It was three weeks ago when Donald Trump first bragged about a military strike on a civilian boat in international waters, which killed 11 people. The president and his team have since confronted some difficult questions, including whether the strike was legal — a question the White House has struggled to answer.
But almost immediately after the deadly incident, Trump said this was the first such strike, but not the last. Evidently, he meant it. The New York Times reported:
For the third time this month, the United States military attacked a boat in the Caribbean Sea and killed suspected drug smugglers, President Trump announced on social media on Friday. The attack killed three people aboard the vessel, which was in international waters, he said. Mr. Trump described them as ‘narcoterrorists’ but did not offer more details, such as their nationality or a specific alleged criminal organization.
There’s no shortage of elements to a controversy such as this one. We could talk, for example, about the fact that there are standard procedures that apply when U.S. officials suspect a boat of carrying drugs, and Team Trump has abandoned them. We could talk about the lack of evidence about the boats’ crews and cargo.
We could talk about the fact that even John Yoo, a notorious former deputy assistant attorney general under George W. Bush, has suggested that the White House might be crossing a legal line. We could talk about the unfortunate fact that Trump and JD Vance apparently find the recent developments amusing. We could talk about the vice president’s stated indifference as to whether these strikes are war crimes or not.
We could talk about the fact there are Pentagon lawyers who’ve reportedly expressed concerns, not only about the legal justification for the strikes, but also about the possible legal implications for U.S. troops involved in the operations. We could similarly talk about Democratic Sen. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan asserting that uniformed military personnel have asked their chain of command “for letters that ensure that they don’t have personal liability for any illegal action in these operations.”
But as important as all of these elements are, the one thing I find myself stuck on is this: What is Congress going to do about it?
As NBC News reported late last week, two Democratic senators, Virginia’s Tim Kaine and California’s Adam Schiff, have introduced a resolution under the War Powers Act that would block the U.S. military from engaging in “hostilities against certain non-state organizations.”
The senators’ offices said their measure “also emphasizes the importance of Congress retaining its power to declare war as President Trump has stated that ‘it is not possible at this time to know the full scope and duration of military operations that will be necessary.’”
Republicans apparently have a fundamentally different approach in mind. The New York Times reported: Draft legislation is circulating at the White House and on Capitol Hill that would hand President Trump sweeping power to wage war against drug cartels he deems to be ‘terrorists,’ as well as against any nation he says has harbored or aided them, according to people familiar with the matter. … The broadly worded proposal, which would legally authorize the president to kill people he deems narco-terrorists and attack countries he says helped them, has set off alarm bells in some quarters of the executive branch and on Capitol Hill, according to people who spoke on the condition of anonymity about sensitive internal deliberations. Brian Finucane, who’s been covering the story for Just Security, told The New Republic’s Greg Sargent that the proposal would represent “a blank check to use force anywhere in the world against anyone he designates a narco-terrorist.” Or put another way, congressional Republicans see a president abusing his powers, and they’re eager to make it easier for Trump to engage in even more abuses. As for possible oversight, Republican Rep. Tim Burchett of Tennessee told NOTUS last week, “We’ll provide some oversight afterwards.” After what? He didn’t say.
Steve Benen is a producer for "The Rachel Maddow Show," the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He's also the bestselling author of "Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans' War on the Recent Past."
Latest Post
Recommended
