Current indications show House will reject White House resolution
Paul Joseph Watson
September 4, 2013
Amidst signals that the White House could ignore Congress if lawmakers vote no on military intervention in Syria, Senator Rand Paul demanded that Obama adhere to such an outcome during an appearance on CNN last night.
Emphasizing that the Constitution mandates that the legislature has the final decision on war, Paul stated, “I am proud of the President for coming to Congress but….he has to say he will adhere to our verdict, he can’t come to us in theater and say you guys get to vote but it may not count if I don’t like your vote – he can’t do that.”
Responding to claims by John McCain and John Boehner that a vote against military intervention in Syria would undermine the credibility of the United States and the office of President, Paul asserted, “I take my responsibility very seriously and I’m not too concerned about the President’s public relations – I am concerned though about young men and young women who serve in our military and I vote as if it’s my son or your son going to war.”
“I can’t send them to war to fight for stalemate, I can’t send them to war with no clear military objective, and I can’t send anybody to war when our goal is not victory. Our goal is stalemate, they’ve already said they don’t even want to topple Assad, they just want a negotiated settlement after they blast him with a few bombs – I can’t see anyone’s son or daughter fighting for that,” added Paul.
According to a whip list compiled by the Hill, current indications show that Congress will vote no on Obama’s resolution to attack Syria. While the Senate vote is already in the bag, 44 members of the House are either “no” or “leaning no” compared to just 17 who are “yes” or “leaning yes”. 31 Congressmembers are “undecided” or “unclear,” according to the Hill.
However, as we highlighted on Monday, both Secretary of State John Kerry and another State Department official have indicated that Obama will go ahead with military intervention anyway even if Congress does not give the green light.
Senator Paul ridiculed Secretary of State John Kerry’s assertion that cruise missile attacks on Syria would not be an act of war, remarking “to say this is not war is just plain not accurate,” warning that so-called “limited strikes” could easily expand into a regional war.
Paul joked that Kerry’s “guarantee” that Assad would use chemical weapons again if the US didn’t attack meant that Kerry was now a “clairvoyant” and that people should start asking him for stock tips. The Senator argued that it was equally as likely that Assad would launch another gas attack or a strike against Israel if the US became involved.
During his testimony yesterday, Kerry refused to rule out using US ground troops in Syria, despite the administration arguing all along that this was not part of their plan.
According to Harvard Law School professor Jack Goldsmith, the White House’s draft resolution for military intervention which Congress is set to vote on next week is so broad that it would authorize boots on the ground as well as regime change and open ended war throughout the entire region.
This article was posted: Wednesday, September 4, 2013 at 5:25 am