- President doesn't need Congressional approval.
- The Democratic Party is always on the attack but never attacking US security concerns.
- Thirty five Islamist extremist training camps located inside the United States.
Over the last few days President Trump has ordered attacks on the enemies of the United States and its citizens abroad. After instituting these attacks the President has come under extreme scrutiny and prejudices of the Democrat controlled House. So let’s take a look at the reality of the situation, and in doing so we will also discover the Democratic Party’s inability to know and speak the truth.
Firstly, the President does not need Congressional approval to attack the enemies of the United States. Here’s the proof:
The U.S. is currently conducting military operations in at least seven countries. In addition to Afghanistan and Iraq, American forces are involved in conflicts in Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Niger, and Libya. Most of these campaigns are being carried out under the 2001 Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which Congress passed just a week after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. The 60-word resolution granted the president sweeping powers to use force against any nation, organization, or person who aided in the attacks. That was understood to include Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network al Qaida and the Taliban regime in Afghanistan. The Constitution gives Congress the sole power to “declare war,” but since 2001, presidents have repeatedly used the AUMF to justify military operations around the globe. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo recently suggested President Trump had the authority to unilaterally order a war against Iran because of the AUMF.
How has the AUMF been used?
Presidents Bush and Obama invoked the AUMF at least 37 times for military actions in 14 countries and at sea. Obama invoked it to strike ISIS in the Middle East and al-Shabab in East Africa — terrorist groups that didn’t exist on Sept. 11, 2001. Obama administration lawyers argued that those groups were “associated forces” of al Qaida, so the law still applied. But even before the AUMF, American presidents had steadily expanded their war powers over the last century.
“Through what authority?
Through their role as commander in chief of the military. The Framers acknowledged that the president should be able to order a military response to an emergency, such as a foreign attack on the U.S., without a formal declaration of war. American presidents have steadily expanded the definition of “emergency”; as a result, the U.S. has had only five declared wars in its history, the last of which was World War II. President Truman didn’t seek congressional approval for the Korean War — which lasted for three years and cost the lives of 40,000 Americans — by describing it as a “police action” under United Nations rules. The small American presence in South Vietnam metastasized into a full-blown war after Congress passed the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin resolution, authorizing the president “to promote the maintenance of international peace and security in southeast Asia.” The undeclared war lasted until 1975, killing more than 58,000 Americans and more than 1.3 million people altogether.
Can Congress take its power back?
It has tried. In 1973, Congress passed the War Powers Resolution, which required the president to seek congressional approval for any conflicts lasting more than 60 days. Presidents have mostly just ignored it. Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, and Bill Clinton all used loose interpretations of “national emergency” to justify interventions in conflicts in Lebanon, Grenada, Panama, Somalia, and Bosnia. Obama argued that the War Powers Resolution didn’t apply to airstrikes in Libya because they wouldn’t involve ground troops or the “sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire.” The Obama and Trump administrations have used a similar rationale to justify supporting Saudi Arabia’s brutal campaign against Houthi rebels in Yemen. Trump used the same legal framework for airstrikes on Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria last year.
So, what’s the real and unseen problem with the Democratic Party and the mainstream media? The very fact that Islamist training camps inside the United States borders are being ignored should be a major concern for every US citizen, and it should not matter which political party they adhere to. Since 9/11, there have been 36,153 attacks on innocent people by Islamist extremist world wide. Since 9/11, there have been more than 240,000 innocent people killed by Islamist extremist. Since 9/11, there have been more than 320,000 innocent people injured by Islamist extremist attacks. Keep in mind that these are innocent people and do not belong to any military organization.
Right now, on January 4, 2020, there are no less than 35 Islamist extremist training camps inside the United States. This is a proven fact. The FBI has documents to prove it and so does the CIA. So why does the Democratic Party and mainstream media ignore these things? Is it because the new far left Socialist Democrat Party is closely associated with the Muslims? Did the Muslims in our Congress receive donations from foreign nationals to gain their seats? That would be highly illegal. An investigation into these matters should surely have taken place already.
In 2018 Judge Emilio Chavez of the Eighth Judicial District Court of New Mexico dropped all charges against Islamic terrorists that were training little children to be shooters and bomb carrier’s. WHY? They are now free to roam around our nation and recruit other people/children to do their bidding in heinous ways. If we are going to call the kettle black then let’s point the finger in the right direction. Good job Mr. President.