House Votes to Curb Trump Power to Strike Iran Without Congress

By Daniel Flatley

The U.S. House of Representatives voted Thursday to limit President Donald Trump’s authority to strike Iran, a mostly symbolic move Democrats say defends Congress’s constitutional powers but Republicans say endangers national security.

The resolution was adopted on a 224-194 vote, as tensions in the Middle East remain high after a U.S. drone strike killed Iranian general Qassem Soleimani. Iran retaliated with missiles striking an Iraqi base used by U.S. troops late Tuesday, without casualties, leaving uncertainty about future hostilities.

With Thursday’s resolution, the House is saying that Congress should be consulted before the conflict with Iran escalates. The Senate now can either consider the House-passed measure or move forward with a different version introduced by Senator Tim Kaine, a Democrat from Virginia.

The effort to constrain Trump’s power was backed by three Republicans but faces tough odds in the GOP-led Senate. Still, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the measure has “real teeth,” citing the 1973 War Powers Act to limit a president’s military options without consulting Congress.

Republicans Matt Gaetz of Florida, Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Francis Rooney of Florida and independent Justin Amash of Michigan joined 220 Democrats in supporting the measure. Eight Democrats voted with 186 Republicans against it.

Democrats criticized the Trump administration for failing to provide clear justification that Soleimani posed an imminent threat. Two Republican senators -- Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky -- sharply criticized Wednesday’s classified briefing led by Secretary of State Michael Pompeo for failing to address their concerns about congressional authorization for the attack.

Lee said the “insulting” briefing tipped his vote in favor of strengthening requirements for the president to consult Congress on military action.

“That briefing is what changed my mind,” Lee said Wednesday. “After today, every time they pull a stunt like this, I’m willing to consider and introduce any and every War Powers Act resolution.”

Constitutional Requirement

The House measure, sponsored by Michigan Democrat and former CIA analyst Elissa Slotkin, would require Trump to cease military actions against Iran unless authorized by Congress or in response to an imminent threat.

Republicans and at least one Democrat -- New York Representative Max Rose, an Army veteran -- criticized the House resolution as an empty gesture that plays “politics with questions of war and peace.”

The House version is a concurrent resolution that wouldn’t require Trump’s signature if passed by both chambers. The War Power Act provides for a concurrent resolution to have the force of law, although that would probably be challenged in court.

The Senate version Kaine introduced is a joint resolution, which would require the president to sign it to become law. Trump vetoed a previous resolution last year to end U.S. military involvement in Yemen, and the Senate didn’t have enough votes to override his veto.

If either Kaine’s resolution or the House version meets Senate requirements to get a privileged voting status, it would only need a simple majority to pass. With Lee and Paul saying they back Kaine’s resolution, it would need support from at least two more Republicans to pass.

Kaine said he dropped two paragraphs that referenced Trump directly after getting feedback from some Republicans he hopes to attract to his effort. GOP Senators Susan Collins and Todd Young, who have voted with Democrats for war powers resolutions in the past, said they are considering the Kaine resolution but haven’t committed to it yet.

Military Authorization

Kaine’s resolution also states explicitly that the 2001 and 2002 Authorizations for the Use of Military Force don’t cover military action against Iran. The Trump administration included the 2002 AUMF as part of its justification for the drone strike near the Baghdad, Iraq, airport that killed Soleimani.

The White House on Thursday issued a statement challenging the House resolution, saying it’s unnecessary and would lack the force of law. The statement of administration policy also said the 2002 AUMF covers any military action that would be restricted under the House measure.

The statement said that if the provisions of the resolution were to become law, “they could undermine the president’s ability to defend United States forces and interests in the region against ongoing threats from Iran and its proxies.”

Kaine said earlier that it is precisely the risk of conflict with Iran that makes it so important for Congress to defend its constitutional authority to declare war.

“We’re at the brink of war right now,” Kaine said. “It increases the necessity of the bill.”

PHoto: Wikicommons

Pompeo Vows That U.S. Will Protect Shipping in Persian Gulf

By Mark Niquette and Shawn Donnan

There’s “no doubt” Iran was responsible for attacks on two oil tankers leaving the Persian Gulf last week, and the U.S. will guarantee safe commercial navigation going forward with its partners, Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said.

“The United States is going make sure that we take all the actions necessary, diplomatic and otherwise, that achieve that outcome,” Pompeo said on “Fox News Sunday,” one of two scheduled appearances on the political talk shows.

Pompeo spoke days after he and President Donald Trump accused Iran of being behind attacks that crippled the tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, which abuts Iran and is a strategic choke point for crude oil coming out of the Persian Gulf.

Asked how certain the U.S. is about Iran’s responsibility, Pompeo said, “it’s unmistakable what happened here” and there’s “high confidence” Iran was behind other attacks throughout the world during the past 40 days as well.

The U.S. has released video of what it says was an Iranian boat approaching one of the tankers at night to remove an unexploded limpet mine and other evidence that it says point to Iran’s responsibility for the attacks.

“Iran did do it and you know they did it,” Trump said Friday during a phone interview with Fox News.

‘Economic Terrorism’

Iran has denied any wrongdoing. The country’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, on Friday suggested in a series of tweets that Iran’s enemies may have been behind the attacks, accusing the Trump administration of “economic terrorism’’ and blaming it for the “renewed tension in our region.”

There’s no question Iran was behind the attacks, and it was a “Class A screw-up,” Democratic Representative Adam Schiff of California, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” But the problem is the U.S. is struggling to persuade its allies to join in a response, he said.

“It shows just how isolated the United States has become,’’ Schiff said.

Pompeo said on CBS he is making calls to allies and “the world needs to unite against this threat.’’ He suggested that Iran is attacking international waterways to “drive up the price of crude oil around the world so that the world will cry uncle.”

The incidents highlight the potential risks of the Trump administration’s aggressive approach toward Iran. They’ve raised fears that months of building tensions over Trump’s decision to abandon a multilateral nuclear deal and restore U.S. sanctions might trigger a military conflict between the U.S. and Iran.

Retaliatory Strike

Republican Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas advocated an attack, saying on CBS that “these unprovoked attacks on commercial shipping warrant a retaliatory military strike.’’ Schiff noted that Trump has said he doesn’t want war with Iran, but that his advisers “seem to be taking actions to undercut that ambition to stay out of warfare.’’

Schiff said Trump’s pressure campaign on Iran after withdrawing from the nuclear accord was “dangerously naïve” and that the attacks on shipping were “eminently foreseeable.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, in an interview conducted Thursday that aired on CNN’s “Fareed Zakaria GPS” on Sunday, said “we have absolutely no appetite for going to war, or to be provocative to create situations that might evoke responses, where mistakes could be made.”

Pompeo blamed Iran for escalating the tensions. He declined to discuss what options the administration is considering in response, but said Trump has been clear that the Islamic Republic will not acquire a nuclear weapon.

Photo: Bloomberg

Pelosi Says Trump Needs Congress for Any Military Action on Iran

By Daniel Flatley

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned the Trump administration against taking military action in Iran without authorization from Congress, as the U.S. weighs how to respond to rising tensions in the Middle East.

"The responsibility in the Constitution is for Congress to declare war," Pelosi said Thursday. "So I hope that the president’s advisers recognize that they have no authorization to go forward in any way."

Pelosi said that the 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force—or AUMF—enacted by Congress after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks would not cover actions taken against Iran. She said that, like President Donald Trump, she opposed the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and she welcomed reports this week that the president had "no appetite" for war, a characterization offered by Republican Senator Mitt Romney.

"I like what I hear from the president that he has ‘no appetite’ for this," she said. "Even though some of his supporters are rattling sabers."

Trump suggested Thursday he wasn’t looking for a military confrontation even as his advisers warn Iran against any provocation. Tensions have been rising with the Islamic Republic over U.S. allegations that Tehran may be preparing an attack on U.S. military forces in the region or on commercial shipping.

“I hope not,” Trump told reporters on Thursday after he was asked about going to war with Iran while greeting Swiss President Ueli Maurer for a meeting at the White House.

Perceived Threats

Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky and one of the president’s allies on domestic issues, said he worries that the recent moves by the administration risk dragging the U.S. into a war with Iran.

"There are people who do want a war for regime change and they don’t mind putting all the people so close together that there might be a skirmish that leads to war," Paul said. "I think that would be a terrible tragedy."

Paul is a co-sponsor of legislation introduced by Democratic Senator Tom Udall that would "limit the use of funds for kinetic military operations in or against Iran." He is the only Republican sponsor of that bill.

Other Republicans said they were comfortable giving the White House more leeway to respond to perceived threats.

House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy said Trump was trying to head off a debate about the use of military force altogether by deterring hostile actions from Iran and Iranian-backed combatants in the Middle East. He said he believes that the administration will act in a “thoughtful” way.

"There’s no action that’s being taken," McCarthy said. "What has transpired today is the administration is trying to make sure there is not. It’s sending a very clear message to Iran."

‘Cause for Concern’

Senator Marco Rubio, a Florida Republican, said U.S. forces have the right to protect themselves if attacked and that questions about congressional authorization would not be relevant in this situation.

"If Iran attacks us, they’re going to get hit hard," Rubio said. "If they don’t attack us, there’ll be no war. It’s up to them."

Representative Mac Thornberry, the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee, said recent Iranian action in the Persian Gulf is “cause for concern,” according to the top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee.

Thornberry, who has been briefed by Central Command officials and intelligence staff over the last two weeks, said sending a signal to Iranians not to attack Americans “seems like the prudent thing to do.” He said he’s not concerned that the Trump’s administration’s response could be politically motivated.

Senator Richard Durbin, a member of Democratic leadership, said he voted against the Iraq War because he wasn’t convinced of the intelligence, and he fears the U.S. could be heading toward a repeat. He also warned that miscalculation when tensions are high could lead to fatalities, followed by calls for retribution.

The Illinois Democrat said Trump has surrounded himself with advisers “who believe that getting tough on a military basis with Iran is in our best interest. I do not."

Photo: Wikicommons