AOC Squad

It's an act of war and a dramatic escalation of tensions that should have been discussed with Congress.

We'll see what happens next, but this and everything else Trump has done with respect to Iran since taking office has made Americans in the Middle East less safe.

Among other things, Americans have been strongly urged to evacuate Iraq, and in the long run Iraq may not allow U.S. troops to remain in the country anymore. What would that mean? Iran takes over Iraq by default.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/means-war-us-embassy-baghdad-warns-americans-evacuate-country-110891

ATTACKS ON U.S. INTERESTS IN AFRICA Members of the IRGC in Nigeria were arrested for planning bombings targeting American- and other Western-affiliated destinations in the country.
HARASSMENT IN THE PERSIAN GULF Iran’s military has repeatedly taken a range of provocative actions against Americans in international waters, including charging American ships at close range as well as the seizure of two naval vessels and 10 U.S. sailors in January 2016.
ASSASSINATION ATTEMPT IN D.C. American law enforcement disrupted a plot backed by Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. by bombing a popular restaurant in Washington, D.C.
HEZBOLLAH PLOTS ATTACKS IN U.S. In June 2017, two Hezbollah operatives were arrested for conducting surveillance of U.S. military and law enforcement facilities, as well as airports, in New York City in preparation for terrorist attacks against Americans.
AGENTS OF IRAN IN THE U.S. In August 2018, two Iranian agents were arrested for surveilling potential terrorist targets in the United States, including Israeli and Jewish targets in Chicago.
IRANIAN PROXIES TARGET U.S. DIPLOMATS Iranian-backed terrorist proxies in Iraq launched attacks against the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad and the U.S. Consulate in Basra. The funding and training for these assaults came directly from Iran.
How much more should we tolerate before acting decisively?

Iran has been involved in exporting terrorism for decades that has killed an untold number of people including Americans. Its far past time to take a stand and Trump is doing it right. Take out the leaders and see how many of them are willing to die for their "cause" . As to Americans evacuating, that is for civilians. We've already sent 100 marines and 750 paratroopers in and are sending another 3000 in as a show of force. Both Bush and Obama refused to retaliate against Iran and because of their appeasement policy Iran only grew stronger and bolder.

Attacking the sovereign property of another nation -an embassy- is also an act of war. But I have mentioned this on another thread, and won't repeat more of it here. That would be boring.

It doesn’t matter what the other side did, honestly. We still have to follow our own Constitution which requires a declaration of war from Congress, or at a minimum, an AUMF targeted toward Iran.

There is debate regarding the need for a separate authorization. At this point, Congress was briefed regarding Iran and Middle East operations and raised no concerns regarding the need for authorization. That does not imply consent, but absent an objection the president is not empowered to take military action to defend US interests but has the responsibility to do so. Were this attack to have occurred in Iran, I'd agree with you.

Trump was required to notify congress within 48 hours. He did. The office of the presidency has the authority to act on real time intelligence on its own authority So what's the problem?

"t's an act of war and a dramatic escalation of tensions that should have been discussed with Congress."

No, it's taking out a terrorist leader like we're supposed to do, not apologize every time he murders more Americans. And he didn't have to discuss it with Congress.

"We'll see what happens next, but this and everything else Trump has done with respect to Iran since taking office has made Americans in the Middle East less safe."

Now you're just making a claim without any proof it would actually happen, to make your argument sound better. Making it sound as if the Middle East was safe to begin with. There's multiple reasons it's not, by the way, and one of those reasons just went up in smoke.

"Among other things, Americans have been strongly urged to evacuate Iraq, and in the long run Iraq may not allow U.S. troops to remain in the country anymore. What would that mean? Iran takes over Iraq by default."

If we stood by and did nothing, possibly. But the whole Iraq mess was "started" by Bush 1 and rekindled by Bush 2. All we did this time was take out a murderous terrorist leader who was murdering Americans and other innocent people under that wicked regime.

It's a sad time for our country when Congress can't be trusted with sensitive information .

I'm sure McConnell and repubs can be "trusted"...(in that they'd let Trump do whatever he wants.) I'm assuming you mean the democrats in Congress.

The office of the presidency has certain powers authorized by the congress or enumerated by the constitution. As much as it disappoints you, Trump acted within those boundaries.

Ya him sh*tting on Congress and the Constitution is also acting within the boundaries.. I can't help but wonder if this is part of his re-election strategy.

Save your shareblue talking points for the sheeple. You left wingnuts make all kinds of claims and prove nothing when called to do so. Name one PROVEN instance of Trump violating the constitution. Just one. Not your fantasy land accusations, proven.

Your shareblue talking points? Wtf is shareblue? 🤔
I never said he violated the Constitution. I said he sh*t on it. Now it does seem logical that he sh*t on it for a reason.. (idk why he'd go out of his way to call the emoluments clause "phony" unless he might have violated it) but I guess we'll see... Or maybe we won't.

Shareblue is where the left gets their marching orders. When you see the same argument being made over and over again its form share blue. If you parrot the lefts arguments, odds are you are repeating the shareblue talking point memo.
So sh**ting on it but not violating it? Hows that work exactly?
2 out of three of the emolument clause cases were dismissed by an appeals court. The third will soon follow.
"Assuming that foreign officials were trying to curry the president’s favor by staying at his hotel, the hotel is associated with him and would financially benefit his family even if it didn’t benefit him — and the emoluments clauses have no application to the family members of a federal official. The Fourth Circuit found this a fatal flaw in the plaintiffs’ argument and noted that the lawyer for Maryland and the District was “repeatedly unable to articulate the terms of the injunction” that was being sought to remedy the supposed violation of the Constitution.
As the court expostulated, “when plaintiffs before a court are unable to specify the relief they seek, one must wonder why they came to the court for relief in the first place.” Like I said, endless accusations with no proof when called upon to provide it.

Never-Trumpers all share the same brain

Kind of ironic that you go on to talk about baseless accusations considering yours...
"How's that work exactly?" Did you even read what I wrote or just skim?
Ya there are still a few courts who havent b*tchslapped him.. personally I think if it doesn't apply to direct family idk wtf the point of an emoluments clause is. You can't directly benefit from the power of the presidency...but your brother can?? Perhaps in that way it is "phony" as the Donald claims.. more of a joke really. Him wanting a Biden investigation considering that is icing on the cake.

That's cool. I said quit following my responseS. With an S. Plural. Meaning more than one. Do I need to translate that into Canadian for you?

Impossible to follow my responses? Then quit following my responses. They're obviously hard for you to follow regardless of my sobriety and unless snowtiger is an alt account of yours, this conversation was with someone else from 2 weeks ago before you hopped in.

I do treat what I read on the internet with skepticism..including your comments.

Yup. Sure am.
You gonna get off my d*ck yet or keep riding? I'm kind of bored with you.

Nothing baseless about you parroting Shareblue. Even if you don't realize it. I read what you wrote and I still want to know how the President can sh*t on the constitution and not violate it at the same time. Be specific. How did he "sh*t" on the constitution? You can't understand how the emoluments clause only reference the president? Seriously? Its pretty clear. Just read the two courts decisions to two out the two cases so far. Additionally, its a pretty well established point of law that you are held accountable for your actions, no one elses. If you think that the call for the investigation into Biden is about his son benefiting, you are seriously misinformed. Its about Biden's actions in threatening to withhold aid which benefitted his son. His own action as VP, no one else's. Huge difference.

I don't think you understand how a parrot works.

And as far as sh*tting on stuff.. if I call someone a f*cking moron, I'm sh*tting on them.. probably for a reason. Doesn't mean I'm physically violating them though.

Ok you seem to be failing to understand nearly every part of my comments.. what im saying is what's the point of an emoluments clause if your relative can simply reap the rewards for you? Is it illegal for Don Jr or whichever relative from simply kicking that $ back to Donald after his presidency has concluded? If not, I'd say "a joke" is more accurate than "phony"..

"If you think that the call for the investigation into Biden is about his son benefiting, you are seriously misinformed. Its about Biden's actions in threatening to withhold aid which benefitted his son."
🤨

Hey captain Canada.. are you snowtiger? If not I guess I wasn't talking to you

"You leftists" .... "You leftists" ok.
You're not able to buy the president.. but you can buy the f*ck out of his brother. Ya thats totally different than what I thought.
Yabut Hillary. Yabut Obama...
He literally did. He may have also called the accusations phony. He calls many things phony.
Remind me of when I said i dont understand Trump or why he got elected or that he's beneath me..Strawman.
False. I claim he thinks he can do whatever he wants because it's literally the argument his lawyer made in court.100% immunity.. could even shoot someone. (While president)
I agree that Trump will probably win but idk why you care about any of this... aren't you Canadian or in Canada or some sh*t?

I don't think you grasp the difference between "a parrot" a noun, and "to parrot" a verb. Once again you are incapable of providing a single instance where Trump has "sh*t" on the constitution. Instead you attempt to deflect with fallacies ( appeal to ignorance and false analogy).
The fact you are making the assumption that Don Jr may 'kick back' any money recovered from foreign entities is meaningless. You're predicting potential future actions which the law does not reference. Just as Hunter Biden getting a job at Burisma because he was related to the VP is not illegal And please don't tell me you think he was there for any other reason. Many politician's relatives (both sides) receive sweetheart deals because of their relative and congress will never outlaw that. A flaw in the system that should be corrected? Definitely. Going to ever happen? Not a chance.
Incidentally ,President Trump never called the emoluments clause "phony," if that was your point. He referenced he charges being made under the emoluments clause. If that was your point I can see where you were mistaken. Shareblue has been pushing that misinterpretation for quite some time now. Though, considering that the president is rather inarticulate when speaking off the cuff, I can understand some people being confused and mislead.

Ah here it is..
Ya regardless of word format root word etc it's still bullshit. I'm "parroting" something i've never heard of. Sure. Ok. Coincidence? Naw.. parroting. Moving on....

He sh*t on it exactly the same way he sh*t on Ted Cruz and countless others.. with 3rd grader name calling. "Lyin' Ted".. "Phony emoluments clause".. I saw the footage. I mean it's literally what he said. I guess you're going to play the "he meant something else" game though so idk.. no point in debating your feelings about what he meant to say.

Wasn't necessarily predicting anything. I was saying what's the point of having employment clause if it's so easily thwarted? As you said a flaw in the system..... Ah so it was you and you do think Hunter's Burisma deal wasnt illegal.. so how bout IF he told Joe to fire the prosecutor? Illegal then..?

NO, you are parroting shareblue whether you realize it or not, like I said. It s not coincidence you are making the incorrect statements they want you to. Your argument that you "heard" Trump say the emolument clause was phony is proof of that. What you heard was the part of a an answer he gave to a question regarding the use of his properties being in violation of the emoluments clause., If you had heard the entire answer you would know he wasn't referencing the clause itself Go research it. It happened at the G-7 summit. As to Hunter Biden potentially telling then VP Joe Biden to fire the prosecutor then it was more than likely conspiracy to commit a federal felony. Don't know the statute that was violated but you would have to prove that and thats damn near impossible