet-stream; name="2df07f51.jpg"

Content-Disposition: inline; filename="2df07f51.jpg"

Content-ID: <7.1.0.9.0.20170408140900.0e036...@america.net.8>

X-Attachment-Id: 38105638e38684df_0.4

--

--

Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.

For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

Â

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/

* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.

* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

---

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to politicalforum+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.