Another Democrat Move To Disarm America

[Billy_Kinetta]

He has the Constitutional authority to attack if threatened

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Is the war powers act unconstitutional?

It is irrelevant to the legislation now proffered by the Democrats.

 

[Reasonable]

I guess "Commander-In-Chief" is another term they don't understand.

Worried Trump Will Strike North Korea, Democrats Pitch Bill To Slow Him Down | HuffPost

When you have a commander in Chief proven to be reckless and unstable it would be foolish to not have safeguards on him.

 

[pismoe]

still reaching eh Reasonable !!

 

[Tehon]

He has the Constitutional authority to attack if threatened

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

 

[Tehon]

He has the Constitutional authority to attack if threatened

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Is the war powers act unconstitutional?

It is irrelevant to the legislation now proffered by the Democrats.

It's not irrelevant to the discussion. It's a check on the president and undermines your argument seeing how it is established law.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I guess "Commander-In-Chief" is another term they don't understand.

Worried Trump Will Strike North Korea, Democrats Pitch Bill To Slow Him Down | HuffPost

When you have a commander in Chief proven to be reckless and unstable it would be foolish to not have safeguards on him.

Unconstitutional.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He has the Constitutional authority to attack if threatened

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He has the Constitutional authority to attack if threatened

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Is the war powers act unconstitutional?

It is irrelevant to the legislation now proffered by the Democrats.

It's not irrelevant to the discussion. It's a check on the president and undermines your argument seeing how it is established law.

Miss. Try reading my last statement carefully.

 

[miketx]

i think that you are incorrect , President is Commander in Chief of the USA Military and all its men , weapons and nukes . I don't think that the Presidents CiC war powers are going to be over run by a committee of dem , lefty enemies Tehon !!

I am correct, they can make that idiot think twice about what he does. Something he doesn't seem to do often.

Congress cannot legislate itself direct control of the military over the CinC's Constitutional authority, which such legislation would attempt to implement.

He doesn't have the constitutional authority to take us to war.

But N. Korea needs no authority to nuke us like they have said they would.

 

[peach174]

I don't know why the media keeps saying Nuke war.
They really should stop guessing at things.
They are the ones pushing that narrative.

We have the ability to disarm their nuke technology.
Without it N. Korea's blowing stops.
Dems way would keep their program to continue to progress.

 

[Tehon]

I don't believe I have ever seen that language in the constitution.

You obviously believe the war powers resolution is unconstitutional.

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

There is no power granted in the constitution that permits the CIC to initiate a first strike against NK. And if he did so, he would further violate the constitution by violating the UN Charter.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

There is no power granted in the constitution that permits the CIC to initiate a first strike against NK. And if he did so, he would further violate the constitution by violating the UN Charter.

Indeed, there is no text referring to "first strike" authorization.

"Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye."

 

[jc456]

i think that you are incorrect , President is Commander in Chief of the USA Military and all its men , weapons and nukes . I don't think that the Presidents CiC war powers are going to be over run by a committee of dem , lefty enemies Tehon !!

I am correct, they can make that idiot think twice about what he does. Something he doesn't seem to do often.

Congress cannot legislate itself direct control of the military over the CinC's Constitutional authority, which such legislation would attempt to implement.

He doesn't have the constitutional authority to take us to war.

no president has that authority. what's your point?

 

[jc456]

Article II Section II - "The President shall be commander in chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states, when called into the actual service of the United States ..."

The language seems plain enough to me. Now, show me the Constitutional text that grants Congress command authority over the Armed Forces.

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

There is no power granted in the constitution that permits the CIC to initiate a first strike against NK. And if he did so, he would further violate the constitution by violating the UN Charter.

sure there is. He has every right as did kennedy at cuba and Vietnam. not sure what you're point is.

 

[Tehon]

sure there is.

Let's try again.

Where is it written in the constitution?

 

[Tehon]

Section. 8.

To declare War

To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

There is no power granted in the constitution that permits the CIC to initiate a first strike against NK. And if he did so, he would further violate the constitution by violating the UN Charter.

Indeed, there is no text referring to "first strike" authorization.

"Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye."

Then there is nothing wrong with the legislation being proffered, Thank you.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

There is no requirement to declare war when ordering an attack.

Command authority remains with the CinC under your texts.

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States

It doesn't say he can call them into service. And it would totally undermine the checks and balances incorporated in our constitution if he could. One person does not have the power to commit this nation to war. You're thinking of Nazi Germany.

OMG ...

Please post where I mentioned ANYTHING about commitment to war.

There is no power granted in the constitution that permits the CIC to initiate a first strike against NK. And if he did so, he would further violate the constitution by violating the UN Charter.

Indeed, there is no text referring to "first strike" authorization.

"Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose anymore. Goodbye."

Then there is nothing wrong with the legislation being proffered, Thank you.

Except it's unconstitutional.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

Just more treason from the Troglocrats

 

[jc456]

sure there is.

Let's try again.

Where is it written in the constitution?

so you're saying that all other presidents did something outside the constitution? oh boy that is some fking news there. Trump already fired on Syria. how did he do that? shit obummer did drone strikes all over the world. how did he do that. dude you are just a confused puppy, go find the paper and take a pee.

 

[TroglocratsRdumb]

lil'Kim is probably making campaign donations to the Psychocrats