Rand Paul Stands The Gap – Senator Paul Blocks Senate vote on House Resolution Condemning Trump Syria Withdrawal….

Great job by Senator Rand Paul. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer attempted to bring the anti-Trump House resolution to the floor.  However, because the procedure for a single senator to bring vote to the Senate Chamber requires unanimous consent, the maneuver can also be blocked by a single senator.

Today, Rand Paul stood up and would not allow Chuck Schumer to advance a Senate vote on the House resolution condemning Trump.

(Washington DC) […] Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) tried to get consent Thursday to bring up the resolution, arguing that “we’re in real trouble.”

“The most important thing we can do right now is send President Trump a message that Congress, the vast majority of Democrats and Republicans, demand he reverse course,” Schumer said.
The resolution passed the House on Wednesday by a wide margin in 354-60 vote. All 60 votes against the resolution came from Republicans.

Under Senate rules any one senator can try to set up a vote on a bill. But because that requires unanimous consent, any one senator can block it.

Paul, a libertarian-leaning GOP senator, objected to Schumer’s request for a vote, arguing that he was trying to sidestep the Constitution.

“He should come to the floor and say that we are ready to declare war. We are ready to authorize force, and we are going to stick our troops in the middle of this messy, messy, five-sided civil war where we would be ostensibly opposed to the Turkish government that has made an incursion,” Paul argued. (read more)

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Big Government, Dem Hypocrisy, Donald Trump, Election 2020, Heros, media bias, President Trump, Syria, Turkey, Uncategorized, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

275 Responses to Rand Paul Stands The Gap – Senator Paul Blocks Senate vote on House Resolution Condemning Trump Syria Withdrawal….

  1. Seabee4Trump says:

    Thank You Rand Paul….if Congress wants to keep troops in Syria, then declare war and tell President Trump whose butt they want kicked….the Constitution does not give the Congress the power to use US troops as a human shield. That is all that the 28 troops were providing in Syria.

    Liked by 12 people

  2. noswamp says:

    Rand Paul made a brilliant statement that some on here noticed. He told Congress: if you want to go to war with Syria, get on the floor and make a declaration of war, and put your name on it for all to see. Stop the political attacks on the President which mean nothing, but stand for your “convictions” about what you SAY the President supposedly should have done, which was go to war.

    CRICKETS. (From the cowards that would have our sons and daughters die in Syria, but never have the guts to officially sanction it).

    Thank God we have a fighter as POTUS in our WH. We need him for these times.

    Liked by 30 people

    • farrier105 says:

      Another objection to military action against Turkey: We are “allies” (no treaty) with this Kurdish bunch in Syria to fight a common enemy–ISIS, and probably to overthrow Assad. We are NOT allies with those Kurds to protect them while they raid across the border into Syria. We are NOT obligated to protect them after the Turks have enough of their crap and try to hit back at them. Not when we have a treaty (NATO) that requires us to HELP the Turks against the Kurds.

      Liked by 2 people

      • TheOtherSean says:

        We are only obligated to help defend NATO allies attacked in Europe or North America. IIRC, this was because when NATO was formed nobody wanted to get forced into defending colonial holdings. And whether it applies to non-nation-state actors is open to question – the Brits didn’t invoke NATO to deal with the IRA, for example.

        Liked by 1 person

        • 4EDouglas says:

          Exactly. Also the Kurds are awash in communist sympathizers. The “Good” Kurds are in Iraq.

          Liked by 1 person

        • farrier105 says:

          Once upon a time there was only an Article 5 that limited NATO alliance response to Europe and North America, but there is now an Article 6 to cover the interests of Turkey and Greece, who joined later:

          The “out-of-area” debate

          This article is complemented by Article 6, which stipulates:

          Article 61

          “For the purpose of Article 5, an armed attack on one or more of the Parties is deemed to include an armed attack:

          on the territory of any of the Parties in Europe or North America, on the Algerian Departments of France 2, on the territory of Turkey or on the Islands under the jurisdiction of any of the Parties in the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer;

          on the forces, vessels, or aircraft of any of the Parties, when in or over these territories or any other area in Europe in which occupation forces of any of the Parties were stationed on the date when the Treaty entered into force or the Mediterranean Sea or the North Atlantic area north of the Tropic of Cancer.”

          According to one of the drafters of the Treaty, Theodore C. Achilles, there was no doubt in anybody’s mind that NATO operations could also be conducted south of the Tropic of Cancer3. This was confirmed by NATO foreign ministers in Reykjavik in May 2002 in the context of the fight against terrorism: “To carry out the full range of its missions, NATO must be able to field forces that can move quickly to wherever they are needed, sustain operations over distance and time, and achieve their objectives”. (Extract from the Reykjavik communiqué).
          The principle of providing assistance

          With the invocation of Article 5, Allies can provide any form of assistance they deem necessary to respond to a situation. This is an individual obligation on each Ally and each Ally is responsible for determining what it deems necessary in the particular circumstances.

          This assistance is taken forward in concert with other Allies. It is not necessarily military and depends on the material resources of each country. It is therefore left to the judgment of each individual member country to determine how it will contribute. Each country will consult with the other members, bearing in mind that the ultimate aim is to “to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area”.

          At the drafting of Article 5 in the late 1940s, there was consensus on the principle of mutual assistance, but fundamental disagreement on the modalities of implementing this commitment. The European participants wanted to ensure that the United States would automatically come to their assistance should one of the signatories come under attack; the United States did not want to make such a pledge and obtained that this be reflected in the wording of Article 5.

          Article 6 has been modified by Article 2 of the Protocol to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Accession of Greece and Turkey.
          On January 16, 1963, the North Atlantic Council modified this Treaty in its decision C-R(63)2, point V, on the independence of the Algerian departments of France.
          Documents on Canadian External Relations, Vol. 15, Ch. IV.

          Like

          • Pokey says:

            Just as I have always thought, NATO is pure bullshit and has never been any use to the USA. Plus, a treaty like this seems unconstitutional to me. Only our Congress can declare war, not our so-called allies in their times of need.

            Like

    • And as was heavily pointed out yesterday there was ZERO outcry about the slaughter of thousands when Obama was handing out lives to be killed like raffle tickets.

      The kurds are not angels, they were well paid (better than our soldiers) to be allies against ISIS, but they have not only communist ties but terrorist ties. Turks HAVE suffered under some of their violence.

      Liked by 2 people

  3. Rynn69 says:

    Rand Paul, like him or not, is not a Senator that can be bought, corralled, or coerced into the lock-step wishes of lobbyists. He has been consistent on his views in the area of foreign policy. This was no great orchestration by Mitch.

    Liked by 15 people

    • Mike in a Truck says:

      Congress can declare war on the Lilliputians but only the Commander In Chief can send troops to war. So Chuck E.Cheese Schummer and those cowardly Republicans over in the House can saddle up and go fight if they want to.

      Liked by 5 people

      • NC Nana says:

        Mike in a Truck, in the case of President Donald J. Trump it gives me great peace that he is the only one who can send our children and grandchildren to war.

        As a supporter in Texas said last night: Honest Donald!

        Liked by 4 people

        • I loved his comment about how more ‘presidential’ involves being a ‘stiff’ (and then mimicking that) and not being able to be more presidential than Abraham Lincoln because of that hat of his. 🙂 He was on fire.

          Just thinking about what has happened to those who have supported him (especially the egregious red haired harlot judge’s treatment of Manafort and the horrendous SWAT raid on Roger Stone AND Barron Trump being TERRORIZED by Kathy Griffin’s severed head made to look like Trump) makes my blood nearly lava level boiling.

          Liked by 1 person

    • Joshua2415 says:

      Chip off the old block.

      Liked by 1 person

    • Chimpy says:

      Agreed, Rynn. Anyone who thinks that Rand Paul can be coerced into anyone hasn’t been paying attention to the entire body of work from this guy.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Chieftain says:

        Two candidates in 2016 campaigned in Iowa and said get rid of corn subsidies; Rand Paul was one. I do not always agree with him, and yes he sometimes does things for pure political reasons, but here he has been very consistent and often alone.

        Liked by 4 people

    • MelH says:

      Rand Paul is admirable for being maybe the only politician who thinks through a problem as if he favored all sides before he determines what’s RIGHT , according to the Constitution, which is what makes him consistent, as opposed to Lindsay Graham who often just considers the politically-correct (from his viewpoint)options, Constitution be damned.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. Aintree says:

    Sen Paul had a very good day today that Trump supporters will appreciate.

    Schumer failed to get “consent” to bring up the Resolution thanks to Sen Paul but as “The Hill” reported the Senate Resolution was sponsored by Sens. Bob Bob Menendez (Dem and pro Mueller letter writer to the Ukrainian gov’t) and Todd Young (R-Ind.)

    With the early ceasefire in the Turkey/Kurd/SDF etc conflict, GOP RINO Young looks like a fool and a back stabber of P Trump. Sen Paul saved the other GOP Senators from having to decide to support or not PT. A few like Romney might be disappointed they didn’t get another opportunity to oppose him like the House GOP did.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Flabbergasted says:

      Agreed Aintree. Senator Paul showed how the upper House is supposed to behave. The more mature, wise, and slow to act body. The House lurched, as by design, and got it wrong, and Senator Paul applied the brakes in an appropriate manner and, thankfully, in defense of our President. The thing you have to respect about Senator Paul is his consistency in his defense of the Constitution regardless of which side of the issue he ends up. Personally, I would like for him to revive his stance on the 4th amendment against the deep state’s incursion into the lives of US citizens – especially for political reasons.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Romney’s statement of this being a ‘bloodstain’ on America ought to make it into some future video of President Trump’s when he moves on from campaigning to nailing the traitorous uniparty.

      Liked by 3 people

  5. wightmanfarm says:

    Why doesn’t Trump call their bluff?

    “Ladies and Gentlemen, I have seen that the House is overwhelmingly in favor of a war with Turkey. I today am placing before Congress a bill to declare war on Turkey, due to overwhelming support from Congress.”

    If they don’t vote it through (and they won’t), they can STFU.

    THIS is WAR. Right here, right now.

    Liked by 6 people

    • farrier105 says:

      If they voted for war, or just passed a “war powers resolution,” and aimed it at Turkey–as pointed our yesterday–what becomes of all of our military personnel at Incirlik Air Base in Turkey? All of those Americans are still stuck INSIDE TURKEY. It’s incredible this has to be pointed out to these stupes in DC.

      Liked by 8 people

      • 4EDouglas says:

        That would mean we would have to go in and get them. We would win but under
        a Gallipoli like cloud….
        Turks unlike a lot of Islamic nations fight.

        Liked by 2 people

        • farrier105 says:

          When there was an attempted coup on Erdogan in 2016 (probably Obama’s regime change swan song) he blamed the Gulen Group that is headquartered in Bucks County, Pennsylvania and the United States. Power was cut to Incirlik Air Base, which went on generators until things calmed down, but it was one of the first things the Turks did which sent a clear signal to DC the jig was up. Don’t try anything else or you’ll have the world’s biggest hostage crisis if you do. Erdogan is still in charge of Turkey.

          Liked by 1 person

      • trump20162024 says:

        You mistakenly assume that the dhimmikkkrappers care about our armed service members and their families. The dhimmis only care about finding a way to impeach 45.

        Liked by 2 people

        • farrier105 says:

          The reason I posted the information is because it would take the Neocons by surprise. I don’t think they thought about Incirlik at all.

          Like

    • mainecoonman says:

      I understand your anger but don’t even think about it happening. US military lives would be lost because of a local conflict that, most likely, will not be resolved in our lifetimes.

      The Dems and RINO’s are so blinded by hate for the President that they would actually do that.

      Liked by 2 people

    • If you read the transcript of Rush from Yesterday he gives a very good explanation of it. I part it’s because if the bluff was called right now it could disappear into the media cauldron of news, but as we get closer to when more people, voters, have to be looking at the situation it will resonate far more strongly and enduringly.

      Like

  6. Sammy Hains says:

    You are woefully misguided.

    Democrats want to use any situation to condemn our President, especially when they can get the RINOcons to give them “bipartisan” cover so they can gleefully announce “even Republicans disapprove of this president.” But what they are denouncing is the President getting troops out of a war Congress never authorized.

    Senator Paul told the Democrats and neocons alike to put up or shut up. If they want war then they need to get on record declaring it and stop hiding. What he did is the exact opposite of what you claim.

    Like

  7. T2020 says:

    Excuse my French, but Schumer is a POS, which is proven by the sh**hole he and Cuomo created out of a beautiful, historic state. Thank you, Senator Paul.⭐️👍🏻🇺🇸

    Liked by 2 people

  8. Bigly says:

    Are we dumb? Obama’s redline(s) go ignored. Trumps very serious solution solving gets condemned.

    It’s disgusting. Like the entire system is built for mediocre representation.

    Thank god for Rand Paul , geeeeez.!

    Liked by 4 people

  9. railer says:

    Romney is a degenerate. I’m so glad I refused to vote for this creature. During the Vietnam War, he fled the country and hid out, in France I believe it was, and then returned after the coast was clear and had the nerve to demonstrate on campus AGAINST the anti-war movement. and in favor of the war.

    He’s doing it again today. Romney is amoral filth.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Pokey says:

      I’m sure you did, railer. I voted for Romney because I already knew Obama was a Communist. I did not like Romney, but I didn’t know he was in the hip pocket of the Global Cabal at the time. Romney was not the only incompetent nincompoop I have voted for in my life, but I hope to get at least two more tries to tip that scale more in my favor! 🙂

      Like

  10. ivanthenuc says:

    Yawn. Talk, talk, talk. We know that many of the GOP reps and senators are corrupt members of the liberal uniparty and have known that for a long, long time. So what. They don’t care anymore. They will never care until we consistently hold them accountable by kicking them out of office and having them leave with their tails between their legs.
    We, the conservative voters, need a way to track which of these people is against us and then we need to be organized enough to find and support a serious opponent in their primary.
    We have to be wary of splitter candidates put up by the GOP leadership – mcconnel is an expert at this.
    We have to be wary of the concern trolling about how we might get someone even worse – who cares? The idea is to get the traitor out as a message to the other traitors. If the replacment is bad, get that person out in the next election.
    The key idea is to keep these traitors from being reelected time and time again and screwing us over every time. A good place to start this time would be with all of the reps who signed this trash and any senators that have gone on record siding with the libs.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Julian says:

      Who are the Republican Primary opponents for the following RINOs in 2020?

      Cory Gardner (CO)???
      Ben Sasse (NE)???
      Mitch McConnell (KY)???
      Lindsey Graham (SC)???
      Susan Collins (ME)???
      Martha McSally (AZ)???
      Jim Risch (ID)???
      Wyoming Open Senate Seat???
      Kansas Open Senate Seat
      Tennessee Open Senate Seat

      It’s been known for few years these RINOs are up for election in 2020 so who are the MAGA Candidates Trump has endorsed?

      Liked by 4 people

      • Bogeyfree says:

        I believe katica@gopanalyst has put together a list.

        We really need a digital file that shows the 129 who voted to condemn PT where you can sort by state and it lists their MAGA opponent in 2020 if there is one.

        Think of it as a simple cheat sheet that could go viral to MAGA voters that they can pull up on their phones so we can all zero in on voting these anti-trumpets out in 2020.

        I’m no excel wizard but IMO tools like this help organize us so our actions can be more unified and impactful.

        Plus if these 129 know we are sending out this cheat sheet and their name is on it maybe they will think twice about voting against our President and the MAGA cause.

        Liked by 4 people

      • Darn. Is Murkowski safe?

        Like

      • Pokey says:

        As long as we know we have the power to keep the Demcommies from taking over the Senate in the process, It wouldn’t take many Demcommie breakthroughs to put a permanent end to Constitutional Conservative justices on the SCOTUS, among many other things. We could win a few battles and lose the war, this way.

        Politics is a blood sport, and who would prevent the third party candidates from popping up from the Tom Steyer gopher hole to spend millions to defeat our insurgent Republicans. We don’t have enough billionaires out there to overcome that scenario. Maybe we should primary the Demcommies we don’t like, instead.

        Every election issue exists because of yin and yang, not because of yin, yang and a third choice. The third choice is up to the legislature to figure out, if possible. Just throwing that out there, but I hope it sticks. 🙂

        Like

  11. aProvider says:

    Rand Paul is all about Rand Paul. He’s a snake that will bite when you really need him. Not as bad as McCain—yet. So today he’s your hero. Just wait for the next Libertarian Act on the moral high ground ( which is BS). He’ll turn on Trump.

    Like

  12. Trumpeter says:

    Let’s not forget that every time the Senate recesses, Rand joins with every single senator in voting to deny President Trump the right to make recess appointments.
    Every Single Time!

    What an independent iconoclast.

    Liked by 3 people

    • AND against the wall. His views on illegals are mind blowing. This is where the narcissism of libertarians comes into play.

      Since Trump used to have some of Rand’s opinions before the witch hunt knocked some sense into him, I think he has a soft spot for Rand.

      Like

  13. Kristin DeBacco says:

    Yes Senator Rand Paul, it is lonely at the top. But you have the gratitude of the American people. Especially the families who wear the uniforms.
    Thank you!

    Liked by 1 person

  14. The system is entirely broken. Rand Paul’s “stand” is political propaganda, allowing Congress critters to pretend the system is working, with checks and balances and all. It should not be good enough for those with the proper “cold anger” (remember that, sports fans? How easily you forget.)

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Sherri Young says:

    Mitt’s 2007 position on the same stretch of the Syria/Turkey border.

    Liked by 2 people

    • tozerbgood8315 says:

      2 faced Flake McCain

      Liked by 1 person

      • I defy anybody to look at Romney’s eyes now – compared to when he did such a beautiful job overseeing the Olympics in Utah (a level at which he ought to have stayed, except of course the Olympics are now moving towards as much political and transgender lunacy as the Academy awards) – and not see the same darkness that you can catch in stills of Obama when he is in meetings with his fellow terrorists (and yes I DO call Obama a top grade terrorist, along with most of the uniparty) and globalists (same same here).

        Same thing if you look at Romney when he was at the RNC election for W’s second term vs now.

        DARKNESS.

        They have been gotten to…not a surprise given the no holds barred permission to invade every level of our privacy; and the non-existence of any depths to which these jaded and depraved sink as they do their deals and compromises with the filthiest and most degenerate to secure their positions of power with no accountability to the citizens

        Like

        • Correction: I was referring to RYAN at the RNC election for W’s second term. That speech that he gave and his mother there…he is simply not that good an actor and what is more he visibly had passion, whereas now you could think he’d just had an enema.

          Like

  16. Mike Robinson says:

    Military industrialists don’t want to declare war, because that would require the House to re-authorize spending every two years. They want undeclared, vaporous fighting that never, ever end$.

    Liked by 4 people

  17. tozerbgood8315 says:

    Not a Libertarian, and I don’t often agree with Sen. Paul, but this time I do.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. yy4u says:

    I might not always agree with Rand Paul on everything, but he is consistent to his Libertarian views. I can deal with a politician who is what he claims to be. It’s those who claim to be A and turn out to be B (Ryan, Romney, mcCain — all those who run as conservatives and are anything but). For that matter, I respect Pelosi Galore and Schmuck Chumer more than Lisa Murkowski, Mitt Romney or Paul Ryan. At least Pelosi and Chumer are TRUE to the people who sent them to DC. They’re elected by left wing moonbats so they promote leftwing moonbattery. “Our” politicians run as conservatives and then get to DC and run like left wing moonbats.

    Like

  19. Fools Gold says:

    Perhaps my letter to McConnell and Blackburn influenced some R’s regarding elections brought Rand out. It was really very easy for Rand to step forward with no elections consequences providing cover for the rats in the senate. But we all know Trump Win is key for their jobs like those reps who showed their true colors and are now ripe for the picking in primaries.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s