Romney On Whether He Can Invade Iran Without Congressional Approval: Let The Lawyers Sort It Out

During the CNBC Republican debate tonight, moderator Chris Matthews asked Mitt Romney, "If you were president of the United States, would you need to go to Congress to get authorization to take military action against Iran's nuclear facilities?" Romney's answer: let the lawyers sort it out.

ROMNEY: You sit down with your attorneys and tell you what you have to do, but obviously the president of the United States has to do what's in the best interest of the United States against a potential threat. The president did that as he was planning on moving into Iraq and received the authorization of Congress...

MATTHEWS: Did he need it?

ROMNEY: You know, we're going to let the lawyers sort out what he needed to do and what he didn't need to do, but certainly what you want to do is to have the agreement of all the people in the leadership of our government as well as our friends around the world where those circumstances are available.

Comments

[GenericBlogger]

Chris Matthews' questions to Mitt Romney in the October 9, 2007 debate regarding the need for Congressional approval for military action ordered by the President is a loaded topic.

The President's powers to use military action without Congressional authorization is limited by The War Powers Resolution of 1973. The President can send a limited force for a limited length of time without Congressional authorization. However, past presidents consulted Congressional leaders and obtained authorization to satisfy the Constitutional requirement that only Congress can declare war.

The last war declared by Congress was in WW2. Since then, Congressional authorizations were accepted as sufficiently synonymous to declarations of war. Those who literally interpret the Constitution will expect a declaration of war. Those who accept figurative interpretations accept Congressional authorization instead.

Romney was not far off with his answer but his wording was pitiful and misrepresented the relationship between the President and lawyers. Lawyers are advisors, not decision makers. When he said "You sit down with your attorneys and tell you what you have to do...", he should have said the attorneys will provide the legal choices and he will decide. Our post WW2 history shows the President is better off to obtain Congressional authorization even for limited use of military force. The time to test the constitutionality of the President's powers is not when we are attacked and time is wasted on sorting out the legalities.

On a related point, it was reported that Dubya is trying to avoid Congressional authorization for attacking Iran by including Iran as part of the Iraq War which is already approved. That is a question that should have also been asked in yesterday's debate. The legality of this must be ascertained ahead of time.

Truman authorized the Korean War by claiming the UN's mandate negated the need for a Congressional declaration of war. Whether Dubya needed Congressional authorization for the Iraq War is moot because he obtained it and precedence shows that he needed it. Especially since the UN didn't mandate the Iraq War.

[keltonics]

To my mind, it is no different for matters related to war or peace!

Ron Paul’s wonderfully consistent plea to “read the Constitution” notwithstanding, all of this opportunistic posturing, from both the media and candidates alike, about what a given candidate might, or might not do, in the future about Iran is both morally and practically irrelevant in the extreme.

Frankly, I, for one, could not care less!

What I want to know is what these individuals running for public office stand for in real SpaceTime, here, at this moment, and now, where the body is. That’s when and where all creative living takes place, not in the future, nor in the past, for that matter.

Unfortunately, like most Americans, our presidential candidates of today haven’t the first clue as to when and where they really are, who and what they really are, nor even how or why they truly are.

Unfortunately, reality and truth seem to hold no interest for any of them.

What a pathetic attempt at actual being, if not to say a rank suicidal charade, it has all become!

And come 2008 (if the Supreme Court doesn’t beat us to it), we are going to put one of these woeful, opportunistic, lost souls in the White House?

Of course! Having no moral or practical idea of where, when, who, what, how and why we are ourselves as Americans, that is the way we want it to be!

Rightly or wrongly, as it is consciously, or unconsciously, desired so shall it be!

It always is!

[Purple Girl]

All thses candidates are tap dancing around the question of Iran- yet their drool is apparent. theres alot more supporters of the Cheney doctrine of pre-emptive invasions then are admitting. And in that non answer- we get our answer.
frankly I'm afraid of any of these people getting into the oval office (Repugs and Dems)

[Stevelagain]

What is the point of the article? It seems clear that the author of the article did not state their point. I gather it was to indicate that Romny horribly answered this question and got it wrong.

But the author doesn't tell us what the right answer is. The president carries around a little black box so that he can push the buttons and wage nuclear war in a heart beat. That's what you elect him for.

Romney most likely gave the same Answer Hillary would. Which is it depends on the situation and the consensus of leadership at the time.
You might even see the leaders of the house and senate tell the president to go ahead and do it and please don't ask them to vote on it because they know it needs to be done but don't want to be "unpopular" for doing it.

Here's a question for you. Would a strike like that start a war? Is Iran already at war with us? Israel made such a strike the other day and the nation attacked has said nothing, nada, not a thing.

It seems to me that Romney gave a good answer and that this article doesn't deal with it at all.

[beholder]

This clown is campaigning to become the President of the United States of American, to protect and defend its constitution.

Only Congress can authorize war. Period. I don't know if you ever studied civics---perhaps they don't teach it anymore judging from how little anyone seems to know about how this country is supposed to run.

Only Ron Paul is a patriot---all the others are baffoons, jingoists, fearmongers, and born again numbnuts.

[Ginzaman]

This answer just cost him the election. Like many of these neocons, he's a powerhungry arrogant idiotic racist that could care less about the Constitution. He thinks he can buy the election with his fortune and continue with the same neocon crap because we the public are too stupid to see thru his s**t. Wrong. I'll keep laughing my ass off as he keeps sticking his foot in his mouth.

[Stevelagain]

Hillary will be the next president anyway. Why don't you ask Hillary this question and see if she answers it any differently and how much you like her answer?

[Stevelagain]

And the point of this article is what? Romney essentially said it depends on the exact situation and what all the leadership thinks about it at the time.

That's why the president caries the little black box folks. So that he can push that button in a heart beat if he has to. That's what you elect your president to do.

I don't think Hillary or Obama would have answered this much differently. And I'm not CERTAIN what the point of the article is because it's NOT STATED. Was it meant to merely inflame without actually making the attack they know isn't true? It seems to me the conversation does not support the intention of the author...had the author of this "article" stated their intention.

[larstein]

It's frustrating that nobody seems to be taking this seriously. It's as if Bush can bomb a sovereign nation and Congress will say "Oops..." and grumble and shrug. When we start bombing Iran, (and I don't doubt but what we will) it will be a criminal act, the ultimate impeachable offence, and it will mean $5.00 a gallon at the pump, the disruption of 20% of the world's oil supply going through the Straits of Hormuz everyday because Iran is not going to just sit there and take it. They will hit us back where it hurts the most. It will exacerbate the land rush for oil, and sink the American economy. It is also political suicide for the Gops, but Bush doesn't care about politics anymore. He has disdain for the Gop party. He is God's iron rod. And he will do what God tells him to do. In other words, Bush is mad. Is America far behind?

[jsantiago]

You are quite accurate, including your conclusion ("In other words...") which most Americans make exuses for, hoping against hope that it's really not the case. Also, don't forget the 170,000 American hostages the Iranians will have at that point just across their border...

[RandyRanson]

As writers and seers into the future, based upon sheer logic, deduction and reason, it's not too difficult to conclude, that the sickness and disease of power lust, turned into a megalomania of insanity run rampant with abuse, has and is sweeping like a plague, within the Neo Con Republican Party, in the same manner that the disease struck the Germans through the wanton destruction and terror, inflicted on their own people, by the likes of the NAZI's Hitler and his hand chosen insane followers.

The same disastrous consequences await America 70 years later, ignited by a populace, who gave up on it's beliefs, hopes, dreams, and desires, by allowing madmen like George W, Bush, Dick Cheney, and all of the other sycophant like minded others, to reign a control of hell, terror, war and heartache on the world.
Destroying the fiber and soul of America in the process.

War is to them a good thing. Why? They don't even really know why, they just bathe and lust in the power they believe it offers. They are the real mentally ill and crippled minds of our time. They need to be more than Impeached.

[Nonamnesiac]

Romney's answer to this is precisely why the Dems should move to simultaneously impeach and remove Bush and Cheney NOW. The supposedly lame duck Bush got the war funded without limitation in May, got the Trample on Civil Liberties Act 2 (Protect America Act) passed in July, got the Democrats in the Senate to join in a 94-1 vote in support of his war budget, again without limitations last week, and looks as if he'll have a bi-partisan Trample on Civil Liberties Act 3 (FISA Reform) passed this week or next. All of this has been done in a bi-partisan manner -- giving the overwhelming majority of the American electorate who oppose the war and the assault on civil liberties the finger.

Bush and Cheney have repeatedly committed high crimes and misdemeanors and continue to repeat them and actually plan to have the results of those high crimes and misdemeanors carried into the next Administration.

Romney is simply saying the lesson that all of the Democratic frontrunners, and Republican candidates have learned from Bush -- just do anything and wait until the courts decide it, as Congress will do nothing to stop the criminal, unconstitutional actions of the Executive Branch.

Once the American people hear an uninterrupted version of the high crimes and misdemeanors of this Administration, which is what moving high crimes and misdemeanors would require, they will overwhelmingly support impeachment/removal of Bush/Cheney. The rest of the 67 votes for removal will come from the incumbent Republican Senators who will be running for the 22 Republican seats up for reelection in 2008. Either they vote to remove Cheney/Bush or they will be removed by the voters of their states.

Romney's answer to this is really scary.

[coyote4]

WTF?
Murders in the illegal Iraq war have been reduced down to POLITICS on Arianna's blog?

----------­----------­----------­----------­-------
Politics>> Private Contractors Open Fire In Iraq, 2 Women Dead

Politics>> Blackwater Again? Private Contractors Open Fire In Iraq, Two Women Dead

Politics>> Insurgents Kill At Least 50 In Iraq
----------­----------­----------­----------­-----

WTF?
Murders in the illegal Iraq war have been reduced down to POLITICS on Arianna's blog?

[PollM]

What a stupid answer.

On going Poll for the Dearborn Debate

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=672
.

[Tyle]

Ron Paul gave such excellent responses to the questions asked him .... yet MSM reports on the idiots ... Mitt, Fred, Rudy and John... who cares what these 4 have to say?

Big news is how Fred did in his first debate. Ridiculous.

Come on .... MSM ... report on the important issues discussed and how Ron Paul came out on top ... start reporting truth not distraction news.

[SpoookyJoe]

Exactly right! Ron Paul was fantastic in the debate. He has the most exciting campaign going right now. He has a movement behind him that is picking up steam... and the MSM is missing it 'cuz they decided a long time ago that he couldn't win. Ol' George Snuffleupagus told him right to his face that he didn't have a chance.

The internet is slowly, but surely, replacing the MSM.

[gopnot]

this man is dangerous,this man is a idiot,obviously,he is a mormon,and his PROPHET JOE SMITH SAID "ONLY THOSE WHO MARRY MULTIPLE PARTNERS ENTER THE "HIGHEST" HEAVEN.UNBELIEVABLE THAT FOOLS BELIEVE IN THIS SHIT,AND THEY HAVE ENOUGH POWER TO RUN FOR PRESIDENT AND HAVE IDIOTS FOLLOW THEM.this is a gop loser for sure,NO GOP CANDIDATE WILL BE ELECTED FOR PRESIDENT,AND THE HOUSE AND SENATE WILL BE SWEPT CLEAN OF THEIR FILTH.they bankrupt the country,lie,send jobs overseas,buy china,buy china,owe china,owe china.they have ruined social security,health care,they are the GREATEST TRAITORS TO AMERICA EVER KNOWN,THIS IS HOW HISTORY WILL REMEMBER THEM.AND NOW AS IF THE FAILURE IN AFGHANISTA­N,OSAMA,IR­AQ,NOW THEY WANT FAILURE IN IRAN,BUT FOLKS,THIS ONE IS NOT A SICK JOKE,THIS ONE WILL BE WORLD WAR THREE,I GUARANTEE IT.if we wake up someday,and we attack iran,this will be it,a draft,a horrific unending war that will indeed destroy us.

[not one of the sheep]

Let's give the guy a little credit, at least he answered the question unlike some other candidates. I may not agree with him but at least he and the rest of the repubs had the gonads to go on Media Matters, sorry, Moveon.org, sorry, I mean MSNBC (you know it's all the same anyway). Haven't seen the Dems go on Fox yet, have we? Too busy dodging the questions and leading the ignorant sheep to socialist slaughter.

[Tyle]

Ron Paul answered this question the right way. His response was "Absolutely not" ... meaning he would not go into a war with Iran or any other nation without the consent and approval of Congress.

George Bush went into Iraq without the consent of Congress ... he usurped Congress

[Kansas Evans]

It's not all the same.

Especially when Brian Williams thanked God on 9/11 that Bush and Cheney are in office.

[JohnJames]

God, it's really beginning to look like this country is approaching melt-down.

[larry278]

This is one of many reasons that I don't watch debates. It pays to wait till SLATE, HP & other progressives sites report, recap & analyze debates.

[ResidentChimp]

Not a very good answer. Clinton demonstrated how stupid it is to ask lawyers about military considerations. It's like allowing politicians to run a war. There is a difference between invasion and surgical strike. Again Clinton showed what a bad idea surgical strikes are. The real dilemma is when Congress gives the President the go ahead and then does everthing within its power to undermine the war effort. That's the kind of situation President Lincoln faced in Prosecuting the Civil War. If the Democrat Copperheads, AKA surrender monkeys, had gotten their way we would still have slavery today.

[ashabot]

He has to talk on both sides of a knife. No problem. He has a forked tongue.

[LibsRHilarious]

Someone needs to explain to Chrissy the term, "Commander­-in-Chief"­.