This transcript is automatically generated
investor though the war powers act grow brickyard Nixon -- like it he -- the thing they overrode that.
No president -- -- like -- but what is the purpose of this if there isn't some clout from congress or is turn it.
Is this the problem is that congress should not be able to limit the powers of the president is this constitutional or.
Or -- what's your reaction to wall of this -- ignoring in the war power attack.
Well I think it is unconstitutional you know it was one of those post Watergate so called reform statutes.
That the overwhelmingly.
Liberal democratic congress enacted in 75 and 76 the campaign finance laws the independent counsel statute.
And others all all bad ideas.
Tried to correct the problem which they associated with that Richard Nixon.
About congress clearly has a role in decisions about.
War and peace.
But that comes through its appropriations.
Power One of its most important constitutional powers have trouble with the war powers act is that it and it's too.
Limit the president's constitutional discretion as commander in chief.
And that's where it gets off the rails.
Yeah and has ended go to the finance ignition because one of the things that a lot of people talked about I've heard is well all the congress needs to do it is defund this -- operation.
Regarding Libya and yet.
You can't really do that either because that we you'd have to have it seems like you have to defund the entire.
Military because the president can use from.
Monies from pot -- pod B when he's using military funds.
I think they're actually ways to draft a prohibition no no funds appropriate appropriated under this or any other statute may be used for operations in connection with Libya.
That's it and in elegant way to put it but but I I've seen this done before congress can.
Cut off appropriations.
If it wants to and if it is thorough enough.
And that would be a very strong signal disapproval -- I mean I happen to think that we do have an interest in getting rid of -- It's not the reason the president went into Libya and it's certainly not consistent with the way he's conducted the operations that's obviously part of the problem this is -- So incoherent policy and so in that the performances.
Commander in chief that it's got a lot of people Republican and Democrat upset about the way it's been carried out.
Day and and -- the president agreed with you on this business about the war par check whether -- constitutional robot that could have been a response saying sorry.
Congress is not constitution where the steady suspect this note.
That essentially said well the UN authorized and I know you were former UN ambassador -- But when did the U winds have authority over the military power to the president.
-- you put your finger on a very important point you know the legal analysis that the White House released the other day was really pathetic it was one paragraph.
And and -- didn't really make any sense and you're exactly right to the extent he's trying to rest his authority.
For the use of force on the Security Council resolution he is way way out of line he has strained and strained.
To say that the war powers act doesn't apply because we're not engage in hostilities you know Gadhafi and his people would be surprised to hear that.
And also to try and find some authority.
In the UN outside the constitution.
That's just out of bounds in my view I think it's gonna cause the president more political trouble.
Because it's so transparently invasive I think what we ought to do is have an up or down vote in congress.
Authorizing this action the president could have done it early on would have been politically a lot smarter if he's done that even if he wasn't constant.
-- -- -- right I think is.
One of those where politically.
It's an insult to say that were not involved in hostilities beyond all the other technical rules they're really -- but you investor John Bolton.
Always good to -- viewpoint on to thank you very much.
Well thank you very much for.