I swear your mother must have used heavy drugs when she was pregnant with you.
There are 3 separate things I discussed: The constitution, the War Powers Act, the funding bill with the timeline.
Those things are not one in the same.
The bill you brought up at the start of this thread has nothing to do with the War Powers Act. NOTHING. ZERO. NADA.
Your bill is an appropriations bill that congress is attempting to attach a timeline provision to. The issues surrounding that bill being invalid are parallel but not the same as the issues with the WPA. Nevertheless that funding bill doesn't matter because that bill will be killed by veto and won't be overturned.
The WPA was brought up, by me, in the midst of a discussion over the constitution and each branch's rights. You had no idea it ever existed before that.
Originally Posted by
hyteckit 
So Captain Obvious went from saying:
Congress has the power to recall our troops
Captain Obvious, make up your mind. Does congress has the authority to withdraw our troops or not?
1) Congress has the right to cancel the resolution they passed in 2002.
They have NOT attempted to do it. You don't seem to ever question why this all important vote has not happened which is a shame because its crucial for you.
That would effectively reverse the permission they gave the President to enter Iraq with. That vote would be the starting point for them to even ATTEMPT to end troop involvement. Without that resolution reversal they are not really demanding to bring troops back. It is necessary to justify the authority to move to the next step.
Congress is authorized by the War Powers Act to vote and say the troops are recalled. If that vote passes they have in effect recalled the troops. What they don't know is if that recall would mean anything because it would require a court decision for it to actually happen. Democrats have to put into motion that recall power for this to be tested but they refuse to give it a try.
It is straightforward: They nullify the resolution. They vote. They recall. The right of Congress is approved or denied by the Supreme Court.
Congress has the authorization. The question is if that power is even valid. Your response to this question is dribble. The War Powers Act has never been fully used since it was made up in 1973 and the odds aren't in its favor of it holding up if tested.
And note this has nothing to do with funding.
Originally Posted by
hyteckit
To:
Congress don't have a legal authority to force the President to withdraw our troops
Make up you mind buddy.
2) Congress will never have the authority to tell the PRESIDENT to bring the troops back.
If congress wants the troops back congress has to vote do it themselves.
Can you read carefully enough to understand that difference?
Congress has no legal authority to dictate the president's actions despite what the funding bill says. This is not up for debate.
Your problem is that you are grouping together posts I made in response to separate points and treating them as if I am talking about the same thing in every one.
There are no contradictions you just aren't bright enough to separate the topics from the arguments.
Taken in chronological order with the text I quoted from others showing what I was responding to it is crystal clear.
Again, you don't have the slightest idea what the hell you are talking about.
I defer to Cipher now because I am tired of repeating myself. Just remove the winks because I am dead serious when I say that if anyone tries to understand your way of thinking it will only kill their braincells.
Originally Posted by
Cipher13
I'm done with you. Our discussion has been played out to its fullest. Let the readers decide who they want to agree with from here... and if they agree with you, they're wrong too.
By the way, it's hard not to be conceited with so many idiots hanging around.
Top