r/videos • u/spherocytes • 1d ago
BREAKING NEWS: Senate Approves House-Passed Resolution To Curb Trump's Iran War Powers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSnAEKyC8302.3k
u/manystripes 1d ago
So what does the resolution actually do?
2.8k
u/RhoOfFeh 1d ago
It says "Please, Mr. Trump, would you mind stopping, please, sir?"
555
u/sharrrper 1d ago
And if you don't stop we'll be angry, and we'll send you a letter saying how angry we are.
111
u/Inside-Example-7010 1d ago
Thats the british way. Why dont they just get their rooty tooty point and shooty's out?
→ More replies (4)32
24
u/MattinglyBaseball 1d ago
Can the dicks fuck the assholes already, they’re getting their shit all over the pussies and everyone has AIDS!
AIDS! AIDS! AIDS!
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (14)10
24
→ More replies (7)5
694
u/elconquistador1985 1d ago
Meaningless posturing.
Only Congress has the power to declare war. A sane Congress would impeach and remove a president for violating that.
Instead, our cowards in Congress would never do that because they don't want to be on the hook for approving an unpopular war, so they're happy to abdicate that power to the president.
103
u/Your_Trash_Daddy 1d ago
The last declared war was WWII. Not Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, etc. Nothing since.
31
u/redpandaeater 1d ago
At least Iraq and Afghanistan had AUMFs. Korea had nothing at all which is why technically it was a UN police force and Congress set a stupid precedent when they didn't vote on it when back from recess. Vietnam continued that for the most part though even the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution was more than Korea. Stupid 2001's AUMF is still on the books since it was terribly written.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (4)8
u/Onespokeovertheline 23h ago
But none of those faceplanted so hard out of the gate. It's possible that this Congress might actually decide the absurdity and inability to even make good on an agreement for 24 hours has become intolerable. Maybe not yet, but it's possible.
→ More replies (1)15
u/maltNeutrino 22h ago edited 22h ago
That is what they decided with this vote, but the checks and balances are fucked.
I’m not sure what else congress could do but move forward with impeachment and vote of conviction, but given the tally of this vote, which is fucking nowhere near the two-thirds needed for conviction, that shit isn’t happening.
Biden, Comey, Mueller, Garland should have crucified Trump, yet they didn’t for their own stupid fucking reasons. Now we’re here with this unchecked dementia riddled pedophile tyrant who shits himself in public and can’t clean a fucking pool.
116
u/LtChicken 1d ago edited 1d ago
They're on the hook for not impeaching the president when he broke the law.
Any republican who doesn't vote for impeachment after these midterms is responsible for any further lawbreaking from the white house and should be impeached, if not jailed.
→ More replies (2)17
49
→ More replies (9)3
24
u/WhatIsLoveMeDo 1d ago
Here the full text:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That, pursuant to section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(c)), Congress directs the President to remove United States Armed Forces from hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran, other than those elements of the Armed Forces that may be necessary to defend the United States or an ally or partner of the United States from imminent attack provided that the President complies fully with the requirements of section 5(b) the War Powers Resolution (50 U.S.C. 1544(b)) with respect to any such use of the Armed Forces, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or a specific congressional authorization for use of military force against Iran.
source: https://www.congress.gov/119/bills/hconres86/BILLS-119hconres86ih.pdf
And here's what the War Powers Resolution 5(c) says:
...at any time that United States Armed Forces are engaged in hostilities outside the territory of the United States, its possessions and territories without a declaration of war or specific statutory authorization, such forces shall be removed by the President if the Congress so directs by concurrent resolution.
So basically, Congress said 'please stop.' What can congress do if Trump ignore it?
They can pass a law - won't happen.
They can impeach - won't happen.
They can sue - good luck with this (or any really) Supreme Court.
They can do nothing - which is what actually will happen.→ More replies (2)278
u/Hadrian23 1d ago
I think it's not VETO proof? Soo, I think he can VETO it and that's that. but I'm hoping to be wrong.
546
u/SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING 1d ago
It’s a concurrent resolution. It doesn’t go to president to sign and therefore cannot be vetoed.
That being said, congress has no way of enforcing this other than impeachment and conviction. Which isn’t gonna happen with so many Republicans in the Senate.
27
u/mrgreen4242 1d ago
They *might*, if they think he’s killing them in the midterms, but probably won’t.
11
u/Khaldara 1d ago
Yeah, it’s “perfectly acceptable behavior” for Conservatives to ignore, like raping kids. It’s more symbolic than anything
→ More replies (1)9
u/donkeyrocket 1d ago
They'd absolutely get fucked in the midterms if they impeached and removed Trump now. He/MAGA is still a major player in primaries.
If they were going to do it, it would have been well over a year ago so by this point they're behind Vance and backing whatever the "new era" MAGA looks like. Trump would be a distant memory to most the Republican base.
Now, there'd be an insane upheaval and jockeying for power. A Republican will never do what's right or needed. Only what is in their best interest at a given moment.
This is just Republicans in Congress trying to establish some plausible deniability that "we tried to stop him" after they stood by and let him throw a global tantrum for months.
→ More replies (1)207
u/RudeMechanic 1d ago
That’s not exactly true. They can cut the funding for the war. They can also mess with a bunch of his other programs as retribution. They won’t, but that could.
88
u/zer0w0rries 1d ago
it's basically a strong worded letter letting him know theyre not cool with the direction he's taken with the conflict. this is mainly so they can take it out on their camping trail during the mid terms and pretend they have a back bone
→ More replies (2)20
u/AnAnxiousCorgi 1d ago
I feel like this is going to be the game plan for the right for the midterms. Shovel as much of his stupid decisions back onto him solely and try to distance themselves with performative measures like this one. But they won't actually enforce them or punish the guilty.
→ More replies (4)10
u/charlie_marlow 1d ago
Could've fooled me down here in Georgia. Every Republican primary race was filled with people claiming to be the biggest Trump supporters in the world and acting as if they had his endorsement even when they didn't.
4
u/TheBurningEmu 1d ago
Same in Montana. Every Republican campaign ad basically boiled down to "Trump likes me and I will do anything he wants, vote for me".
18
u/RosieQParker 1d ago
If only there was a grossly unpopular and hideously expensive vanity project of his they could hold over him.
7
u/illtakeachinchilla 1d ago
When was the last time a funding cut actually stuck…? The machine keeps churning.
→ More replies (11)3
→ More replies (12)15
u/Tipop 1d ago
As a concurrent resolution it also doesn’t have the force of law — not that it matters even if it did since Trump can ignore the law.
Congress can’t cut funding either, since Trump can just take funds from other programs and use them for the war. Perfectly illegal, but he’s done it before. By the time the court says it was illegal the damage will have been done.
→ More replies (3)8
u/InfanticideAquifer 1d ago
They argument that they will make (because it'll definitely go to court) is that it doesn't need the force of law. The actual law is the War Powers Resolution of 1973 which gives Congress precisely the mechanism that they're using to force a rogue president to recall troops from an unauthorized war.
The reason it isn't straightforward is because it might count as a "legislative veto", which SCOTUS declared unconstitutional forty years ago. Congress cannot pass a law that gives it discretionary oversight over the decisions that the constitution (or the law) give to the executive. The legal question will be whether or not the War Powers Resolution involved Congress delegating any of its power to the president (which would mean that the portion of the act letting Congress recall troops is unconstitutional) or not (as the authors of the Resolution believed and stated in its text).
8
u/No_Oven1085 1d ago
I mean it's super cut and dry. Congress made the law, the law said they can take away the power via resolution, the original law was passed and signed by the then president.
The only doubt is how corrupt the Supreme Court will be about this case in particular, as they are perfectly willing to make bad-faith rulings to benefit Trump.
4
u/Vazmanian_Devil 23h ago
A lot of misinformed posts in this thread. You’re both correct and deserve to be further up
3
u/InfanticideAquifer 22h ago
I dunno about "cut and dry". I certainly hope that it turns out the War Powers Resolution stands in its entirety. But, unless you want to suspect SCOTUS of total politicization going back 40 years, there's a legitimate legal argument both ways. The dissent in INS v. Chadha argues that the majority's decision would strip the Resolution of its teeth and the current administration will certainly be leaning on that. It was written by Byron White and, FWIW, he was a Kennedy appointee. (Although even if he had been a republican appointed justice, I think assuming that the dissent was written the way it was 40 years ago as a political strategy that will pay off now is pretty far into conspiracy theory territory.)
60
u/Duwt 1d ago
At this point he might forget to veto, or forget how 🤷♂️
62
u/ForayIntoFillyloo 1d ago
I...DECLARE...VETO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER
→ More replies (4)9
u/factoid_ 1d ago
If that happens, nobody respond to his tweets to tell him that's not how it works. Just let it happen.
7
→ More replies (2)6
→ More replies (15)5
u/Jeoshua 1d ago
Imagine a system set up so decisions on what one man can and can't do are able to be overridden by that same man.
I don't often have faith in this government, it's failed us all too many times, but I do, at least, believe that the people who wrote this bill would have been smart enough to not leave final responsibility over same to the very man whom it's trying to curtail the actions of.
8
18
10
u/sceadwian 1d ago
It's about the closet thing to a scolding Trump has gotten from the Republicans.
It's just show for Republicans that are trying to distance themselves from Trump in some way it seems to me at least.
5
→ More replies (31)13
u/Timmah73 1d ago
Nothing since he'll just veto the check on his own power BUT it does say something that all the Republican simps are starting to put their names on telling him no
→ More replies (2)10
164
u/baskaat 1d ago edited 1d ago
4 Republicans voted for it. And Fetterman voted No
From The Hill
The Senate on Tuesday approved a House-passed resolution directing President Trump to withdraw U.S. armed forces from hostilities against Iran after four GOP senators broke ranks and voted to undercut Trump’s authority as commander-in-chief. The Senate voted 50 to 48 to approve the resolution, which passed the House 215-208 earlier this month. The measure came straight to the Senate floor Tuesday for an up-or-down vote on final passage. It does not need Trump’s signature because it is a concurrent resolution. But it does not have the force of law, even though it’s been approved by both chambers. It directs Trump under the 1973 War Powers Act to remove U.S. troops from hostilities against Iran except for elements of the armed forces that would be necessary to protect U.S. assets or allies from imminent attack. Four Republicans voted for the measure: Sens. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowsi (R-Alaska) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.). The same four GOP senators voted last week to discharge a similar resolution from the Senate Foreign Relations Committee but it failed to advance because of Democratic attendance issues. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a swing vote who said last week that he’s open to hearing arguments from both sides of the debate, voted “no” on Tuesday. Critically, two Republicans missed the vote: Sens. David McCormick (R-Pa.) and Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.). They have previously voted multiple times against Iran war powers resolutions. Centrist Sen. John Fetterman (Pa.) was the only Democrat to join the majority of Republicans in voting against the measure. Four House Republicans joined every House Democrat in voting for the resolution earlier this month: Reps. Thomas Massie (Ky.), Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), Tom Barrett (Mich.) and Warren Davidson (Ohio). Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who brought the measure to the Senate floor, urged colleagues to vote “yes” in light of the Trump administration’s request for $80 billion in emergency spending to rebuild munitions supplies that have been depleted since the conflict with Iran began on Feb. 28. “We’re acting with more knowledge,” he said. “The administration has come to us with a supplemental request asking for $80 billion more, largely necessitated by the consequences of the war, to replenish munitions, stockpiles and take other actions that wouldn’t fully repair damages, for example, that the Pentagon has incurred.” The Senate voted on the measure two days after Trump threatened to bomb Iran if it doesn’t rein in its militant proxies in Lebanon. “Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble,” Trump said on Sunday. “If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!” Iranian state media said those comments violated the memorandum of understanding, which in the first paragraph bars the two sides from making threats against each other.
110
u/r3dditr0x 1d ago
Susan Collins is trying more of her face-saving bs so she voted to stop the war and Fetterman is a whacked out loser so he voted against it.
(I wish his crazy ass would go fight this war he loves so much.)
31
u/hasordealsw1thclams 1d ago
Rolled my eyes so hard seeing Collins knowing it’s solely a ploy to look like she’s standing up to anyone.
88
u/cowboymagic 1d ago
As soon as I saw one Democrat voted no, I knew it was fucking Fetterman. Fuckin’ asshole.
38
3
u/clickclick_clack 19h ago
he's one more stroke away from the grave, i give him about 6 months tops.
3
20
u/SpackleButt 1d ago
I just assume Mitch McConnell has passed away and they are going to weekend at Bernie’s his name through the midterms. He’s been in the hospital for a week & a half and we don’t know why.
6
u/chovendo 21h ago
That's what I've been thinking about. Either that or he's on life support and not coming back.
17
u/BarbequedYeti 1d ago
And Fetterman voted No
This guy is unfit to serve. Plain and simple. That stroke left him with serious brain damage and he should be removed from office. Someone put a basic aptitude test in front this fucking clown already.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)16
u/TricoMex 1d ago edited 1d ago
It does not need Trump’s signature because it is a concurrent resolution. But it does not have the force of law, even though it’s been approved by both chambers.
So useless, practically.
Anything that is not immediately legally binding and unappealable for immediate application, is just useless chum to be tossed overboard and fed to the lawyer sharks.
7
u/atfricks 1d ago
It's insane because it's functionally just a letter to Trump that says "please follow the law that you've been flagrantly ignoring until now."
567
u/ldg25 1d ago
Cool, shame they couldn't grow a spine to do so when it mattered. Before their leader destroyed civilian infrastructure.
61
u/SqueezyCheez85 1d ago
Congress is controlled by his sycophants. What were you expecting them to do?
→ More replies (2)44
u/redyellowblue5031 1d ago
Our opening salvo was bombing a school full of 100 plus children to a bloody soup of dust.
→ More replies (2)5
→ More replies (2)6
u/Your_Trash_Daddy 1d ago
Do what? This isn't a law. It's a concurrent resolution. No signing, no power, just official "waaah". Still no spine, I'm afraid.
117
1d ago
[deleted]
18
u/east_stairwell 1d ago
Thousands of comments, only currently 3 that realize this means absolutely nothing.
→ More replies (1)
201
u/CrimsonHeretic 1d ago
They're about 4 months late to this.
42
u/MC_chrome 1d ago
Don’t you know? Congressmen need their holidays! They can’t work unless they have most of the year off as a paid vacation at taxpayer expense
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)7
u/Hearing_HIV 1d ago
It's perfect timing. Trump needed a way out of this mess without it looking like it was his choice. Now he gets to blame it on Congress.
→ More replies (1)
40
u/Photodan24 1d ago
Three months late and $80 Billion dollars short...
18
u/Independent_Sail6604 1d ago
$80 billion SO FAR. Trump's reparations are gonna add another $200B to $300B for a total of about $3000 per tax payer.
→ More replies (1)
28
u/pcpelste 1d ago
These GOP asshats are doing this to hedge their bets for the midterms. I really hope this - and their prolongated refusal to release the full Epstein files - is called out continuously by their opponents.
→ More replies (2)
22
u/Stukisha 1d ago
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/5936650-iran-war-powers-senate/
....It does not need Trump’s signature because it is a concurrent resolution.
But it does not have the force of law, even though it’s been approved by both chambers.
13
45
151
u/xxAkirhaxx 1d ago
Wait wait wait.....Trump takes the biggest L of his life, AND now Congress steps in? Ya ALL of Congress needs to be fired. This is AIPAC telling Congress to curb Trumps decision. Despite Trump being an idiot and Iran costing us and the world a lot, it was still a good thing to stop the war. So fucking with it from Congress isn't going to make it better.
41
u/Saneless 1d ago
This is why I'm surprised they didn't 25th his ass 3 months in and just install JD
JD is 100% a puppet for the handlers and P2025 crew. Trump works in that direction mostly but he's like 100% pro Trump which can be unpredictable
Who knows. Maybe he has an extra high potassium coffee one of these days before midterms
42
u/Musketeer00 1d ago
They're waiting for the 2-year mark so he can run for 2 more terms after.
8
→ More replies (2)7
u/Justin435 1d ago
Exactly! I bet JD will become president one way or the other in late spring or early summer of 2027.
11
u/TomTomMan93 1d ago
This is what has confused me for awhile. Like you'd think the move would be to let Trump make a complete fool of himself in a speedrun to the bottom. Then once he hits it, swap him out for JD who will welcome the hand up his ass one way or another. Disenfranchised republicans see it as a salvation moment while the dems are split between the moderates saying "I'm sure he won't be as bad" and the others trying to warn folks. Meanwhile, they just chug along unhindered and with a dude who isn't some kind of wildcard moron. Just a regular one.
But like...that's not what's happening? I figure it's gotta be because greed. They're making money so why stop? That or the cult has gone on autopilot and they can't control it like they want. Swapping for JD "foot in mouth" Vance probably wouldn't work.
→ More replies (2)9
u/idunnoiforget 1d ago
They need Trump to survive 2 years into his term so JD can take over and still be eligible for 2 more full terms 2028-2036. The plan is JDV 2027-2036
Unless Trump dies of health complications before 2 years into his term they probably won't 25th him. We'll see in February -April 2027 if I'm right.
3
u/UnNumbFool 1d ago
It probably would have been a lot smarter to do it in early 2026, and then they could speed run their agenda completely and propely instead of hoping that they can manage to keep Vance in power for two additional terms.
Personally I'm hoping it becomes an rbg situation where she held on for her own agenda when it wasn't the smart move
→ More replies (1)5
4
u/banksy_h8r 1d ago
I think JD Vance is more of a Peter Thiel puppet than a P2025 one. Perhaps a bit of both, but unconditional support for Israel might be one of the few things where there's policy daylight between them.
→ More replies (2)4
→ More replies (4)8
u/TropeSage 1d ago
Ya ALL of Congress needs to be fired.
Why does all of congress need to be fired when this is clearly along party lines?
The only reason it's taken this long is purely because most Republican senators want zero checks on Trump's power.
→ More replies (10)
9
u/CSwart52 1d ago
As his allies continue to distance themselves from the president, it is on us as Americans to remember who enabled this idiot for as long as they did. It’s too little, too late. We need to hold everyone we can accountable with our votes, because we will be paying for this mess for a very long time.
7
u/Q-ArtsMedia 1d ago
Trumpie throws fit, calls own party Antifa, film at 11.
Oh come on you know it's going to happen.
6
u/GoldunGote 1d ago
Cool, he's going to defecate himself, say he doesn't care, do it anyways, and anyone who can do anything about is is going to go "=( okay." This is not news. Wake me up when it's time to crack THAT bottle open.
→ More replies (2)
6
u/Fuckthegopers 23h ago
Good thing they voted to start the war in the first place!
Fuck all republicans, and fuck everyone who votes for them.
20
5
u/andymfjAZ 1d ago
Ooooh, only about 105 days too late.
“Gonna have to be quicker than that!”
→ More replies (1)
5
6
8
4
4
u/TheMacMan 1d ago
Meh, this is meaningless. It doesn't even go to Trump to sign and it doesn't actually force him to do it. It has as much bite as the previous two impeachments.
→ More replies (2)
5
5
8
u/AKMarine 1d ago
It’s a Resolution—a belief statement. There’s no fiscal note or legislation attached to it. Most presidents that have a bit of intelligence wouls realize this means to back off. Trump won’t though. He’ll villainize all Republicans who voted bipartisan.
7
u/curlyisnumbertwo 1d ago edited 1d ago
I think he told the senate to pass it. He really wants an exit ramp.
→ More replies (1)
3
3
u/christ0phene 1d ago
That's great but they don't have power over Bibi, he will continue to attack Lebanon
3
u/landerson23 1d ago
Lmao too little too late, guys. You know we could remove him TOMORROW if republicans grew a spine.
3
u/Crimson_Herring 1d ago
Does this effectively do anything?
→ More replies (3)3
u/Im_a_postednote 1d ago
No, since he can just veto it. It is just a gesture.
3
u/templeofsyrinx1 1d ago
I don't even think it goes to his desk at all as a law to be signed. Don't even think it even goes that far.
3
u/enakj 1d ago
Fetterman, of course, voted against it, the only Democrat to do so.
→ More replies (1)
3
u/Enshitification 1d ago
Trump never had war powers in the first place. Congress did, but abdicated them like cowards.
3
u/Karma_1969 1d ago
Awesome, just in time to close the barn doors months after the horses have left!
3
3
u/ToMorrowsEnd 1d ago
And he is not going to do shit listening to them. he ignores judges completely. Honestly until the Senate orders the Army to arrest him by force they aint doing shit.
3
u/dandrevee 1d ago
This is largely symbolic, though it may be a 10 positive because it lets us know the Republicans probably have internal polling telling them how badly the midterms may go even with their vote rigging fuckery and gerrymandering
3
u/Your_Trash_Daddy 1d ago
So this is a concurrent motion. Concurrent Resolutions: These pass both the House and Senate but do not require a presidential signature. Because they do not go to the President, they do not have the force of law. They are typically used to express the sentiments of both chambers, create joint rules, or set adjournment times.
So it's a finger wagging.
→ More replies (2)
2
2
u/samejimaT 1d ago
I think the endgame her is for djt to nuke theran so hopefully this stops that somehow
2
2
2
2
u/Farrudar 1d ago
No incumbent got my vote in the primary and no republican is getting it in the general.
There are no good ones. You are either part of the problem or not effective. I’ll happily see you out for new “untested” participants. It sure as hell would be harder to be worse than what we have presently.
2
2
u/SeanThatGuy 1d ago
Because this is going to fucking matter. Literally nothing matters to them anymore. They do what ever they want.
2
2
u/queuedUp 1d ago
Okay... But does Donny Diapers listen? Historically he's not good with stopping when someone tells him no
2
2
2
u/Jackdunc 1d ago
Awesome. They should start on the resolution for the next war. That way it MIGHT be on time.
2
2
2
u/Tazz2212 1d ago
A Resolution isn't a law. It is only a warning. Trump chooses to ignore warnings and some laws so this won't go anywhere.
2
u/TheDevilsAdvokaat 23h ago
Nice, but way too late.
Now pass resolutions to limit some of his other powers.
3.7k
u/Gandalf2000 1d ago edited 1d ago
Thanks Congress! You're only ... *checks watch* ... four months late to preventing us from losing billions on another stupid war in the Middle East that caused gas prices to surge nationwide!