Senator Says War Powers Resolution Against Trump Will Have GOP Support

[AntiFascist]

Source: Newsweek

Senator Tim Kaine, a Virginia Democrat, says that Republican lawmakers in his chamber have expressed support in voting for a War Powers Resolution following President Donald Trump's authorization to strike three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday.
...
Kaine told Punchbowl News on Monday that he is privy to Senate GOP support of his resolution, saying that lawmakers have expressed interest in signing off on whether Congress and not just the president should have a say to attack other nations.

"I know I will have Republican support. How much is unclear," Kaine said. "The day-to-day events will affect this...This is a very evolving situation."

A vote that requires a simple majority for passage is expected to happen before the chamber's July 4 recess, the senator added.

Read more: https://www.newsweek.com/iran-bombing-tim-kaine-senate-republicans-trump-2089364

---

I hope Congress sticks with this.

[RandySF]

1. No

[ShazzieB]

5. What are you saying "no" to?

I'm really not clear on exactly what you mean by that one word answer.

Do you think Kaine is lying when he says "Republican lawmakers in his chamber have expressed support in voting for a War Powers Resolution"? I think that would be a silly thing to lie about, because it could be so easily disproven.

Do you disagree with seeking a War Powers Resolution against Trump? If not, I'd like to know your rationale. I'm not clear about exactly what it would accomplish in a purely practical sense, but I think some things, including this, are worth doing as a matter of principle. I certainly can't see any reason NOT to seek such a Resolution, especially if there's a possibility of getting some Republicans on the record as opposing Schlump's actions in bombing Iran.

If you simply think that such an effort is doomed to failure and therefore a waste of time, I disagree. Kaine has served in the Senate for 12 years, which means he knows how things like this work. I can't see why he would talk about this publicly unless he was pretty he's got his ducks in a row. That would be just plain stupid, and he doesn't strike me as being a stupid person. Among other things, I can't really see someone as smart as Hillary Clinton chosing a stupid guy as her running mate.

In the meantime, I keep hearing complaints about Democrats not "doing anything," and here's a Democrat with an idea about something he thinks he might be able to do, so I'm inclined to cheer him on.

[RandySF]

6. There will not be Republican support.

Last edited Tue Jun 24, 2025, 08:38 PM - Edit history (1)

They always fold.

[AntiFascist]

7. It sounds like the House might be a bigger problem...

even if a majority of House members support it, I've heard the Johnson won't bring it to vote.

[ShazzieB]

14. Yeah, the House is a mess these days.

Still, I'm going to be curious to see what happens in the Senate with this.

[ShazzieB]

13. I can understand being skeptical on that score.

But I don't know who he's been talking to behind the scenes or what they've told him. I'm curious to see how this all plays out.

[travelingthrulife]

19. Impeaching him is worth doing on principle. This will accomplish nothing.

He's broken laws and trampled on the Constitution and Democrats are fine with it apparently, because they are certainly not doing their job of impeachment.

[Raven123]

2. Ok, but Trump couldn't care less, so it's all theater

[PSPS]

3. Big deal. A "resolution." Yeah, like that will matter.

[Scrivener7]

4. I have lost all faith. The best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity.

[0rganism]

8. They said that? They lie so easily even to a "colleague"...

[slightlv]

9. Think about everything in the Congress that demands a supermajority,

filibuster proof vote... in these days, it's just about everything having to do with the American People... whether whatever is the proposal helps us or hurts us.

But to commit war on another country... killing thousands and/or millions people and destroying vital infrastructure only takes a majority vote.

Man, this country has had its priorities and ethics wrong for a long time...

[Picaro]

10. So the Constitution was never enough

The Constitution explicitly gives only Congress the power to declare war. And presidents have always routinely simply not declared war. Since they have the power to engage in war without declaring war because they are the commander-in-chief it is left to Congress to not fund the war. Which they never do. The optics you know and the immediate groundswell of support for the defacto war and those 2 year terms have historically made it damn difficult to rein in a rogue president.

This bill will have as much impact as a fart in a wind storm.

[Prairie Gates]

12. The framers supposed that people really wouldn't want a King / Dictator

They were, of course, very obviously stupid and wrong in this belief. Large numbers of people, often tipping over into a majority, have a deep desire for a unifying sovereign, and will opt for it over anything that suggests self-determination through deliberative councils, whether direct or representative.

[travelingthrulife]

18. I agree. This is doing nothing.

[Prairie Gates]

11. Spoiler alert: It won't

[FBaggins]

15. I'm not sure that we'll even find out - because it may not receive a vote

Possibly because there would be more democrats on the other side than republicans who join him... but mostly because there's little left to vote on unless things blow back up.

[republianmushroom]

16. GOP Support until the actural vote.

Then dude you will be on your own. Don't expect much help from the GOP.

[travelingthrulife]

17. How does this help anything? He's already done it.

And we already know that Congress is supposed to be declaring war. There was no emergency involved.

This is just bullshit.

[AntiFascist]

20. Netanyahu will eventually try to finish the job in Iran and he'll want Trump's help n/t