Obama administration tells Hill aides U.S. 'not at war' with Libya
Washington (CNN) - As coalition planes cleared ground threats to support a no fly zone over Libya, the Obama administration briefed a bipartisan group of congressional aides Tuesday on the mission.
According to one official who attended the briefing in the Capitol Visitors Center Auditorium, the panel (recently removed Ambassador to Libya, two military, two intelligence and one treasury official) made clear that the U.S. is "not at war" with Libya.
During the question and answer session where 17 or 18 questions were asked, the official described "deep skepticism from both sides of the aisle, both sides of the capitol." The official said that concerns about the mission were expressed and that while some spoke of support for "what the president is doing," they were seeking guidance on how to answer their constituents when they ask "what's next."
According to the official who spoke to CNN but did not want to be quoted on the record, the panel could not provide a clear answer and instead said they're focused on implementing the UN Security Council resolution.
When the panel was asked to define "success" in Libya, they told the congressional aides "preventing attacks on the Libyan people and handing off control to a coalition force."
However they "would not talk about cost, whether they would send up a supplemental or if they would like congressional authorization," the official said.
From CNN Politics
- McConnell 'chomping at the bit' to return as several ailing senators absent from Capitol
- 10 Cards Charging 0% Interest Until 2024
- Trump and his advisers await potential indictment in hush money case
- Bruce Springsteen, Gladys Knight among group honored at the White House
- More red states will help pay for all K-12 students to go to private schools
- Supreme Court humors itself as it considers whether Jack Daniel's can stop a dog toy company from parodying its brand
“It would be a mistake of historical proportion if the administration thought that the 2002 resolution authorizing force against Iraq was a blank check for the use of force against Iran without further congressional authorization”
“We continue to experience the consequences of unchecked presidential action,” she said, later adding: “This president was allowed for too long to commit blunder after blunder under cover of darkness provided by an allied Republican Congress”
Quote from Hillary Clinton...thank you.
Patrick, FL
According to Senator Barak Obama in 2007 said exactly the opposite of what you assert. Matter of fact, Senator Biden also said, on several occasions the exact opposite of what you assert.
ROFL, the dope smoking, non working, non taxpaying Oprah watchers who voted for this Kenyan village idiot deserve exactly what they got. Unfortunately, those of us with a sense of personal responsibility di not deserve this incompetent, inept, union toady buffoon.
Hazmat77, I get that but it does not matter because the Constitution clearly states otherwise, as long as Congress is informed 48 hours prior to action and the military involvement last no more then 60 days with a 30 day withdrawal period.
Anything above and beyond that requires congressional approval and funding.
And Congress was informed within 48 hours.
"We are not at war with Libya" This is the dumbest thing yet to come from Obummie. I'd like to see missiles blow up the white house and bombs fall on our military installations and Obummie come out and say oops they didn't attack us. They didn't make war against us. He is the BIGGEST FOOL that ever occupied the white house.
I really don't understand how some of you supposedly educated folks don't understand basic Government 101, which you should have learned when you were in school. With respect to budgets, just as the governor of the state prepares his budget recommendations, the state legislature approves the actual budget. Same thing for the federal government. The President prepares his budget recommendations, and the Congress approves the actual budget. Sheesh..go to the back of the class.
"but lets just call an ace an ace and stop with the semantics of politics."
I'm not talking semantics or playing political games. I cited FACTS...and there are plenty more where they came from. Those facts, in turn, have legal significance. If you can't accept that and wish to ignore all the factual evidence that makes the two situtations extremely different, not to mention all the legal precedent that applies and how it relates to that factual evidence, I suppose that's fine...your ignorance bubble echo chamber is yours to choose...but I did provide a reading list above so you could get started with your understanding. The December 4, 1992 memo can be foung via Google and is a good place to start.
That being said, if people want to disagree with us taking action somewhere yet again for legitimate reasons...like pointing out how hypocritical it is that we went in here but not in the Congo or no in Yemen or Bahrain, or comlpaining that we don't have the money...that's all well and good. I agree with some of those criticisms and concerns to some extent. Jumping on the Kucinich bandwagon and using what Bush did to Iraq as the juxtaposing example to show what would have been constitutional though? Complete and utter nonsense...total crap..and the "news" media is only helping sell that false equivalency because it riles people on both sides and stirs up the controversy that helps give them something to talk about during the 24 hour "news" cycle while they sell advertising.
"When you demand that Obama confiscate Bill Gates and Warren Buffet's wealth in order to redistribute it or pay it back to the Chinese?"
Why not? Applying the "trickle down" daydream economic theory and the "tax cuts for the wealthy create prosperity" ideological nonsense sold to us by Ronny Rayguns and the Republicans have, quite literally, resulted in redistribution of the country's assets and wealth to the already wealthy and corporations. THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE. And what we're seeing all around the country now from dittohead tinfoil hat wearing Limbots like yourself is arguments that the middle-class and the poor are supposed to shoulder all the burden for fixing the financial problems the government faces...cuts to SS, Medicare, public education, employees' salaries and benefits, etc. etc....all while the capering teatards refuse to even consider for a second that the ultra-rich and corporations should make similar...OR ANY...additional sacrifices whatsoever in order to close the gap? While they enjoy a 2 year extension of tax cuts and deductions worth $120B and the GOP proposes cutting $60B per year for 2 years from programs that helped create and stabilize the middle-class in the first place and take care of our most needy citizens? DO THE FREEKIN MATH ON THAT ONE. THE NUMBERS DON'T LIE. We're being sold a bill of goods by the GOP and Teatards and the rest of the idiot conservatives that ALREADY EQUATES TO WEALTH REDISTRIBUTION...IT HAS FOR 40 YEARS...it's just that it redistributes all the wealth to the top and has been for decades. Every single measure the GOP is taking across the country right now, particularly the efforts to eviscerate union rights and demonize labor, are nothing more than a pushback against wha happened in November 2008...an attempt to secure GOP/conservative power by obliterating one of the biggest sources of Dem organizational and financial support. It dovetails oh so nicely with the Citizens United decision, eh? The GOP sees for itself a bleak future in which minority populations have blossomed and continue to support liberal candidates...one in which white has become a minority or jus a membe of the plurality...one in which the middle-class actually grows and is capable of counterbalancing the special interests of the extraordinary wealthy and giant corporations...and it finds that unacceptable, so it is doing everything it can to prevent it. Don't give me your nonsense about communism and socialism and all that crap...you clearly don't know what those concepts mean. I'm not arguing for wealth redistribution...I'M ARGUING FOR IT TO STOP.
I find it so hard to imbue some logical reasoning even in simplest form as that of teachers reasoning to third graders to some republithurd and teapoppers in this thread or any thread because of the the fear that was already indoctrinated deep in their brains by the manchurian faux news. To all my fellow Progressive posters here. Let them believe what they want to believe
their brains are fried we can just ignore them and discussed this with our fellow sane poster in this thread if Obama has to face court because some moron will definetely and desperately fight this then let them THE CURRENT LEADER OF THE FREE NATION WAS DOING HIS JOB UNDER THE JURISDICTION OF THE LAW OF THE LAND AND THAT OF THE INTERNATIONAL ONE. HE KNOWS THE LAW AND HOW IT WORKS HE IS AN EXPERT OF THAT AFTER ALL. IF THE TEAPOPPERS INJECT THEIR OWN INEPT AND IGNORANT INTERPRETATION OF THE LAW THAT THE FOUNDING FATHERS ENACT THEY WILL BE SADLY HUMILIATED IF THEY HAVE A LEAST BIT OF SANITY OR CONTINUALLY A BLABOUT COMBATIVE IDIOTS IF THEY DON'T SADLY MY MONEY IS ON THE LAST. BECAUSE THERE IS NO CURE FOR SELF INFLICTED IDIOTNESS.
Deomocommie, you clearly overlooked the fact that both Bill Gates and Warren Buffet not only own large scale charities, but they also ENDORSE higher taxes on the rich. I know why you are so ignorant on these subjects. You choose to be.
WiredwierdinSF – 'Unfortunately, those of us with a sense of personal responsibility...'
THANKS FOR THE LAUGH!!!!!
WHAT A JOKE OF A STATEMENT (coming from you that is)!!!!!