U.S. Senate committee approves Turkey sanctions bill

A U.S. Senate committee backed legislation on Wednesday to impose sanctions on Turkey after its offensive in Syria and purchase of a Russian S-400 missile system... The Republican-led Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted by 18-4 to send the “Promoting American National Security and Preventing the Resurgence of ISIS Act of 2019” for a vote in the full Senate.

“Now’s the time for the Senate to come together and take this opportunity to change Turkey’s behaviour,” said Senator Jim Risch, the panel’s Republican chairman, a lead sponsor of the bill with Senator Bob Menendez, the panel’s top Democrat....

“This is not some minor dustup with this country. This is a drift by this country, Turkey, to go in an entirely different direction than what they have in the past,” Risch said.

“They’ve thumbed their nose at us, and they’ve thumbed their nose at their other NATO allies,” he said...

To become law, the legislation would have to pass the House of Representatives, which passed its own Turkish sanctions bill by an overwhelming 403-16 vote in October and be signed by Trump.

Turkey does seem to be on the wrong side, needs to be out of nato for Ezek. 38-39 to happen.

Over 130 historical references demonstrate that Magog is the father of today’s Russian people. The phrase “hooks in the jaw” comes from the equestrian world where a special bridle is used to make a rebellious horse obedient to its rider’s commands. It symbolizes God forcing Russia to become involved in this battle to assure that His will is done. Persia is the ancient name for Iran, Cush and Put represent the North African nations, Gomer was Magog’s brother and settled along the Danube River in what would become Eastern Europe, and Togarmah, a son of Gomer, inhabited what’s now known as Turkey. The characteristic all these nations have in common today is their religion. They’re all Moslem. “Get ready; be prepared, you and all the hordes gathered about you, and take command of them. After many days you will be called to arms. In future years you will invade a land that has recovered from war, whose people were gathered from many nations to the mountains of Israel, which had long been desolate. They had been brought out from the nations, and now all of them live in safety. You and all your troops and the many nations with you will go up, advancing like a storm; you will be like a cloud covering the land. (Ezek. 38:7-9) If the fulfillment of Psalm 83 and Isaiah 17 precede the Battle Ezekiel 38, it helps explain how Israel could be taken by surprise when the Moslem coalition attacks and why none of Israel’s next door neighbors are mentioned in Ezekiel’s line up.

[Tho Constitution gives the Executive primary control over the conduct of foreign affairs. ]

Only over the minutia, things that require an expeditious response, such as ICBM’s over the horizon. The broad thrust is decided by Congress. The ultimate foreign policy move, a declaration of war, is also within Congress’s purview. The real bottom line is that the relative balance of power between Congress and the President re foreign policy is determined based on the current state of centuries of wrangling between the two branches, not the Constitution as written, which actually gives Congress a lot more power than it has chosen to wield since this founding document was drafted. Overall, the President obviously has much more control over foreign policy than any individual congressman or even both chambers of Congress combined, given that he can issue foreign policy edicts at will, whereas to reverse those edicts requires a veto-proof majority in both chambers of Congress, something that is pretty rare because it’s hard to get that kind of agreement on any single policy.

Just how rare are veto overrides, where Congress gets its way over the President’s objections? 7% of the time. In other words, 93% of the time, Presidential vetoes survive override attempts.
https://www.archives.gov/files/legislative/resources/education/veto/background.pdf

https://www.cfr.org/backgrounder/us-foreign-policy-powers-congress-and-president
[Powers of Congress

Article I of the Constitution enumerates several of Congress’s foreign affairs powers, including those to “regulate commerce with foreign nations,” “declare war,” “raise and support armies,” “provide and maintain a navy,” and “make rules for the government and regulation of the land and naval forces.” The Constitution also makes two of the president’s foreign affairs powers—making treaties and appointing diplomats—dependent on Senate approval.

Beyond these, Congress has general powers—to “lay and collect taxes,” to draw money from the Treasury, and to “make all laws which shall be necessary and proper”—that, collectively, allow legislators to influence nearly all manner of foreign policy issues. For example, the 114th Congress (2015–2017) passed laws on topics ranging from electronic surveillance to North Korea sanctions to border security to wildlife trafficking. In one noteworthy instance, lawmakers overrode President Barack Obama’s veto to enact a law allowing victims of international terrorist attacks to sue foreign governments.

Congress also plays an oversight role. The annual appropriations process allows congressional committees to review in detail the budgets and programs of the vast military and diplomatic bureaucracies. Lawmakers must sign off on more than a trillion dollars in federal spending every year, of which more than half is allocated to defense and international affairs. Lawmakers may also stipulate how that money is to be spent. For instance, Congress repeatedly barred the Obama administration from using funds to transfer detainees out of the military prison at Guantanamo Bay.

Congress has broad authority to conduct investigations into particular foreign policy or national security concerns. High-profile inquiries in recent years have centered on the 9/11 attacks, the Central Intelligence Agency’s detention and interrogation programs, and the 2012 attack on U.S. diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, Libya.

Furthermore, Congress has the power to create, eliminate, or restructure executive branch agencies, which it has often done after major conflicts or crises. In the wake of World War II, Congress passed the National Security Act of 1947, which established the CIA and National Security Council. Following the 9/11 attacks, Congress created the Department of Homeland Security.

Powers of the President

The president’s authority in foreign affairs, as in all areas, is rooted in Article II of the Constitution. The charter grants the officeholder the powers to make treaties and appoint ambassadors with the advice and consent of the Senate (Treaties require approval of two-thirds of senators present. Appointments require consent of a simple majority.)

Presidents also rely on other clauses to support their foreign policy actions, particularly those that bestow “executive power” and the role of “commander in chief of the army and navy” on the office. From this language springs a wide array of associated or “implied” powers. For instance, from the explicit power to appoint and receive ambassadors flows the implicit authority to recognize foreign governments and conduct diplomacy with other countries generally. From the commander-in-chief clause flow powers to use military force and collect foreign intelligence.

Presidents also draw on statutory authorities. Congress has passed legislation giving the executive additional authority to act on specific foreign policy issues. For instance, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (1977) authorizes the president to impose economic sanctions on foreign entities.

Presidents also cite case law to support their claims of authority. In particular, two U.S. Supreme Court decisions—United States. v. Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation (1936) and Youngstown Sheet & Tube Company v. Sawyer (1952)—are touchstones.

In the first, the court held that President Franklin D. Roosevelt acted within his constitutional authority when he brought charges against the Curtiss-Wright Export Corporation for selling arms to Paraguay and Bolivia in violation of federal law. Executive branch attorneys often cite Justice George Sutherland’s expansive interpretation of the president’s foreign affairs powers in that case. The president is “the sole organ of the federal government in the field of international relations,” he wrote on behalf of the court. “He, not Congress, has the better opportunity of knowing conditions which prevail in foreign countries and especially is this true in time of war,” he wrote.

In the second case, the court held that President Harry Truman ran afoul of the Constitution when he ordered the seizure of U.S. steel mills during the Korean War. Youngstown is often described by legal scholars as a bookend to Curtiss-Wright since the latter recognizes broad executive authority, whereas the former describes limits on it. Youngstown is cited regularly for Justice Robert Jackson’s three-tiered framework for evaluating presidential power:]

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.