“Given the mission you have ordered to the U.S. Armed Forces with respect to Libya and the text of the War Powers Resolution, the House is left to conclude that you have made one of two determinations: either you have concluded the War Powers Resolution does not apply to the mission in Libya, or you have determined the War Powers Resolution is contrary to the Constitution,” Mr. Boehner wrote. “The House, and the American people whom we represent, deserve to know the determination you have made.”Either or. Today his weekend golf partner's lawyers replied:
“We are not saying the president can take the country into war on his own,” Mr. Koh said. “We are not saying the War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional or should be scrapped, or that we can refuse to consult Congress. We are saying the limited nature of this particular mission is not the kind of ‘hostilities’ envisioned by the War Powers Resolution.”So it all depends on the meaning of hostilities and 'boots'. Really, do we want the meaning of "not hostile" to now include hellfire missiles coming from unmanned drones targeting the leaders of countries we don't like? Gaddafi might disagree with that characterization. Not that anyone cares--he deserves to go down based on his past if not for the al-Megrahi f-you by itself (is he dead yet?), but this is about the rule of law.
Boehner has previously supported the Libyan theater and is not about to pull the plug willy nilly without cover, so we await his retort. But here's some advice for the weekend--watch out for those foot wedges and only give one mulligan. No need to let the big guy win.
Meanwhile in Pockeston, the Pockestonis have rounded up five patriots who helped rid the world of UBL by talking with the CIA. Yeah, another cartoonish story about our supposed 'ally' in the GWoT and yeah, it makes one long for the Armitage solution sometimes. But this sounds like a reasonable explanation.
Wait though, weren't we told the move was gutsy-risky because it was only a 55/45 shot that UBL was in that encampment? If we actually had five (maybe more?) CIA informants along with a CIA listening post nearby, together with satellites, stealth drones, and a Pakistani general on the payroll feeding information then really, was it really a 50/50 shot? Also, if a Pakistani general was helping us gather intelligence where was he getting his information?
Oh well. If the president is not troubled by bending the truth about just almost everything else then nobody should be surprised if he bent the truth on this a little, too. Rest assured he's tirelessly at work for us peeps, focusing like a laser on all kinds of stuff.