The US Senate on Thursday advanced a bipartisan war powers resolution to prevent Donald Trump from taking further military actions against Venezuela, after he ordered a weekend raid to capture that country’s president, Nicolás Maduro, without giving Congress advance notice.
The measure passed with 52 senators in favor and 47 opposed. All Democrats voted for the resolution , as did Republicans Rand Paul, Todd Young, Lisa Murkowski, Josh Hawley and Susan Collins.
Should the Senate approve the measure, it will need to pass the House and be signed by Trump.
The war powers resolution, introduced by the Democratic Senator Tim Kaine, requires Trump to seek permission before attacking or otherwise using the military against Venezuela. Following the Saturday raid that saw US special forces assault the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, and spirit Maduro to New York City to face trial on charges related to “narco-terrorism”, the president said he did not tell lawmakers beforehand because “Congress has a tendency to leak”.
…in Venezuela…
So that’s nice, but come the fuck on. Take the war powers back that you’re supposed to control.
And why would Trump sign this?
Well, presumably he wouldn’t. But a Trump veto can actually be overridden by Congress. Additionally, a law passing both houses of Congress but being vetoed by the president sends a message to the people as well.
By the way, this is how it’s all supposed to work in a functioning democracy. But USA doesn’t have that so rules are out the window.
Congress could override but they would need a 2/3rds majority and good fuckin luck with that
They passed the Epstein bill almost unanimously, which surprised me to be honest. You never know.
Republicans probably had insider info that the files would be censored to the point of being useless
If they can only muster 52 senators for the first pass there is no chance in hell it will gain more votes to override a veto.
Parliament: We have done our part and further processing doesn’t concern us.
Excuse me wtf, we already had rules for this exact thing that apply well beyond just Venezuela and this is just avoiding enforcement.
The enforcement of the executive comes almost exclusively from people in the executive refusing to follow their orders. If the Supreme Court says “the War Powers Act applies, duh” it still won’t mean anything unless the military refuses to do the wars. Congress saying it or the SC ruling it is just an effort to get them to do that.
I thought they called this a criminal prosecution rather than a war as a loophole, am I wrong?
They can call it a ballet, it doesn’t make it one, and the human soldiers who will be on the hook for following illegal orders won’t be protected because of it.
Interesting that most republicans voted against this but didn’t filibuster. Speaks to their impotent terror of disobeying the Trump administration. They are truly pathetic.
It won’t get signed even if it passes the house and there’s not enough votes to overturn a veto. So, why even bother filibuster? If there was enough votes to overturn a veto, then they’d just be able to end the filibuster too.
Because it looks bad for the Administration. If they were 100% trying to protect him I think the best move strategically is to filibuster. I interpret this as they don’t support Trump’s military abuses but they’re too scared to actually vote against it.
However it’s possible there is some other explanation I’m missing.
Congress, you have a choice, assert your powers, you know the ones you have had since November 7, 1973. Or give in, give up, and go home. Your constituents have put you in the position, as a co-equal branch, to restrain The Executive Branch. Do your JOB!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_Powers_Resolution
"The War Powers Resolution (also known as the War Powers Resolution of 1973 or the War Powers Act) (50 U.S.C. ch. 33) is a federal law intended to check the U.S. president’s power to commit the United States to an armed conflict without the consent of the U.S. Congress. The resolution was adopted in the form of a United States congressional joint resolution. It provides that the president can send the U.S. Armed Forces into action abroad only by Congress’s “statutory authorization”, or in case of “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces”. "
That resolution was kneecapped by the Authorization for Use of Military Force after 9/11. Multiple presidents have treated it as a blank check to execute military actions around the world without congressional approval. Just call the targets “terrorists” (or “narco terrorists” now) and do anything without repercussions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Authorization_for_Use_of_Military_Force_of_2001
So the updated war powers act under consideration is worth passing? We should all contact our reps.
It would be a (small) step in the right direction if it had any chance of becoming law. It’s a non-starter in the House, and Trump certainly wouldn’t sign it either.
I happen to appreciate any/all steps in the directions that move us away from war.
Should the Senate approve the measure, it will need to pass the House and be signed by Trump.
Well, that was a great idea, it’s a good thing that the person it’s designed to rein in can’t simply nullify it with the stroke of a pen, right? /s
jump shots bipartisan War Powers resolution into trash from across Senate floor
Meaningless legislative theater. It’ll never pass the House. If it did Trump wouldn’t sign it. And even if those things magically happened, the scope is too narrow. Congress needs to take back its constitutional war powers that it’s ceded to the executive branch long ago.
it will need to pass the House and be signed by Trump.
Well that’s that I guess.
the NEWS already moved onto the shootings in oregon and minnesota.
