Yes, but … an opinion essay in The Hill is stingy with facts

In arguing that Congress has treated President DJ Trump differently than his predecessors when it comes to “war” efforts, an essay in The Hill claims that President Harry Truman’s support for UN action in South Korea in 1950 had no declaration of war from Congress. (True.) He then immediately claims that Truman’s actions created a “’Korean precedent’ for unilateral presidential action in armed conflicts.”

Next up, Erick Chomskis (a civilian employee of the Defense — not War — Department), asserts:

The moment President Trump took office, executive actions that had been tolerated for decades under previous administrations were suddenly treated as legally questionable, illegitimate, or even unprecedented. Love Trump or hate him, you cannot miss that powers exercised by presidents from Truman to Obama were completely reinterpreted the moment they were used by a president outside the establishment’s favor.

Establishment Republicans have done no such thing. Trump has illegally imposed tariffs, has illegally refused to spend funds budgeted by Congress, has somehow spent funds NOT budgeted by Congress and has engaged in warfare in the Caribbean (bombing a port in Venezuela this week) with no Congressional oversight and no Congressional pushback.

MOREOVER, the Chomskis argument about Truman is directly refuted by Congress.gov as it clarifies:

President Truman ordered U.S. military intervention in the Korean peninsula after forces from the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (or North Korea) crossed the 38th parallel in June 1950 seeking to take over the portion of the peninsula under control of Republic of Korea (or South Korea)…

[T]he Department of State prepared a memorandum defending the conflict as an “international police action” to enforce the UN Security Council resolutions rather than a war. Citing a list of 85 instances in which past Presidents deployed forces overseas without express congressional authorization, the memorandum argued that historical practice demonstrated that the Constitution does not require congressional permission for the President to use military force to protect American interests abroad. The listed incidents ranged from the pursuit of pirates to multiyear overseas missions, but none approached the scale of conflict reached in the Korean War, which involved over 5.7 million American military personnel and over 36,000 American casualties. The Truman Administration’s constitutional theory was never challenged in court, and Congress ultimately extended the draft and appropriated funds for the war effort.

Chomskis also made the following blank (no caveats) statement: “President Barack Obama ordered military intervention in Libya in 2011 without a congressional vote.”

Yes, Obama intervened based on UN Security Council Resolution 1973 and support for NATO allies as they sought to establish a “no fly” zone. Nevertheless, the Administration reported the operations to Congress within 48 hours, consistent with the War Powers Resolution. Obama was resoundingly criticized by the Republican House. The current Congressional Republican leadership has failed to criticize any Trump encroachment on war powers and authority.

Each example follows UN declarations. Trump’s war efforts have no such cover: they are naked exhibitions of might and deflection.

The fact that The Hill published the essay using “War Department” as the essayist’s employer tells you all you need to know about its bias.

The post Yes, but … an opinion essay in The Hill is stingy with facts appeared first on The Moderate Voice.