Posted on 06/14/2011 2:03:28 PM PDT by Red Badger
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, sent President Obama a letter Tuesday afternoon warning him that the operation in Libya will be violating the War Powers Resolution by this Sunday, which marks the 90th day of U.S. military involvement in the country.
Boehner wants "a clear explanation of the legal standing under the War Powers Resolution," that Obama is using to justify continuing the operations behind Sunday.
The letter is below.
June 14, 2011
Dear Mr. President:
Five days from now, our country will reach the 90-day mark from the notification to Congress regarding the commencement of the military operation in Libya, which began on March 18, 2011. On June 3, 2011, the House passed a resolution which, among other provisions, made clear that the Administration has not asked for, nor received, Congressional authorization of the mission in Libya. Therefore, it would appear that in five days, the Administration will be in violation of the War Powers Resolution unless it asks for and receives authorization from Congress or withdraws all U.S. troops and resources from the mission.
Since the mission began, the Administration has provided tactical operational briefings to the House of Representatives, but the White House has systematically avoided requesting a formal authorization for its action. It has simultaneously sought, however, to portray that its actions are consistent with the War Powers Resolution. The combination of these actions has left many Members of Congress, as well as the American people, frustrated by the lack of clarity over the Administration’s strategic policies, by a refusal to acknowledge and respect the role of the Congress, and by a refusal to comply with the basic tenets of the War Powers Resolution.
You took an oath before the American people on January 20, 2009 in which you swore to “faithfully execute the Office of President” and to “preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.” The Constitution requires the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,” and one of those laws is the War Powers Resolution, which requires an approving action by Congress or withdrawal within 90 days from the notification of a military operation. Given the mission you have ordered to the U.S. Armed Forces with respect to Libya and the text of the War Powers Resolution, the House is left to conclude that you have made one of two determinations: either you have concluded the War Powers Resolution does not apply to the mission in Libya, or you have determined the War Powers Resolution is contrary to the Constitution. The House, and the American people whom we represent, deserve to know the determination you have made.
Therefore, on behalf of the institution and the American people, I must ask you the following questions: Have you or your Administration conducted the legal analysis to justify your position as to whether your Administration views itself to be in compliance with the War Powers Resolution so that it may continue current operations, absent formal Congressional support or authorization, once the 90-day mark is reached? Assuming you conducted that analysis, was it with the consensus view of all stakeholders of the relevant Departments in the Executive branch? In addition, has there been an introduction of a new set of facts or circumstances which would have changed the legal analysis the Office of Legal Counsel released on April 1, 2011? Given the gravity of the constitutional and statutory questions involved, I request your answer by Friday, June 17, 2011.
From the beginning, the House of Representatives has sought to balance two equal imperatives regarding Libya which have been in direct contradiction: the House of Representatives takes seriously America’s leadership role in the world; our country’s interests in the region; and the commitments to and from its steadfast allies. At the same time, strong concern and opposition exists to the use of military force when the military mission, by design, cannot secure a U.S. strategic policy objective. The ongoing, deeply divisive debate originated with a lack of genuine consultation prior to commencement of operations and has been further exacerbated by the lack of visibility and leadership from you and your Administration.
I respect your authority as Commander-in-Chief, though I remain deeply concerned the Congress has not been provided answers from the Executive branch to fundamental questions regarding the Libya mission necessary for us to fulfill our equally important Constitutional responsibilities. I believe in the moral leadership our country can and should exhibit, especially during such a transformational time in the Middle East. I sincerely hope the Administration will faithfully comply with the War Powers Resolution and the requests made by the House of Representatives, and that you will use your unique authority as our President to engage the American people regarding our mission in Libya.
Respectfully, John A. Boehner
Can you just IMAGINE the Media outrage if this were Bush?
Yeah, he'll come up with some lame. and ILLEGAL, justification. My hope is that Boehner doesn't just take it, action is needed. As to NATO, yep that's just semantics. Without the USA there are no 'NATO forces'.
But the thing is that Libya is 'just' War #3, we're fighting War #4 in Yemen. The USAF or Navy Jets are doing Bombing runs. That's a lot of Wars for a 'peace loving liberal' like Obama. ;-)
Excellent post........a lot of knee-jerk reaction around here.
“The War Powers Act only allows a president to engage troops without a declaration of war by the Congress if there is “a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.””
Obama’s polling numbers were falling, that qualifies as a National Emergency now.
Just ask anyone in a New York or DC ABC,NBC,CBS,CNN,MSNBC,NPR,Univision,NYTimes or WashPost newsroom.
Geez, Boner, at least cut his $100 p/lb wagyu steak account. Make him eat worms from Michelle’s garden with his French surrender monkey argrowla salad.
baroach obuggery PING
I also agree. And I’m not a newbie.I signed up for the first time under another screen name in 2002. And even if I were a newbie I would not hesitate to comment on this forum, because I am signed up for it, like everyone else.
It’s the circular fire and destructive sarcasm that 99% of the time keeps me from posting on this forum. In the past couple of years the tenure of this forum has taken on some of the attributes of our opposite competitors.
I also think that Congress is moving ahead on this. Let Boehner be Boehner and do his job and get things moving.
All talk and no co,,,,,uh,,,,uh,,,,Weiner.
Hearing you. Come on,everybody - lets try to NOT KILL EVERYONE on “our” side before we beat back the enemy - what say you? hmmmm? Let the letter soak in a little. Between Wednesday and Friday might be kind of interestink.
Zero to Boehner: “Nuts!”
Boehner gets points for challenging Zero on his unlawful combat commitments, echoed again by combat actions in Yemen.
I would have gone just a bit further in the letter:
“Mr. Obama, if a satisfactory reply is not received by Friday, June 17, 2011, you will be adjudged in contempt of Congress and using American military forces in violation of the War Powers Act; thus, impeachment proceedings will begin Saturday, June 18, 2011. Good day.”
Panetta said Obama can to protect US interests. What interests? McSlime agrees with Panetta.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/panetta-obama-can-use-military-without-c
Har. You’re right. Back in the salad days of the Clinton - Lewinsky saga, FR was allowed to post the full articles and people didn’t have to hit links and be bombarded with cookies and ads.
ATC23, proud member (he he) since 1997
You're right, Running. The circular firing squad keeps most rational conservatives from posting on many threads.
Every stupid post like the many above diminishes constructive dialogue.
I sometimes wonder if that's the point...... to make FR useless as a forum for constructive conservativism.
I have often wondered how much of that comes from trolls. The disagreement is not witty or informed, just blustering and vicious and aimed at silencing the other person, and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if there are a few Dem operatives behind some of these "Freeper" attacks on other Freepers.
Agreed. I am disappointed with the GOP but Obama has to answer to contempt with Issa and possibly contempt with Boehner. No one is happy with Obama. I don’t even think 25% strongly approve of him because he is a lying war president. He has to answer to the people.
Just watch....the “boner” will huff and puff but the little piggy will shoot him the finger and make him cry.
The Republicans are All Blow and No Show and ALWAYS cave in.
§ 1542. Consultation; initial and regular consultationsThe President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations.
What part of "before" do Boehner and 0boner not get?
He knows that there really isn’t anything that Congress can do other than impeach him and he knows that the Rats in the Senate will protect him there.
I agree.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.