White House: Boehner inconsistent on war powers

Carney: Boehner's views "stand in contrast to the views he expressed in 1999"

Topics: John Boehner, R-Ohio, War Room, Libya, White House,

White House: Boehner inconsistent on war powersHouse Speaker John Boehner of Ohio speaks to reporters on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, June 16, 2011. Boehner reasserted that the scandal surrounding Rep. Anthony Weiner, D-NY, had become a distraction from the important work in Congress. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia is at right. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)(Credit: AP)

The White House says House Speaker John Boehner has not always demanded that presidents abide by the War Powers Resolution as he is pressing President Barack Obama to do now over U.S. military involvement in Libya.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said Thursday that Boehner’s views “stand in contrast to the views he expressed in 1999 when he called the War Powers Act ‘constitutionally suspect,’ and warned Congress to ‘resist the temptation to take any action that would do further damage to the institution of the presidency.’”

Boehner rejected Obama’s contention that U.S. forces face no hostilities in Libya, saying the argument doesn’t “pass the straight-face test,” and threatened to cut off funds for the operation, with possible House action next week. His spokesman, Brendan Buck, dismissed Carney’s reference to a “decade-old statement.”

“As speaker, it is Boehner’s responsibility to see that the law is followed, whether or not he agrees with it,” Buck said.

Anger in Congress has been growing over the administration’s refusal to seek congressional authorization for the military intervention. In response, the administration sent to Capitol Hill a report saying that because the U.S. is in a supporting role in the NATO-led bombing mission, American forces are not facing the “hostilities” that would require the president to seek such approval under the War Powers Resolution.

The 1973 law prohibits the military from being involved in actions for more than 60 days without congressional authorization, plus a 30-day extension. The Libya campaign has gone on for nearly three months and leader Moammar Gadhafi has maintained his grip on power.

Boehner joined several Republicans and Democrats in expressing incredulity over the White House’s “no hostilities” claim.

“Yet we’ve got drone attacks under way. We’re spending $10 million a day, part of an effort to drop bombs on Gadhafi’s compound,” Boehner told reporters. “The Congress has the power of the purse, and certainly that is an option.”

In a letter to Obama this week. Boehner said the commander in chief will clearly be in violation of the War Powers Resolution on Sunday and he pressed the administration to state the legal grounds for Obama’s actions. The Ohio Republican said Thursday the White House report failed to answer his questions and that he expects a response by his Friday deadline.



Reflecting the congressional frustration with the administration, the Senate Banking Committee postponed action on legislation designating frozen Libyan assets for humanitarian relief. The move indicates that consensus on the issue remains elusive.

Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the top Republican on the Armed Services Committee and one of the strongest proponents of military action against Gadhafi’s forces, criticized the administration for its “puzzling assertion” on hostilities and for adding confusion to what he called an already confusing policy.

McCain said the result has been a “wholesale revolt in Congress over the administration policy.” But he warned lawmakers, especially his Republican colleagues, against taking any step that would encourage Gadhafi. He said the United States should not cut and run from Libya.

Sen. Bob Corker, R-Tenn., a member of the Foreign Relations Committee, pressed for hearings on the administration’s legal explanation for not seeking congressional authorization.

“We owe it to every man and woman who puts on a uniform to serve our country, and every taxpayer who funds the operations, to be clear that our entry into any conflict — whether in response to an attack on the homeland or a threat our broader national security — has been entered into in a lawful and appropriate manner,” Corker wrote to the Foreign Relations Committee chairman, Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.

Countering the criticism, House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California said Obama did not need congressional authorization, but she acknowledged the congressional frustration.

“It’s like a marriage. You may think you’re communicating, but if the other party doesn’t think you’re communicating, you’re not communicating enough,” Pelosi told reporters.

The administration report estimated the cost of U.S. military operations at about $715 million as of June 3, with the total increasing to $1.1 billion by early September.

Adding to the congressional pressure on Obama, a bipartisan group of 10 lawmakers on Wednesday sued the president for taking military action against Libya without war authorization from Congress. The lawmakers said Obama violated the Constitution in bypassing Congress and using international organizations like the United Nations and NATO to authorize military force.

Previous presidents, Republicans and Democrats, have largely ignored the Vietnam-era law, which was created as a check on their power to authorize military force.

The White House sent Congress the 32-page report in response to a nonbinding House resolution passed this month that chastised Obama for failing to provide a “compelling rationale” for U.S. involvement in Libya.

The resolution gave the administration until Friday to respond to a series of questions on the mission, including the scope of U.S. military activity, the cost of the mission and its impact on other U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

While the U.S. led the initial airstrikes on Libya, NATO forces have since taken over the mission. The U.S still plays a significant support role that includes aerial refueling of warplanes and intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance work. Obama has ruled out sending U.S. ground forces to Libya.

“U.S. operations do not involve sustained fighting or active exchanges of fire with hostile forces, nor do they involve the presence of U.S. ground troops, U.S. casualties or a serious threat thereof, or any significant chance of escalation into a conflict characterized by those factors,” the report said.

The president has said the U.S. joined the international effort in Libya to prevent the slaughter of civilians at the hands of Gadhafi’s forces, a development Obama said could have shaken the stability of the entire region.

Although Obama emphasized that U.S. involvement would be limited in time and scope, the mission already has dragged on longer than many expected. The bombing campaign has halted some of Gadhafi’s advances on rebel forces and there are increasing calls from world leaders for him to leave power, but the administration is still struggling to define an exit strategy for U.S. forces.

The report released Wednesday said that if the U.S. were to end its participation in the NATO operation, it would “seriously degrade the coalition’s ability to execute and sustain its operations to protect Libyan civilians.”

The White House also said in the report that the U.S. is working with Libya’s main opposition group, the Transitional National Council, on plans for a political transition if Gadhafi leaves power. Despite initial questions about the council’s composition, the White House said in the report that the U.S. is not aware of any ties the group has with any terrorist organization.

The White House and Capitol Hill have been at odds throughout much of the campaign over whether the administration has fully consulted Congress on the mission. Obama aides insist they have briefed Congress extensively throughout, citing more than 30 briefings with lawmakers and their staffs, and 10 hearings where administration officials have testified on Libya.

——

Associated Press writer Donna Cassata contributed to this report.

——

Julie Pace can be reached at http://twitter.com/jpaceDC.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 14
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Pilot"

    One of our first exposures to uncomfortable “Girls” sex comes early, in the pilot episode, when Hannah and Adam “get feisty” (a phrase Hannah hates) on the couch. The pair is about to go at it doggy-style when Adam nearly inserts his penis in “the wrong hole,” and after Hannah corrects him, she awkwardly explains her lack of desire to have anal sex in too many words. “Hey, let’s play the quiet game,” Adam says, thrusting. And so the romance begins.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Elijah, "It's About Time"

    In an act of “betrayal” that messes up each of their relationships with Hannah, Marnie and Elijah open Season 2 with some more couch sex, which is almost unbearable to watch. Elijah, who is trying to explore the “hetero side” of his bisexuality, can’t maintain his erection, and the entire affair ends in very uncomfortable silence.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Charlie, "Vagina Panic"

    Poor Charlie. While he and Marnie have their fair share of uncomfortable sex over the course of their relationship, one of the saddest moments (aside from Marnie breaking up with him during intercourse) is when Marnie encourages him to penetrate her from behind so she doesn’t have to look at him. “This feels so good,” Charlie says. “We have to go slow.” Poor sucker.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and camp friend Matt, "Hannah's Diary"

    We’d be remiss not to mention Shoshanna’s effort to lose her virginity to an old camp friend, who tells her how “weird” it is that he “loves to eat pussy” moments before she admits she’s never “done it” before. At least it paves the way for the uncomfortable sex we later get to watch her have with Ray?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Hard Being Easy"

    On the heels of trying (unsuccessfully) to determine the status of her early relationship with Adam, Hannah walks by her future boyfriend’s bedroom to find him masturbating alone, in one of the strangest scenes of the first season. As Adam jerks off and refuses to let Hannah participate beyond telling him how much she likes watching, we see some serious (and odd) character development ... which ends with Hannah taking a hundred-dollar bill from Adam’s wallet, for cab fare and pizza (as well as her services).

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Booth Jonathan, "Bad Friend"

    Oh, Booth Jonathan -- the little man who “knows how to do things.” After he turns Marnie on enough to make her masturbate in the bathroom at the gallery where she works, Booth finally seals the deal in a mortifying and nearly painful to watch sex scene that tells us pretty much everything we need to know about how much Marnie is willing to fake it.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Tad and Loreen, "The Return"

    The only sex scene in the series not to feature one of the main characters, Hannah’s parents’ showertime anniversary celebration is easily one of the most cringe-worthy moments of the show’s first season. Even Hannah’s mother, Loreen, observes how embarrassing the situation is, which ends with her husband, Tad, slipping out of the shower and falling naked and unconscious on the bathroom floor.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and the pharmacist, "The Return"

    Tad and Loreen aren’t the only ones to get some during Hannah’s first season trip home to Michigan. The show’s protagonist finds herself in bed with a former high school classmate, who doesn’t exactly enjoy it when Hannah puts one of her fingers near his anus. “I’m tight like a baby, right?” Hannah asks at one point. Time to press pause.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Role-Play"

    While it’s not quite a full-on, all-out sex scene, Hannah and Adam’s attempt at role play in Season 3 is certainly an intimate encounter to behold (or not). Hannah dons a blond wig and gets a little too into her role, giving a melodramatic performance that ends with a passerby punching Adam in the face. So there’s that.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Shoshanna and Ray, "Together"

    As Shoshanna and Ray near the end of their relationship, we can see their sexual chemistry getting worse and worse. It’s no more evident than when Ray is penetrating a clothed and visibly horrified Shoshanna from behind, who ends the encounter by asking if her partner will just “get out of me.”

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Frank, "Video Games"

    Hannah, Jessa’s 19-year-old stepbrother, a graveyard and too much chatting. Need we say more about how uncomfortable this sex is to watch?

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Marnie and Desi, "Iowa"

    Who gets her butt motorboated? Is this a real thing? Aside from the questionable logistics and reality of Marnie and Desi’s analingus scene, there’s also the awkward moment when Marnie confuses her partner’s declaration of love for licking her butthole with love for her. Oh, Marnie.

    13 of "Girls'" most cringeworthy sex scenes

    Hannah and Adam, "Vagina Panic"

    There is too much in this scene to dissect: fantasies of an 11-year-old girl with a Cabbage Patch lunchbox, excessive references to that little girl as a “slut” and Adam ripping off a condom to ejaculate on Hannah’s chest. No wonder it ends with Hannah saying she almost came.

  • Recent Slide Shows

Comments

0 Comments

Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>