Sanders calls on Trump to come to Congress over Syria strikes

[TomCADem]

Source: The Hill

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Sunday said President Trump did not have the authority to launch missile strikes on the Syrian regime and called on the president to seek approval from Congress before any other actions.

“I think he has got to come to the United States Congress. I think he has got to explain to us what his long-term goals are,” Sanders told NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

Trump last week ordered the U.S. military to conduct missile strikes on a Syrian airfield believed to be the launching point of a chemical weapons attack that killed at least 70 civilians. The United States has placed blame for the attack on Syrian President Bashar Assad.

Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have since called on Trump to seek congressional approval before future military action. “Our goal long-term has got to work with countries around the world. We cannot do it unilaterally,” Sanders said on Sunday.

Read more: https://origin-nyi.thehill.com/homenews/senate/328015-sanders-calls-on-trump-to-come-to-congress-over-syria-strikes

[R B Garr]

1. Senator Kaine said the same thing. It's procedure,

so it's stating the obvious.

But it's hardly Latest Breaking News.

[George II]

3. Indeed, just as Senator Chris Murphy did two days ago.

Story about Democratic Senator Tim Kaine's statement:

"Sen. Tim Kaine said Sunday the Trump administration should have sought congressional approval for Thursday's airstrikes against Syria."

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/trump-congress-authorization-syria-tim-kaine-237044

[NurseJackie]

20. Well thank goodness for that. For a moment there it looked as he was the "only" one. Weird headline.

I can't decide if it's carelessly sloppy, or intentionally deceptive. In any case, it's a mistake for people to believe that others hadn't already demanded the same.

[R B Garr]

27. Yes, great points. It does look deceptive when many other

good Senators and lawmakers say the same thing.

[George II]

2. Democratic Senator Chris Murphy said almost exactly the same thing two days ago:

MURPHY STATEMENT ON U.S. AIR STRIKE IN SYRIA
friday, april 7, 2017
WASHINGTON – U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee, released the following statement on the U.S. air strike launched in Syria:

"An ill-thought out military action with absolutely no overall strategy for Syria risks dragging us further into a civil war in which we cannot tip the scales. And put in the context of U.S. policies that aid the slaughter of civilians in Yemen and deny terrorized Syrians the ability to flee their dystopian existence, a solitary air strike exposes the immoral hypocrisy of this administration's policy in the Middle East. Yes, Bashar al-Assad should pay a price for the slaughter of civilians in Syria. But the decision over the nature of that consequence is not for President Trump to make alone. The Constitution states that only Congress can authorize military activity, and President Trump should have sought congressional approval before taking action. Having failed to do so, he now must come to Congress and explain his policy in Syria and seek authorization for any continued military action.”

https://www.murphy.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/murphy-statement-on-us-air-strike-in-syria-

[NastyRiffraff]

4. Many Democratic senators said the same thing

as well as expressing opposition to his not coming to congress in the first place. Even a few Republicans did the same.

[keithbvadu2]

5. 45 times Trump said attacking Syria was a bad idea and might start World War III

45 times Trump said attacking Syria was a bad idea and might start World War III

https://mic.com/articles/173471/trump-world-war-iii-attacking-syria-wwiii-ww3#.iLx50TgXn

[DK504]

9. This asshole wants to start WWIII.

It will make him look virile. While everyone is telling him to stop it'll make him do the wrong thing. Man-child has to have reverse psychology to contain him.

[Orrex]

6. Why does Sanders get top billing for repeating what many Senators have already said?

[elleng]

7. 'Top billing?'

[Orrex]

8. It doesn't say "Many Senators Call on Trump..."

It singles Sanders out as though he's bravely challenging Herr Trump all by himself.

It has the dual effect of painting Sanders as a fearless solo actor and Democrats as followers.

[elleng]

10. Seems to me it's a NEWS story, reporting an earlier occurrence:

'Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) on Sunday said . . .'

[Orrex]

11. Then that should be the headline

Or maybe "Sanders Echoes Common Senate View."

[elleng]

12. Headlines rarely reflect the whole picture.

[Orrex]

13. And they often distort it, as in the current case.

[Tom Rinaldo]

14. Really?

"Sanders Echoes Common Senate View"???

Do you think any media source in America would write a headline like that, regardless of their political slant? I can see how many outlets might not run the story, if they felt that was the headline that best fit. And that would be fine. But Sanders had nothing to do with whether The Hill chose to cover his statement or not, and certainly he isn't their headline writer.

The point you made is a valid one, but it misses another obvious point. The Hill is covering what Bernie Sanders thinks because they now regard him as among our country's political leaders; by no means alone in that status but of higher overall profile now than, for example, Senator Murphy.

Sanders has that status because of the degree of support he galvanized while running for President. On the other side of the isle what Ted Cruz or John McCain thinks will get covered more than what Mike Lee thinks. The news value is that a leading voice in the Democratic Caucus has taken that stand - not that he is unique in taking that position or the first to publicly do so. No offense to Chris Murphy who I feel is a fine Senator. After he is seen as a leader of a national movement I bet his views will get increased coverage whether or not he alone holds them, or is the first to articulate them.

[Orrex]

15. Well, that's one way to read it

The Hill is covering what Bernie Sanders thinks because they now regard him as among our country's political leaders;

Alternatively, they see no harm in covering him now because they know damn well that he'll never sit in the Oval Office. In addition, the media loves a perceived "maverick," even if the maverick in question has a voting record that's more than 97% identical to Hillary Clinton's for instance.

I'm glad that Sanders is saying these things, but I'm glad that others are saying them as well, and they should get the same credit that he does.

[Tom Rinaldo]

16. I will never argue against all Democrats getting credit for doing/saying the right thing if they do

The concept of some Senators being "back benchers" is intrinsically kind of insulting. Actually that is how the media regarded Bernie Sanders for almost his entire tenure in Congress before he unexpectedly did as well as he did in his presidential run. Now he is considered news worthy, before he wasn't - and he was rarely quoted before even if he was breaking significant new ground. That is an unfortunate aspect of our media culture.

[murielm99]

19. I didn't see Orrex call Sanders a back-bencher.

On the other hand, I have not seen him break any new ground in his tenure in the Senate.

Democrats have called on Trump to follow procedure. That should be the headline.

TY, Orrex.

[NurseJackie]

21. "Democrats have called on Trump to follow procedure. That should be the headline."

Indubitably.



"Stronger Together" right? My favorite politicians are the ones who don't accept all the glory, even when others may try to hand it to them. ~ Stronger Together. Democrats united.

[Tom Rinaldo]

22. I didn't say he did

I introduced that concept into the discussion because I think the media thinks in those terms. Look at the Sunday news talk shows, they tend to always invite the same small group of Senators to appear on them, meanwhile over half of the Senate is never invited to appear. My point was that Sanders is now considered as one of their go to guys/gals that they do cover - they no longer treat him as a back bencher.

Frankly I think it is foolish to quarrel about what should be the headline that a media outlet uses. They chose it, not you or I. It seems like some are taking offense at this even though there is no overt slur at anyone in their choice of headline, which happens to be factually correct . There are far worse things to get bent out of shape over. I saw another media headline posted here about Kain making essentially the same comment. That doesn't seem to have caused any ruckus.

Sanders is and has been from day one in the Senate a leading member of the progressive caucus which has taken numerous stands that differ in ways from those staked out by Democratic leadership. on health care, om public education, on budget priorities, on tax policy etc. I would not generally characterize them as adversarial differences, more of a difference in priorities and approaches - but they seldom got much if any media coverage. Two years ago even the idea of Keith Ellison being taken seriously as a possible National Party Chair would have been laughed at by many in the party. The progressive caucus that he co-leads in the House was not considered mainstream enough for one of it's leaders to take on becoming DNC Chair. When they introduced alternative budget proposals they were never given any real media attention. Times are changing.

[beam me up scottie]

25. Thanks, Tom. You nailed it as usual.

[R B Garr]

17. +1, and it's another sign that he gets a pass

from the media and benefits from their treatment of him. He is never accountable for his statements or accusations and this is just another example of it. This comment aside because it is procedural, but there are plenty of things he says that are damaging and purely provocative that get no scrutiny from the press.

[elleng]

18. Thanks, Tom.

[beam me up scottie]

30. I don't understand the confusion. Sen. Sanders appeared on MTP - that's the story.

Why would the Hill focus on what others said when the article is about Bernie's appearance on MTP?

And like you I'm grateful our side is out there challenging the narrative. Bernie is right to call Trump out on television, why cede the spotlight to another Republican so they can echo the administration?

Thanks for posting this, Tom.

[GreydeeThos]

23. Maxine Waters should invite Trump to the House for Impeachment

[beam me up scottie]

24. Thank you again, Sen. Sanders. Bernie also spoke out against Trump's actions Friday.

Bernie Sanders on Syria Strikes: Assad Is a War Criminal and a Child-Killer

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) issued the following statement after the United States carried out a missile strike in Syria in response to the Syrian government’s chemical weapons attack this week:

“In a world of vicious dictators, Syria’s Bashar Assad tops the list as a dictator who has killed hundreds of thousands of his own citizens to protect his own power and wealth. His regime’s use of chemical weapons against the men, women and children of his country, in violation of all international conventions and moral standards, makes him a war criminal.

“As the most powerful nation on earth, the United States must work with the international community to bring peace and stability to Syria, where over 400,000 people have been killed and over 6 million displaced. The horror of Syria’s civil war is almost unimaginable.

“If there’s anything we should’ve learned from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, in which the lives of thousands of brave American men and women and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi and Afghan civilians have been lost and trillions of dollars spent, it’s that it’s easier to get into a war than get out of one. I’m deeply concerned that these strikes could lead to the United States once again being dragged back into the quagmire of long-term military engagement in the Middle East. If the last 15 years have shown anything, it’s that such engagements are disastrous for American security, for the American economy and for the American people.

“The Trump administration must explain to the American people exactly what this military escalation in Syria is intended to achieve, and how it fits into the broader goal of a political solution, which is the only way Syria’s devastating civil war ends. Congress has a responsibility to weigh in on these issues. As the Constitution requires, the president must come to Congress to authorize any further use of force against the Assad regime.

“Further, the U.S. must work with all parties to reinforce longstanding international norms against the use of chemical weapons, to hold Russia and Syria to the 2013 deal to destroy these weapons and to see that violators are made accountable.”

https://medium.com/@pplswar/bernie-sanders-on-syria-strikes-assad-is-a-war-criminal-and-a-child-killer-6be6c1e32cb9

We shouldn't forget Bernie warned congress not to invade Iraq and he was absolutely right about the outcome.

We should be grateful that this time around more politicians are publicly questioning a Republican president's willingness to use military force instead of worrying about who said what first. Maybe all of our outspoken senators can prevent a disaster like Iraq from happening again.

Let's hear that Iraq speech again:

[R B Garr]

26. No mention of Russia's involvement, so this looks

more like the same topical statements that never deviate from his canned talking points.

And it's about time that Iraq is rightfully blamed on Republicans instead of always trying to slam Democrats. It was Bush's war.

[beam me up scottie]

28. Bernie also brought up a good point about Russia's agreement to destroy chemical weapons in Syria.

Syria's government was supposed to have gotten rid of its chemical weapons in 2014. So what happened?

The Syrian deal

The deal between the U.S. (an Assad opponent) and Russia (an ally) was struck in September 2013. Under the agreement, Syria gave a manifest of its chemical weapons and facilities to the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the global chemicals watchdog, which moved quickly to decommission the declared facilities and weapons.

By the end of 2014, all of Syria’s declared chemical weapons were destroyed, along with 24 of Syria’s 27 declared production facilities. (The other three have not yet been destroyed yet due to instability, according to inspector reports.)

Yet some officials were skeptical. In February 2016, James R. Clapper, Obama’s Director of National Intelligence, testified to the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee that Syria had not declared its entire chemical weapons program to inspectors. International monitors continued to receive reports of smaller chemical attacks throughout 2016.

On Jan. 12, in the closing days of the Obama administration, the U.S. Treasury department unveiled sanctions against Syrian military, security and research officials accused of being connected to Syria’s chemical weapons program or with chemical attacks in recent years.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-syria-chemical-weapons-20170406-story.html

Maybe instead of advocating unilateral strikes against air bases we should be asking more of these questions. Obama had the right approach when it came to Syria, he didn't listen to the chicken hawks who wanted us to get bogged down in a proxy war with Russia - too bad he wasn't still in office.

[R B Garr]

29. Great article about President Obama.

We should also be asking about Russia's influence on our foreign policy, as many Democrats are now doing in light of the Trump/Russia connections.

[Demsrule86]

31. Yeah, Democrats have been calling for Trump to come to Congress

from the beginning...nice to see Bernie is on board.