Quote:
Originally Posted by wdmso
did some research it seems congress looked away as well
President Obama abruptly changed course on Saturday and postponed a military strike against the Syrian government in retaliation for a chemical weapons attack so he could seek authorization first from a deeply skeptical Congress.
On Aug. 28 of that year, then-Rep. Cory Gardner, Rep. Scott Tipton, and Rep. Mike Coffman signed on to a House letter to Obama that urged the president to “consult and receive authorization from Congress before ordering the use of U.S. military force in Syria.”
“Engaging our military in Syria when no direct threat to the United States exists and without prior congressional authorization would violate the separation of powers that is clearly delineated in the Constitution,” the letter said.
The letter the three Colorado Reps. signed onto said they viewed the bypass of Congress when ordering military strikes as “unconstitutional.”
“Tonight’s actions in Syria come after Assad’s horrific actions against his own people,” he said in a statement. “America must show leadership and I’m thankful for what appears to be an effective response by our military.”
Seems republicans love wearing Flops Flops when it moves them
|
So when Trump can't get Congress to pass one of his initiatives (health care reform), he is ineffective. When Obama can't get Congress to pass one of his (retaliation against Assad), it's Congress that is ineffective.
When Trump keeps his promise re Assad and goes around Congress and possibly around the Constitution in order to do so, his action is questionable.
When Obama disregards Congress and the Constitution (which he did several times) in order to keep his promises, he is brilliant, and gets things done in spite of Congress and in spite of the Constitution. (which he could have done when Assad crossed his "red line).
So, when Obama and Trump act in similar ways, for Obama it's win, win. For Trump, it's lose, lose.
Nice.