Republican calls White House briefing on Iran ‘insulting and demeaning’
The Trump administration made its case on Capitol Hill for killing a powerful Iranian general, but Democrats — and a handful of Republicans — said Wednesday’s classified briefings were short on details and left them wondering about the U.S. president’s next steps in the volatile Mideast.
Democrats said by not disclosing many details of the threat that prompted the U.S. to kill Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, President Donald Trump is asking the American public to trust the very intelligence reports he has often disparaged.
The Democratic-led House will vote Thursday on a measure limiting Trump’s ability to take military action against Iran.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California announced the planned vote in a one-page statement that said last week’s drone strike that killed Soleimani was «provocative and disproportionate.
«Members of Congress have serious, urgent concerns about the administration’s decision to engage in hostilities against Iran and about its lack of strategy moving forward,» her statement said.
«Congress hereby directs the President to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces to engage in hostilities in or against Iran or any part of its government or military» unless Congress declares war on that country or enacts legislation authorizing use of force to prevent an attack on the U.S. and its forces, the five-page resolution says.
The Democratic war powers resolution seems certain to pass over solid Republican opposition. A similar proposal by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia faces an uphill fight in the Republican-run Senate.
Top Trump administration officials have repeatedly stressed that the undisclosed intelligence about imminent threats to Americans in the Mideast required action — that the president would have been negligent not to strike Iran. But Democrats want more information about what led Trump to kill Soleimani — a man whose hands were «drenched in both American and Iranian blood,» according to Trump.
«Trust us. That’s really what it all boils down to,» Eliot Engel, New York congressman and Democratic chair of the House’s foreign affair committee, said after a classified briefing top administration officials gave members of the House.
«But I’m not sure that `trust me’ is a satisfactory answer for me.»
Some Republicans joined Democrats in criticizing the administration’s presentations.
Republican Sen. Mike Lee of Utah said it was «probably the worst briefing I’ve seen, at least on a military issue, in the nine years I’ve served in the United States Senate.»
He said he found it «insulting and demeaning» for administration briefers to warn lawmakers against debating the merits of further military action against Iran because that would only embolden Tehran.
.<a href=»https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw»>@SenMikeLee</a><br>: «It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government…to come in and tell us that we can’t debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran. It’s un-American. It’s unconstitutional and it’s wrong.» <a href=»https://t.co/fVSE6b3EM0″>pic.twitter.com/fVSE6b3EM0</a>
—@cspan
«It is not acceptable for officials within the executive branch of government … to come in and tell us that we can’t debate and discuss the appropriateness of military intervention against Iran. It’s un-American, it’s unconstitutional, and it’s wrong,» Lee said, adding that he now planned to support a war powers resolution introduced by Virginia Democrat Tim Kaine.
‘How many more Americans did Soleimani need to kill?’
In contrast, Sen. Jim Risch, the Republican chair of the Senate’s foreign relations committee, called the Senate’s meeting «one of the best briefings» he’s had as a member of Congress. He said the information was «crystal clear.»
«How much is enough? How many more Americans did Soleimani need to kill before somebody supports taking him out?» asked Louisiana congressman Steve Scalise, the No. 2 Republican in the House. The world is a safer place without Soleimani in it, he added.
Democrats were unconvinced the threat posed by Soleimani was imminent or other alternatives to the killing were pursued in good faith. By not disclosing many details of the threat, Trump was asking the American public to trust the very intelligence reports he has often disparaged, Democrats said.
While in office, Trump has repeatedly disagreed or refused to accept U.S. intelligence assessments on a range of key national security topics, including Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election, Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal and the role of Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman in the 2018 assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi.
Defence Secretary Mark Esper noted only eight lawmakers — the top four lawmakers in the House and Senate, and chairs and vice-chairs of the intelligence committees in both chambers — are the only members of Congress who are authorized to see all the intelligence.
«One of the challenges, of course, is not everybody has, in fact most members of Congress do not have, access to the intelligence that I think was the most compelling,» Esper said. «That’s just simply the nature of the intelligence, and it’s restricted to the Gang of Eight.»
Democrats also are skeptical of the timing of the strike, which comes in the run-up to a Senate impeachment trial and at the start of a presidential election year. It’s the same skepticism some Republicans expressed in 1998 when they accused President Bill Clinton of using military strikes on Iraq to interrupt and delay a pending impeachment resolution against him.
Dispute over War Powers Act
Virginia Congressman Gerry Connolly, a Democrat, characterized the briefing «profoundly unconvincing» and said «no case was made» that the Iranian attacks were imminent. «I leave this [briefing] more troubled than I went into it.»
The White House so far has ignored calls to declassify the written notification that Trump sent to Congress after the military operation, as required by the 1973 War Powers Act. Some lawmakers have said it was «vague» and inconsistent with details other administrations have provided Congress about military operations. They wondered why it had to be classified in the first place.
Recent Trump national security adviser John Bolton argued on social media on Thursday morning that it should be scrapped.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution is unconstitutional. It reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of how the Constitution allocated foreign affairs authority between the President and Congress. The Resolution should be repealed.
—@AmbJohnBolton
Congress has allowed its war powers role to erode since the passage of Authorization for Use of Military Force in 2001 to fight terrorism after the 9-11 attacks, and passage of another AUMF for the invasion of Iraq in 2002.
The showdown between the White House and Capitol Hill was the latest example of Trump’s willingness to break the norms in Washington. Trump did not consult with congressional leaders ahead of the attack that killed the Iranian general and afterward sent Congress a notification explaining the rationale, but kept it classified.
It’s unclear if more detailed information about the intelligence that led to the strike on Soleimani will ever be publicly released.
