Barack Obama ignored the advice of two Justice Department lawyers on Libya
While the war in Libya rages on so does the battle between the president and the Congress over whether or not Barack Obama needs to seek Congressional approval to continue the war under the War Powers Act. Barack Obama claims that the actions we are taking in Libya do not amount to “hostilities” so there is no need for him to step before the Congress and ask for permission to continue the bombing, while the Congress naturally disagrees with that assessment.
The excuse that the president is using in my opinion is both laughable and insulting to the American people at the same time; It is absolutely laughable that an alliance of countries can bomb another country with the goal of killing the head of that country, and the president can claim that this does not constitute “hostilities.” And it is equally insulting to the American people that the president thinks we are stupid enough to buy into the lame excuse for his usurpation of Congressional authority.
Now we are learning that Barack Obama ignored the advice of two top lawyers in the Justice Department when he made his decision to ignore the demands of the Congress to appear before them. Both the Pentagon General Counsel and the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel informed the president that they believed bombing a sovereign nation was in fact an act of “hostility” which would require the president to ask for Congressional approval.
With the two top lawyers in the Justice Department in disagreement with the president, Barack Obama turned elsewhere until he found counsel which would provide him with the answer he so desired. Technically he did nothing wrong by ignoring the top two lawyers in the Justice Department and relying on other top lawyers in the White House instead, but this is highly unusual and in my opinion leads to more questions.
As the Congress debates what the next move will be they will be equipped with the knowledge that the Justice Department agrees that “hostilities” are taking place and this requires Congressional approval. I believe this news will help the Congress come to a decisive position and hand the president one final ultimatum: explain yourself or the funding will be cut off. The Congress has already given the president too much time and too much leeway, this news should expedite Congressional action.
America's Watchtower 
This is one of the lessons it was hardest for me to learn in the business world. We tend to treat people with advanced degrees and letters after their name as absolute authorities. I met from time to time with our CEO and general counsel to discuss this or that. The general counsel would give his advice, which was based his expertise and on hours of study and research into the situation. Sometimes the CEO would follow the advice, but from time to time he’d take another course of action. This was very confusing to me, and finally I asked the CEO in private why he would pursue a course of action inconsistent with the lawyer’s advice. He told me that the lawyers are well-paid for their advice, but the job of running the organization was his, and he had to consider issues and factors other than just what the law said and how the general counsel interpreted it.
Barack Obama’s the CEO of the USA, and he’s right to seek out legal counsel, but remember not only do all lawyers not agree all the time, but the President himself is a lawyer and competent to analyze and evaluate the law in this area. If the President’ follows the lawyers’ advice and turns out to be a disaster, we’re not going to blame the lawyers, we’re going to blame the President, and rightly so. It’s the President’s job to make the decisions after all advice has been given. This is what harry Truman meant when he said “The buck stops here.”
What’s actually happened here is that President Obama has become like past presidents, chafing under the restrictions imposed on his office by the Congress and looking for ways out from under it. In this case, some members of Congress are suing the President – count on that to go nowhere. The only effective thing the congress can do to curb our relatively minor acttvities in the Libyan conflict are to defund it, and I doubt that’ll happen.
I hope everyone’s got a great weekend on tap – happy Fathers’ Day to the dads out there, and remember to thank your wives for helping you become a dad!
And may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
I understand what you are saying, Barack Obama is responsible for the final say after consulting his lawyers. Not all of them agree and it is up to the president to make the decision. But the DOJ is charged with defending federal law and both DOJ lawyers felt that Obama should seek Congressional approval, it was White House counsel which told the president it was not needed. It seems to me that the department entrusted to uphold federal law should be the lawyers Obama listened to.
Thanks for the Father’s Day wishes, I don’t know if you are a father, but if you are, happy Father’s Day.
LikeLike
I don’t know if the War Powers Act is constitutional or not. The constitution says that only Congress can declare war. It seems to me the WPA was created to give presidents some flexibility to react militarily to events in the world and within sixty days ask for congressional approval. So, why do presidents complain? I think, in the case of Obama, his ego is getting in the way. It’s not likely that congress would deny his request. (Although I don’t agree with our involvement in Libya.)
LikeLike
I do not think the War Powers Act is constitutional, but at this point it is highly likely that it will be overturned. I do understand the theory behind the act; to give the president to act in the case of an emergency when he feels he cannot wait for approval. But this was not an emergency and at this point I feel you are right, his ego will not permit him to go before the Congress and beg for approval.
LikeLike
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/2008/specials/CandidateQA/ObamaQA/?page=full
But the candidate, in 2007, sings a different tune:
“In instances of self-defense, the President would be within his constitutional authority to act before advising Congress or seeking its consent. History has shown us time and again, however, that military action is most successful when it is authorized and supported by the Legislative branch. It is always preferable to have the informed consent of Congress prior to any military action.”
Well, ALMOST always… sometimes… okay, rarely if ever.
LikeLike
Once again his campaign rhetoric doesn’t quite match his actions as president.
LikeLike
I was under the impression one of the reasons the President would go to congress was to insure that his support would be there in case things started to go south. To also reasuure the American citizens that the issue was vetted, and indeed required our lives and treasure.Zero is out on a limb by his lonesome. Let him hang with it alone since that is what he chooses.
LikeLike
An interesting point, by refusing to go to the Congress for approval Barack Obama owns this issue by himself. He will live or die based on the results of this war and there is no way he can deflect the blame if this fails.
LikeLike
Treasonator in Chief…
Aloha and I hope all ya Dad’s had a great Fathers Day!
LikeLike
So Obama is now King? He can attack a nation without Congressional approval, beyound the 90 day window, and were supposed to go along with it because he’s our CEO? I thought the constitution was put in place to help prevent Kings and Dictators. While not supporting GWBush, think of the outcry that would take place if Obama was a Republican.
LikeLike