accuracy.org Home
  • News Releases
  • Blog
  • News Items
  • About Us
    • Board
    • Staff
  • Subscribe
  • ExposeFacts
  • Calendar
twitter facebook donate

Search Results

Your Search for: "boyle findley" returned 12 items from across the site.

Rep. Findley, Key Author of War Powers Resolution, and Congressional Critic of Israel, Dies

August 15, 2019
Share

Rep. Paul Findley died last week and will be buried at Arlington National Cemetery. The New York Times this week ran an obituary: “Paul Findley, Congressman Behind War Powers Act, Dies at 98.” The Times wrote: “The main author of the resolution that limited a president’s ability to wage war, he also made overtures to the Arab world and earned the opposition of the pro-Israel lobby. …

“He supported civil rights and … named the first black person in the 20th century — 15-year-old Frank Mitchell of Springfield [Illinois] — to the position of page in the House of Representatives.” The Washington Post reports: “Mr. Findley was the publisher of a small-town weekly newspaper when he was elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 1960 from a district once represented by Abraham Lincoln. He often invoked Lincoln in his campaign rallies and could quote his speeches from memory.” The federal building in Springfield, Illinois is named for Findley.

Meanwhile, Rep. Steny Hoyer just came back from Israel with 40 other pro-Israeli congressional Democrats. Israel is prohibiting Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar from entering Israel — or the Palestinian territories it occupies, where Tlaib has family — because of their alleged support of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement.

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Professor of international law at the University of Illinois, Boyle’s books include Destroying World Order. He was a longtime associate of Findley, including appearing on several accuracy.org news releases together on the War Powers Resolution. He was also an early advocate of using the boycott, divestment and sanctions tactics employed successfully against apartheid South Africa against Israel.

He said today: “Findley was a Republican, but the pro-Israeli lobby effectively destroyed his political career, as they would for Republican Illinois Sen. Charles Percy during the same period. You thus have both the Democrats and Republicans dominated by pro-Israeli individuals, like Hoyer or now Sen. Dick Durbin, who defeated Findley in 1982.

“Similarly, we’ve seen an escalation of exactly what Findley tried to stop with the War Powers Resolution: President after president attacking other countries illegally, in violation of the Constitution, the War Powers Resolution and international law. The issues he tried to tackle were central to trying to preserve the rule of law and ensuring that the U.S. not use force illegally. He wanted the U.S. to be the ‘Land of the Free and Home of the Brave,’ not relentlessly pursuing murderous wars that ultimately make our own citizens less safe.”

 

Could Biden Be Impeached for Aiding and Abetting Israeli War Crimes?

May 19, 2021
Share

Jewish Currents reports: “AOC to Introduce Resolution Blocking Bomb Sale to Israel.” Groups are urging Sen. Bernie Sanders and other senators to introduce similar resolutions in the Senate, which, unlike the House, would likely force a vote. According to Jewish Insider, Sen. Sanders, Elizabeth Warren and Chris Van Hollen will “introduce a resolution today urging an immediate cease-fire between Israelis and Palestinians.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle@illinois.edu
Boyle is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of Palestine, Palestinians, and International Law.

He said today: “The Biden administration has repeatedly prevented the United Nations Security Council — which under Article 24 of the United Nations Charter — has ‘primary responsibility for the maintenance of international peace and security’ from addressing the Israeli assault on Gaza.” During the 2014 war, the UN Security Council called for a ceasefire, which the Biden administration has been preventing.

“Biden has repeatedly stated that Israel has the ‘right to defend itself’ — effectively a green light for bombing — rather than demanding an immediate ceasefire and allowing the Security Council to do its job. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has correctly understood Biden’s statements and dismissed Biden’s rhetorical call for ‘de-escallation.’

“The Biden administration is thus now aiding and abetting war crimes.

“There is now rocket fire between Israel and Lebanon. The actions of the Biden administration — a green light to Israel — are now threatening global security.

“Biden has knowingly let U.S. weapons to be used by Israel to commit war crimes in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, the U.S. Arms Control Export Act and the Arms Supply Agreement between the U.S. and Israel.

“Moreover, Biden is moving to ship more weapons to Israel as we speak. These efforts by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and others may be worthwhile, but Speaker Nancy Pelosi and company will likely push them aside. The efforts by Sanders and other senators, while a welcome departure from the usual rhetoric from Capitol Hill … are unlikely to jar the Biden administration.

“During the impeachment of Trump earlier this year — which I supported — Democrat after Democrat stated that the issue was not disliking Trump, it was his pernicious violation of the law that was the issue. Well, President Biden is now violating laws. He is aiding and abetting a foreign power in conducting war crimes in violation of both international law and domestic law.

“The remedy for this situation is for one sitting member of Congress to live up to their responsibilities under our Constitution which they have pledged to uphold and introduce articles of impeachment. We are supposed to be a nation of laws and not men. Impeachment is effectively a check given to each and every member of Congress against a president who is violating the law.”

Boyle was legal adviser to Rep. Henry B. González and wrote the first draft of the González Impeachment Resolution in 1991. George H. W. Bush would later write in his memoirs about his fear of impeachment — that if the Gulf War “drags out, not only will I take the blame, but I will probably have impeachment proceedings filed against me.”

In 2017, Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, and foreign policy speechwriter, told Politico that President Obama feared impeachment if he targeted the Syrian government.

While many regard Rep. Rashida Tlaib and other members of “The Squad” as unique in their stance on Israel, that is not accurate. For example, Rep. Paul Findley — the author of the War Powers Resolution and a longtime associate of Boyle’s — addressed the issue in a manner that resulted in his political defeat at the hands of political operatives including Rahm Emanuel.

Also see: “War in Palestine: a timeline.”

 
Filed Under: Foreign Policy, Imperialism

War Powers Resolution “Riddled with Holes”

January 9, 2020
Share

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today regarding moves in Congress on Iran: “The Kaine resolution and the Slotkin resolution are riddled with so many holes that Trump/Pompeo et al. will drive a truck through them. The legislation proposed by Ro Khanna and Sanders has some problematic rhetoric, which should be dropped, but it is not in the operative provisions and it is consistent with the War Powers Resolution and the War Powers Clause of the Constitution and the United Nations Charter and would make a real difference.”

Boyle noted: “Slotkin’s — who notably came out of the CIA — resolution talks of the president being free to act in case of ‘an imminent armed attack.’ This is not consistent with the War Powers Resolution and will likely assist Trump committing aggression.

“Part of the reason we have these continuous wars is that Congress has failed to live up to its responsibilities. I advised Rep. Henry B. González and wrote the first draft of the Gonzalez Impeachment Resolution, introduced in 1991. George H. W. Bush would later write in his memoirs that if the Gulf War ‘drags out, not only will I take the blame, but I will probably have impeachment proceedings filed against me.’ So that might have helped stop the first president Bush from trying to go to Baghdad in 1991.

“Rep. Robert F. Drinan tried to impeach over Nixon’s bombings and got shot down by most of the rest of Congress. If they had lived up to their responsibilities then, we’d live in a much better world.” See New York Times report from Aug. 1, 1973 on the first moves to impeach Nixon — over bombing Cambodia.

Boyle advised Sen. Patrick Moynihan and Rep. Dan Crane in the first use of the War Powers Resolution, after Reagan placed Marines in Lebanon. He added: “Unfortunately, a ‘compromise’ was struck and predictably led to disaster with the Marine barracks bombing.” See New York Times report from Sept. 21, 1983: “Congress And Reagan Back Compromise On War Powers Keeping Marines In Lebanon.”

Boyle added: “Part of the problem is my profession. As Noam Chomsky just noted: ‘there is a respected profession, called “international lawyers and law professors,” who can learnedly explain that words don’t mean what they mean.’”

See accuracy.org news release just after Clinton’s 1998 bombing of Iraq on the eve of his scheduled impeachment, featuring Boyle and the late head of the Center for Constitutional rights, Michael Ratner.

For more crucial background, including the Obama administration’s fears that he would be impeached if he bombed Syria, see recent accuracy.org news release: “Why Not Impeach Trump for War Crimes?”

Boyle has been featured on several accuracy.org news releases with Paul Findley, the main author of the War Powers Resolution who died last year at 98.

 

Why Not Impeach Trump for War Crimes?

January 6, 2020
Share

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law.  Boyle was legal adviser to Rep. Henry B. González and wrote the first draft of the González Impeachment Resolution in 1991. George H. W. Bush would later write in his memoirs that if the Gulf War “drags out, not only will I take the blame, but I will probably have impeachment proceedings filed against me.”

Boyle said today: “Hypocrisies and hypocrites abound. Trump should be impeached for his attacks and threats against Iran. These are far more brazen violations of the War Powers Clause of the U.S. Constitution than anything regarding Ukraine.

“Some Republicans claim that Trump did nothing wrong regarding the Ukraine. That’s clearly wrong. Some Democrats are claiming that they are standing up for the rule of law and to prevent further illegal acts by impeaching Trump for his actions there. But that doesn’t withstand a moment’s scrutiny. Trump should have been impeached for his illegal bombings in Syria. He wasn’t, so predictably, he has gone on to target Iran and is making further threats against it and Iraq.”

Boyle was on an accuracy.org news release on the War Powers Resolution, which was largely written by Rep. Paul Findley, who died last year at 98.

In 2017, Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor, and foreign policy speechwriter, told Politico that President Obama feared impeachment if he targeted the Syrian government:

Rhodes: “The only country in the world that was prepared to join us [in attacking the Assad government] was France. And we had no domestic legal basis. We actually had Congress warning us against taking action without congressional authorization, which we interpreted as the president could face impeachment.”

Politico: “Really? Was the prospect of impeachment actually a factor in your conversations?”

Rhodes: “That was a factor. Go back and read the letters from Boehner, letters from the Republican members of Congress. They laid down markers that this would not be constitutional.”

House Speaker John Boehner wrote to Obama in 2013: “It is essential you address on what basis any use of force would be legally justified and how the justification comports with the exclusive authority of Congressional authorization under Article I of the Constitution.”

 

Why Aren’t Presidents Impeached for War Crimes?

September 25, 2019
Share

Why Aren’t Presidents Impeached for War Crimes?While Donald Trump spoke of “sovereignty” at the United Nations on Tuesday, the U.S. government continues to bomb various countries and kill innocents. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has announced she is launching a formal impeachment inquiry into Trump.

CommonDreams reports: “‘Total Massacre’ as U.S. Drone Strike Kills 30 Farmers in Afghanistan.”

JOHN AMIDON, jajaja1234 at aol.com, ED KINANE, edkinane340 at gmail.com, ANN TIFFANY, anntiffany6235 at gmail.com
Amidon, Kinane and Tiffany are members of Upstate Drone Action in New York, which has organized protests at Hancock base. Kinane said today: “On Tuesday, six of us were arrested in the morning. We’ve had protests here for years, since we found out the 174 Attack Wing was based just near us, killing people in Afghanistan with MQ-9 Reaper drones. We had a banner: ‘Drones Fly, Children Die, Our Hearts Are Breaking.’ We were finally released late last night. We did our latest protest after learning of the drone massacre in Afghanistan that killed and wounded farmers there. The U.S. government is using drones to commit war crimes.” The others arrested are Julienne Oldfield, Rae Kramer and Les Billips. See Kinane’s articles at Truthout, including “Weaponized Drones and the Phony ‘War on Terror.'”

The Washington Post reported Tuesday: “U.S. invokes state secrets privilege to block American journalist’s challenge to alleged spot on drone ‘kill list‘”: “For the first time ever, a United States federal court ruled that the government may kill one of its citizens without providing him the information necessary to prove that he is being wrongly targeted and does not deserve to die.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Professor of international law at the University of Illinois, Boyle’s books include Destroying World Order. He said today: “It’s certainly possible that Trump engaged in wrongdoing in his statements to the Ukrainian leader, but this is insignificant compared to totally criminal wrongdoing like bombings, assassinations, murders and war crimes conducted by Trump as well as prior presidents. A fidelity to the rule of law would act on the ample evidence to impeach Trump for such criminality. So, we’re seeing political power and calculation here by both Trump and Pelosi more than anything else.”

Boyle was legal adviser to Rep. Henry B. González when he released classified material on the House floor in 1992 in an attempt to impeach George H. W. Bush following the start of the the Gulf War and wrote the first draft of the Gonzalez Impeachment Resolution. Bush would later write in his memoirs that if the Gulf War “drags out, not only will I take the blame, but I will probably have impeachment proceedings filed against me.”

In 1990, after Yemen voted against a United Nations Security Council Resolution for war against Iraq, a U.S. representative told the Yemeni Ambassador: “That is the most expensive vote you ever cast.” The U.S. then immediately suspended tens of millions of dollars of aid to that desperately poor country.

Boyle was recently on an accuracy.org news release on the War Powers Resolution, which was largely written by Rep. Paul Findley, who died last month at 98. Also, see: “Attacking Syria ‘Impeachable.'”

 

Trump Threatens War With Iran: Why is Congress AWOL? 

September 16, 2019
Share

Trump tweeted: “Saudi Arabia oil supply was attacked. There is reason to believe that we know the culprit, are locked and loaded depending on verification, but are waiting to hear from the Kingdom as to who they believe was the cause of this attack, and under what terms we would proceed.”

While much of the congressional leadership is silent, Rep. Justin Amash responded: “Under our Constitution, the power to commence war lies with Congress, not the president and certainly not Saudi Arabia. We don’t take orders from foreign powers.”

Bernie Sanders tweeted: “Mr. Trump, the Constitution of the United States is perfectly clear. Only Congress — not the president — can declare war. And Congress will not give you the authority to start another disastrous war in the Middle East just because the brutal Saudi dictatorship told you to.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle, professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He is a leading expert on Congressional war powers.

He said today: “It’s certainly true that Congress is charged with deciding whether or not to declare war. But the Congress has failed to live up to its responsibility as the U.S. is waging war in Iraq, Syria, Somalia, Libya, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Niger and elsewhere without a constitutionally mandated declaration of war. The U.S. government is also providing critical assistance to Saudi Arabia in what is effectively a genocidal war in Yemen.

“Allegedly, the Houthis, faced with the international community’s refusal to restrain Saudi Arabia’s criminality, have resorted to attacking Saudi oil fields. This threatens to spiral into a major regional war. Of course, the Yemen war and a whole assortment of U.S. government actions violate the UN Charter, which prohibits both force and the threat of force to achieve political ends.”

The annual UN General Assembly meeting, which typically features heads of government addressing the body, is scheduled for Sept. 24.

Investigative reporter Gareth Porter noted in a tweet: “Here’s the previous time Pompeo claimed a drone strike on Saudi came from Iraq and WSJ reported it. This is yet another point where journalists must either serve the interests of the powerful or keep questioning until the truth has clearly been established.” See also accuracy.org news release:  Iran Attack? * Pretext for War * Impeaching Bolton.”

 

Need to “Repeal the Perpetual Illegal Wars”

June 21, 2017
Share

image

Charlie Savage of the New York Times reports in “Senators Wrestle With Updating Law Authorizing War on Terrorist Groups” that: “Asked at a luncheon on Monday at the National Press Club in Washington what legal basis the United States had to attack Syrian government forces, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr., claimed the authority stemmed from the 2001 law because the American military presence in Syria was predicated on fighting Al Qaeda and the Islamic State there.

“But on Tuesday, the ranking Democrat on the Senate committee, Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, said, ‘The most recent use of this, in regards to activities in Syria, certainly had nothing to do with the attack on our country on September the 11th.'”

The question at the National Press Club to Dunford was submitted by Sam Husseini of the Institute for Public Accuracy and was featured on an IPA news release on Monday: “Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle[at]illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: “What the U.S. government is getting away with here is incredible. Gen. Dunford is citing the 2001 AUMF to go after Al Qaeda as justification to go after a secular government — Syria — that is actually fighting Al Qaeda, as well as ISIS.

“Congress should not be in the business of ‘updating’ any authorization of continuing these wars, which are clearly illegal under international law. Congress should be in the business of repealing these bogus domestic authorizations. No one in 1970 was working to ‘update’ the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. At least no one who was not a laughing stock. Congress was working to repeal the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, to defund the war — not to perpetuate illegal war for another generation. Congress now needs to repeal the perpetual illegal wars. The War Powers clause of the Constitution, as well as the War Powers Resolution are being flagrantly violated.”

Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.”

Boyle’s books include Foundations of World Order: The Legalist Approach to International Relations (Duke University Press).

 

Bombing Syria: * Impeachable * Carve-Up Agenda

June 19, 2017
Share

Screen Shot 2017-06-19 at 2.33.58 PM

The New York Times reports: “Russia Warns U.S. After Downing of Syrian Warplane.”

This afternoon at the National Press Club, Joint Chiefs Chairman and Marine Gen. Joseph Dunford was asked a question submitted by the Institute for Public Accuracy: “What’s the legal justification for targeting Syrian government forces?” He claimed: “We are there and have legal justification under the Authorization for Use of Military Force, we are prosecuting a campaign against ISIS and Al-Qaeda in Syria.” See video.

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle is professor of international law at the University of Illinois College of Law. He said today: “Gen. Dunford is totally incorrect. The AUMF passed after 9/11 has indeed been used to justify the bombing campaign purporting to target ISIS, but it cannot possibly be used to justify targeting the Syrian government. Those attacks are in fact clearly illegal and impeachable.

“Many have put forward dubious arguments for impeaching Trump — or arguments that they would never apply to a Democratic president. Similarly, some threatened Obama with impeachment and are not doing so now that Trump is engaging in exactly the activity they threatened Obama about. Hypocrisies and hypocrites abound.

“If we care about the rule of law, the most striking thing about Trump is his flagrant violation of the War Powers Clause of the Constitution in this targeting of the Syrian government. Now, the U.S. has been violating international law in terms of its drone assassination program and various bombing campaigns, like the one purporting to target ISIS in Syria. Many of these activities are justified by attempts to invoke the Authorization for the Use of Military Force passed after the 9/11 attacks. A decade and a half after those attacks, that rationale is international legal nonsense, but it exists.

“In contrast, the targeting of forces of or allied with the Syrian government has no justification whatsoever. It is obviously impeachable — Obama’s people say they were afraid of impeachment for exactly this [see below]. But pro-war Democrats don’t raise it because it would put a constraint on the war-making capacities of the U.S. president — while they pretend to care about the rule of law.

“Many of the U.S. attacks on Syria have been around the so-called ‘de-confliction zones.’ These zones are de facto partitions of Syria in violation of its territorial sovereignty and political independence. This goes back at least to the Pentagon just after 9/11 telling retired General Wesley Clark that they wanted to target Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.

“Israeli strategic interests are obviously served by a breakup of Syria; as is the case for much of the U.S. establishment. The Saudis are clearly on board. The Russians, rhetoric aside, are likely simply looking for some scraps. The big losers are the Syrians and most of the other people of the region.”

See recent report in the Financial Times: “Syria de-escalation deal stirs fears of carve-up by foreign powers.” Also, see new report from the Wall Street Journal: “Israel Gives Secret Aid to Syrian Rebels.”

Earlier this year, Ben Rhodes, Obama’s Deputy National Security Advisor and foreign policy speechwriter, told Politico that President Obama feared impeachment if he targeted the Syrian government:

Rhodes: “The only country in the world that was prepared to join us [in attacking the Assad government] was France. And we had no domestic legal basis. We actually had Congress warning us against taking action without congressional authorization, which we interpreted as the president could face impeachment.”

Politico: “Really? Was the prospect of impeachment actually a factor in your conversations?”

Rhodes: “That was a factor. Go back and read the letters from Boehner, letters from the Republican members of Congress. They laid down markers that this would not be constitutional.”

House Speaker John Boehner wrote to Obama in 2013: “It is essential you address on what basis any use of force would be legally justified and how the justification comports with the exclusive authority of Congressional authorization under Article I of the Constitution.”

Boyle was featured on an Institute for Public Accuracy news release in 2013 along with former Rep. Paul Findley: “* Key Author of War Powers Act: ‘Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria’ * Impeachment.”

 

Key Author of War Powers: ISIL AUMF Could be Worse than Vietnam Authorization

February 12, 2015
Share

PAUL FINDLEY, findley1 at frontier.com
Available for a limited number of interviews, Findley was a member of Congress from Illinois for 22 years and was a principal author of the War Powers Resolution of 1973. He resides in Jacksonville, Ill. The federal building in Springfield, Ill. is named for him. He said today: “If I were still in Congress I would oppose any resolution that authorizes further involvement there. Our forces have been killing Muslims by the tens of thousands for the past decade in the misleading label of anti-terrorism. Bombing kills innocent people whose friends are furious over these killings.

“It has greater potential for trouble than the Tonkin Gulf Resolution in 1964 that I voted for, only after getting Republican Leader Gerald Ford’s assurance that  it was not the equivalent of a declaration of war [on Vietnam].

“Congress should have used its responsibility to call a halt long ago to war measures. Instead of such measures, I believe in enforcing world law through international institutions. The current war over religion in the Middle East could make the Vietnam War look like a SundaySchool picnic.” Findley was recently profiled in the Jacksonville Journal-Courier. His books include They Dare to Speak Out.

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle, who has worked with Findley for years, is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of Tackling America’s Toughest Questions. He said today: “Of course Obama is wrong to state that existing statutes give him any authority he needs to wage war against ISIL.

“In the cover letter, Obama would use special forces, which is how the Vietnam War started. Once you have ground troops over there in combat, there is really no way to prevent escalation or to call it off and he knows it. What happens when one of our soldiers is captured and killed by ISIL? What kind of jingoism will that unleash and what escalations will that facilitate?

“He only talks about ‘tailoring’ the 2001 AUMF. It should be repealed, not ‘tailored.’

“This Resolution sets a dangerous precedent. Up until the 2001 AUMF, all War Powers Resolutions had been adopted with respect to a State, not alleged terrorist organizations that can operate anywhere in the world as defined by the President. This Resolution continues in that dangerous path, basically substituting ISIS for al-Qaeda and continuing to wage a global war on terrorism. So if Obama cannot plausibly invoke the 2001 Resolution because there is no connection to 9/11 as required therein, he will simply invoke this Resolution. Between the two resolutions you can have the U.S. government waging war all over the world.

“The Resolution states: ‘The authority granted in subsection (a) does not authorize the use of the USAF in enduring offensive ground combat operations.’ In other words, it does indeed authorize the use of USAF in offensive ground combat operations. ‘Enduring’ is in the eye of the beholder. Three years from now could have another 100,000 troops back in Iraq and maybe Syria too.

“Congress cannot lawfully give him authorization to use military force against Syria. That requires the permission of the Syrian government, which they do not have, or else the authorization of the Security Council, which they do not have. As for Iraq, [Iraqi Prime Minister Haider] al-Abadi is a puppet government that Obama installed and therefore has no authority under international law to consent to U.S. military operations in Iraq. It is like in Vietnam when we had our puppets there asking us to conduct military operations there.”

 

Key Author of War Powers Resolution: “Attack on Iraq Would Violate Constitution”

July 7, 2014
Share

The Nation writes: “Left-Right Coalition of 80 House Members Wants Congress to Check and Balance Iraq Intervention.”

PAUL FINDLEY, findley1 at frontier.com
Available for a limited number of interviews, Findley served as a member of United States House of Representatives for 22 years. He was a key author of the War Powers Resolution and a leader in securing its enactment by overriding the veto of President Richard Nixon. He is also the author of six books. The federal building in Springfield, Ill. is named for him. He said today: “Just as with threats to attack Syria last year, an attack on Iraq and/or Syria today would violate the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution. As with any president, he [President Obama] commits an impeachable offense if he does not follow the Constitution. Some observers misread a section of the War Powers Resolution as giving the president 60 days to make war without a declaration from Congress. The section cited actually limits even war making in the event of an attack upon the United States, its territories, or armed forces, which is not the case in either Iraq or Syria. In my view, a tight rein on presidential war making is more important today than ever before.” Last year Findley wrote the piece “Obama has no Authority to Attack Syria.”

FRANCIS BOYLE, fboyle at illinois.edu
Boyle, who has worked with Findley for many years, is a professor at the University of Illinois College of Law and author of Tackling America’s Toughest Questions. He said today: “President Obama has now incrementally introduced about 800 U.S. troops armed for combat into Iraq in three stages, each without Congressional authorization, which clearly violates the terms of the War Powers Resolution. This is precisely what the War Powers Resolution was intended to prevent — another incremental military escalation along the lines of the Vietnam War. The Obama administration has also threatened to bomb Syria as well as Iraq, either one of which would violate the War Powers Clause of the Constitution as well as the War Powers Resolution. It is not legitimate for the president — or members of Congress — to make de facto arrangements that violate the Constitution and the War Powers Resolution.”

 

Next Page »

Search News Releases

Key term:

By Date Range:


Most Recent News ReleasesRSS

Picket Lines at Congressional Offices: “Looming Threat of Nuclear War”

Zelenskyy and Canadian Parliament Give Ovation to SS Nazi Veteran

National Nurses United Calls on CDC to Hold Public Meetings

Menendez Indictment and Egypt

Biden and Trump Both Treat U.S. Jews as “Appendages of Israel”

On Israel and Saudi: Biden Admin “Normalizing Atrocities and Apartheid”

Updated CDC Mask Guidance for Healthcare Workers

Did U.S. Ukraine Policy Help Crush Pakistani Democracy?

Illinois Becomes First State to End Money Bail

New Push to Reduce Injuries Among Warehouse Workers

National Office
1714 Franklin Street #100-133
Oakland, CA 94612-3409
Voice 510-788-4541
ipa[at]accuracy.org
Washington Office (journalist contact)
Voice 202-347-0020
Fax 615-849-5802
ipa[at]accuracy.org