- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Miss Lindsey calls out Republicans who voted in favor of Venezuelan war powers resolution
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:38 pm
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:38 pm
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
I served for 33 years as a military lawyer judge advocate for the U.S. Air Force. I was a prosecutor, defense attorney and for a brief period, a military judge. The authority of the Commander in Chief under Article II of the U.S. Constitution in matters of conflict and the President’s ability to use military force to protect our nation is a subject matter area I feel comfortable with.
Today’s vote in the U.S. Senate on the Venezuela War Powers Resolution was a gift to our enemies, will encourage more bad behavior in Venezuela and it is an unconstitutional attempt to restrict the power of the Commander in Chief.
Throughout my political career I have been consistent on the idea that under the U.S. Constitution, there is only one Commander in Chief and that is the President. I’ve always rejected the idea that the U.S. Constitution allows Congress to replace the President’s judgement as Commander in Chief in matters of military force.
I told then-President Obama his actions in Syria fell within his authority as Commander in Chief and that he did not need congressional authorization.
Declaring war is exclusive to Congress and has only been done five times in our history. That does not mean a President can only use military force with congressional approval. There have been over 130 military actions taken by a President without congressional authorization. None have been stopped by the U.S. Supreme Court.
The War Powers Act of 1973 is patently unconstitutional and must give way to delegated powers of the Constitution itself, designating the President as the sole Commander in Chief of our armed forces under Article II. One of the bedrock principles of American jurisprudence is that the U.S. Constitution reigns supreme in matters of law.
President Trump is right to be upset with Republicans that voted with Democrats to limit his ability to change Venezuela for the better and make the world safer.
If a member of Congress disagrees with the Commander in Chief’s decision to use military force, then they have the right to stop funding for those operations because Congress has the power of the purse under the U.S. Constitution – or they can bring impeachment actions against the President if they think it is unlawful.
A member of Congress does not have the right to replace their judgement for that of the President who is the Commander in Chief. The nation cannot function with 535 Commanders in Chief.
To my Republican colleagues, you are buying into unconstitutional garbage. If you continue down this road, you are going to lessen the chances of success in Venezuela and other theaters where President Trump, through his strength and resolve, is bringing about positive change.
Again, our enemies will be encouraged by this vote in the U.S. Senate.
And this is why Miss Lindsey is favored by Trump.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:40 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
And this is why Miss Lindsey is favored by Trump.
Think the PT will love him now?
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:43 pm to hawgfaninc
The usuals voted for it who are good at voting against Republicans and not much else
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:43 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Think the PT will love him now?
Nope
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:50 pm to hawgfaninc
Just curious. Is this something the President can veto?
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:53 pm to hawgfaninc
Marxist neocon doing marxist neocon things.
Emergency war powers are for emergencies.
Emergency war powers are for emergencies.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 2:57 pm to bigjoe1
quote:
Just curious. Is this something the President can veto?
Yes.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 3:11 pm to hawgfaninc
Paul Dans for Senate, South Carolina!
Posted on 1/8/26 at 3:16 pm to hawgfaninc
Rogerthecuckers staunch Conservative R Murkowski siding with Dems 
Posted on 1/8/26 at 3:27 pm to hawgfaninc
See, that's the difference between Dems and Reps. Dems did whatever Obama and Biden said. Republicans however are pieces of shite.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 3:43 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
And this is why Miss Lindsey is favored by Trump
That, and because Miss Lindsey is Chair of the Senate Budget Committee which means he has a lot of power in terms of funding things Trump wants.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 3:54 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
SCLibertarian
6.125
Posted on 1/8/26 at 4:13 pm to hawgfaninc
No one cares what that closet gay has to say.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 4:38 pm to hawgfaninc
Apparently this entire vote was prompted by a setup interview Trump gave to the NYT. Why does he do these things? Flip them the double birds and move on.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 4:55 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
member of Congress disagrees with the Commander in Chief’s decision to use military force, then they have the right to stop funding for those operations because Congress has the power of the purse under the U.S. Constitution
Graham is correct in all of this, and the precedent was set under Thomas Jefferson when Congress authorized funds in the first Barbary war to build naval ships to fight against piracy, but never formally declared war on the Barbary states.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 5:02 pm to hawgfaninc
quote:
I served for 33 years as a military lawyer judge advocate for the U.S. Air Force.
There's that magic number again.
Lady Lindsey: Our enemies will be encouraged by this vote in the U.S. Senate ( to restrict the power of the Commander in Chief.)
"Enemies"?? Are they those who insist on Constitutional and congressional protocol? Or those who can't justify frivolous wars and Fuhrer-like "leadership" un-impeded by accountability?
quote:
the President’s ability to use military force to protect our nation is a subject matter area I feel comfortable with.
Lying queen.
This military force in no way shape or form was used to "protect our nation."
Posted on 1/8/26 at 5:05 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Think the PT will love him now?
This Lindsey-Trump bromance may well cause some awkward new support among the neocon contingent.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 5:14 pm to Giantkiller
quote:
Dems did whatever Obama and Biden said. Republicans however are pieces of shite.
Well, the Dems are all damaged goods misfits and zombies from CCP Central Casting.
Republicans (nowadays) are as different as cats and dogs, with principled, independent Pubbies not willing to be mere Rubber Stamps.
The "sh#ts" are the pubbies who routinely obstruct and stonewall justice, or who are puppets controlled by other countries.
Posted on 1/8/26 at 5:16 pm to 3down10
You are very slow. You could not have graduated from Bama.
As much as I dislike Graham, he is very factual and correct in that post. The SCOTUS has upheld those powers too.
It would be an awesome thing for people to actually learn the Constitution.
As much as I dislike Graham, he is very factual and correct in that post. The SCOTUS has upheld those powers too.
It would be an awesome thing for people to actually learn the Constitution.
Back to top


16











