Senators from both parties are expressing concerns about President Trump’s unilateral approach to conducting military strikes against alleged drug cartel boats in the Caribbean.
On the Sunday show circuit, several lawmakers raised questions about the legality of the U.S. military campaign — which last week carried out its 10th attack in recent months on vessels that officials say are trafficking narcotics with the hope of reaching the U.S. — without congressional authorization.
While Democrats took a sharper tone than Republicans, there were members of Trump’s party expressing reservations about the campaign.
In an interview on “Fox News Sunday,” Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Congress has seen no evidence to back up the Trump administration’s claims about drug trafficking and has not voted to authorize the efforts.
“So far, they have alleged that these people are drug dealers. No one said their name. No one said what evidence. No one said whether they’re armed. And we’ve had no evidence presented,” Paul said.
“So, at this point, I would call them extrajudicial killings,” he continued. “And this is akin to what China does, to what Iran does with drug dealers. They summarily execute people without presenting evidence to the public. So, it’s wrong.”
The U.S. military, at Trump’s direction, has carried out strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea, off the coast of Venezuela, and more recently in the East Pacific.
Trump has also authorized CIA operations in Venezuela, and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth deployed an aircraft carrier and its strike group to South America last week. The moves have escalated tensions between the U.S. and Venezuela’s authoritarian leader, Nicolás Maduro.
Trump on Thursday mused about briefing the Senate about the military operation but brushed off the suggestion that he needs Senate authorization, as the Constitution requires.
“The land is going to be next, and we may go to the Senate. We may go to the — you know, Congress and tell them about it. But I can’t imagine they’d have any problem with it,” Trump said. “And I think they’re going to probably like it, except for the radical left lunatics.”
Asked about Trump’s comments in the Sunday interview, Paul welcomed the idea of a briefing but said, “A briefing is not enough to overcome the Constitution.”
“The Constitution says that when you go to war, Congress has to vote on it,” he continued.
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), who joined Paul in the “Fox News Sunday” interview, agreed with his Republican colleague.
“If we’re going to be in a war, whether it’s against boats in Nicaragua chosen off a secret list that the president won’t share with Congress or the public, or a land invasion in Venezuela, it should be done following the debate and a vote in Congress,” Kaine said.
“The Ford strike group that’s being deployed has an awful lot of Virginians,” Kaine added. “They shouldn’t be sent in harm’s way unless Congress has the guts to vote about whether a war is in the national interest.”
Kaine and Paul, along with Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), introduced a War Powers Resolution this month to try and block the use of force by Americans troops within or against Venezuela after Trump raised the possibility of ground troops.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a key ally of the president’s, said in an interview on CBS News’s “Face the Nation” that, on Saturday, he spoke to Trump, who said he plans to brief lawmakers on the military effort when he returns from his trip to Asia. Graham noted that land strikes in Venezuela are a “real possibility.”
But Graham pushed back on the suggestion that the president is operating outside the bounds of his authority.
“Rand Paul, I just fundamentally disagree with,” Graham said. “To the other senators, you deserve more information and you’re going to get more information. But there is no requirement for Congress to declare war before the commander-in-chief can use force.”
Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.), in an interview on ABC News’s “This Week,” said it’s “questionable” whether the Trump administration’s military activity is legal.
“It’s questionable. And the White House and the Department of Defense could not give us a logical explanation on how this is legal. They were tying themselves in knots trying to explain this. We had a lot of questions for them, both Democrats and Republicans. It was not a good meeting. It did not go well,” Kelly said, referring to a prior meeting.
Kelly also said evidence he’s seen does not support the administration’s claim that the boats targeted were carrying fentanyl. He said there is evidence, however, that there were other drugs on some of the boats.
“We were presented some evidence that does not back up the story that the White House is telling to the American people,” Kelly said in the Sunday interview.
Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) went a step further, likening the Trump administration’s military campaign to “murder.”
Asked on NBC News’s “Meet the Press” whether he agrees with the Trump administration’s claim that the strikes are consistent with intentional law, the Democrat said, “No, it’s murder.”
“It’s very simple,” he continued. “If this president feels that they’re doing something illegally, then he should be using the Coast Guard. If it’s an act of war, then you use our military, and then you come and talk to us first. But this is murder. It’s sanctioned murder that he is doing.”
Earlier this week, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) raised questions about the military effort without first consulting Congress.
“The administration needs to give insight into Congress. That’s part of it. If this was happening with this level of insight under the Biden administration, I’d be apoplectic,” Lankford said during a Thursday appearance on C-SPAN’s new “Ceasefire” program.
He appeared alongside Democratic Sen. Chris Coons (Del.), who also shared that he was shocked after learning in the press about the attacks ordered by the White House.
“I serve on the Intelligence Committee. He serves as a senior Democrat on Defense. This is typical consultation,” Lankford told host Dasha Burns. “It’s not permission, but it is, ‘Hey, I want to let you know this is happening and hear the details of what’s happening and here’s why and what, and here’s what we know.’”
Source: The Hill
Be First to Comment