Tag: perpetual war

War Powers Resolution: The Senate Had One Job

On January 14, a “war powers resolution” went down to defeat in the US Senate on a 50-50 vote, with vice president JD Vance breaking the tie.

The resolution, which would have required US president Donald Trump to at least casually mention to Congress that he planned more military misadventures in Venezuela before, rather than after, launching such misadventures, was a half-hearted half-measure, but somehow only half of US Senators could bring themselves to go even that far.

Let’s go over the way things are supposed to work:

The US Constitution assigns the power to declare war to Congress, not to the president.

If the president attacks another country without such a declaration, it’s not a war, it’s just a crime — a “high crime” legally meriting and ethically requiring that president’s impeachment and removal from office.

Unfortunately, presidents have been getting away with such crimes on a routine basis since the end of World War 2. The list is too long to fit in an op-ed, but a few high points include Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Those conflicts weren’t wars, at least so far as US law was concerned. They were criminal acts carried out by lawless presidents with the acquiescence — and often co-conspiracy — of Congress.

Toward the end of the Vietnam fiasco, Congress passed (and overrode Richard Nixon’s veto of) something called the War Powers Resolution of 1973.

Nixon’s veto message claimed that the Resolution included “unconstitutional restrictions” on his power to kill as many people as he pleased, when and how it pleased him to kill those people.

What it actually included was an unconstitutional — absent ratification by 3/4 of the states’ legislatures — repeal of the Constitution’s Article I, Section 8 assignment of the power to declare war solely and exclusively to Congress.

The Resolution supposedly gave the president wiggle room to engage in illegal military operations if he got congressional “authorization” or made up a “national emergency,” and as long as he subsequently bothered to tell Congress about it.

Why would Congress (a notoriously power-hungry body) try so hard to give up its power to declare war? Because if there’s anything a politician hates more than he or she loves power, it’s being held responsible for the consequences of exercising that power. By trying to give up its power, Congress thought it could also rid itself of culpability.

The Senate had one job to do. It wasn’t an especially hard job, it wouldn’t have had any great effect (even if it passed the House, Trump would have vetoed it), and it didn’t even meet the bare minimum constitutional standard.

Keep reading

What’s Behind Washington’s Signaling Support For NATO Troops In Ukraine?

It might be a negotiating tactic to pressure Russia into concessions on its maximalist goals in the conflict as a quid pro quo for not reprioritizing Russia’s containment over China’s by extending Article 5 to NATO states’ troops in Ukraine and thus reducing the odds that they’ll actually deploy there.

France and the UK recently committed to deploying troops to Ukraine in the event of a ceasefire as part of their latest proposed security guarantees to that country, the principle of which was praised for the first time ever by Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, the US’ Special Envoys for talks with Russia. The Paris Declaration that France and the UK signed also pledged their support for “Participation in a proposed US-led ceasefire monitoring and verification mechanism”. All of this certainly raises concern in Russia.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth declared last February during his speech at NATO HQ that his country won’t consider member states’ troops in Ukraine to be covered by Article 5 and won’t deploy any of its own there either as part of any security guarantee. In light of the Paris Declaration, however, some in Russia might wonder whether the US is soon planning to reverse both policies to protect its NATO allies’ troops in Ukraine upon their deployment and deploy its own there too for monitoring a ceasefire.

Putin himself warned as recently as last September that Russia would deem Western troops in Ukraine “legitimate targets for destruction.” It’s therefore easy to see how their deployment en masse, unlike the minor unofficial French and UK troop presence in Odessa that Russian spies confirmed later that same month, could spiral out of control into World War III if Russia targets their forces. That might not happen, though, if the US’ support for the latest security guarantees is just a negotiating tactic (at least for now).

To explain, Trump 2.0 could have continued pumping Ukraine with weapons for free and never initiated talks with Russia if it wasn’t sincere about ending the conflict, all while gradually ramping up escalations against Russia as part of a “boiling the frog” approach for normalizing the path to World War III.

Keep reading

Ukraine Braves Grueling Winter in the Cold and Dark, as Relentless Russian Strikes Take Power Generation and Energy Grid to the Brink

‘Hello, Darkness, my old friend.’

We have reported multiple times on the relentless combined air campaign by Russian forces that is targeting Ukraine’s power plants and energy grid, and leaving swaths of the population in the cold and dark during a grueling winter.

But now, we’ve come to the point where Kiev’s CHPP-5 (combined heat and power plant) and CHPP-6 can’t even be fully restored after a massive ballistic missile strike before the next one hits.

Lights have been out in much of Kiev and many other large cities, and there isn’t much room for improvement.

Simplicius on Substack:

“One of the most noteworthy aspects of the last strike on Kiev was the notable absence of any major air defense action. Video footage of only one ‘Patriot’ missile launching and self-destructing in the sky soon after emerged, but beyond this, Ukrainian defenses over Kiev appeared dismal compared to previous strikes, signifying a likely exhaustion of resources.”

Keep reading

Trump Reportedly Says Ukraine’s Zelensky, and Not Russia’s Putin, Is Holding up the Peace Deal: REUTERS

Zelensky and his EU Globalists do what they can to impede peace, and cling to some non-starter proposals.

Ever since February 2025, in the infamous Oval Office heated on-camera argument between Donald J. Trump and Kiev regime leader Volodymyr Zelensky, it was clear that the US President knew that Ukraine didn’t have the cards, and should settle with Russia as fast as possible, lest they lose more and more territory.

The assessment proved totally correct.

We have been diligently reporting here on TGP on Trump’s peace push for the Russia-Ukraine war ever since before he was inaugurated.

But one aspect stood out: Zelensky didn’t negotiate like the losing party that he is, but rather as the golden boy of Globalism that he also is.

Keep reading

EXPOSED: Rep. Tim Burchett BLASTS Congress for Sneaking Through $90.1 BILLION in DIRTY SPENDING — $1.425B to Egypt and “Building Jordan a Wall While They Fire Missiles at Others”

Tennessee Republican Rep. Tim Burchett stormed off the House floor in utter disgust after Congress rammed through a massive $90.1 billion spending bill loaded with foreign giveaways and anti-American pork.

Burchett first pointed to an amendment offered by Chip Roy to cut the D.C. Court of Appeals budget by 20% and strip salary funding for the staffs of Judges Boasberg and Boardman.

Next up was an amendment from Eli Crane to defund the National Endowment for Democracy, an NGO long criticized by conservatives for meddling abroad and fueling censorship and regime-change operations.

Burchett also laid out another outrageous line item buried in the bill: an estimated $6.15 billion total for the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program across multiple countries.

FMF funding includes:

  • $1.3B for Egypt
  • $3.3B for Israel
  • $425M + $50M for Jordan
  • Additional FMF allocations to other countries

Tim Burchett wrote on X, “I am so disgusted. This is not what you sent us here for. Funding liberal causes and foreign militaries and contraception. $90 Billion of your money.”

Keep reading

Pam Bondi Reveals Classified Leaker Behind Trump’s Venezuela Operation Was Pentagon IT Contractor

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi has unmasked the traitor behind the illegal leak of classified information about President Trump’s bold Venezuela operation.

Pam Bondi revealed Wednesday night that the individual responsible for leaking classified information about President Trump’s Venezuela operation was an IT contractor for the Department of War and he is now sitting in jail.

The disclosure came during an explosive interview with Sean Hannity, where Bondi confirmed that the Trump DOJ and FBI are aggressively pursuing those who leak classified military intelligence and the media figures who obtain and publish it.

As previously reported by The Gateway Pundit, the FBI executed a search warrant at the Alexandria, Virginia, home of a Washington Post reporter who obtained and reported on classified and illegally leaked Pentagon material.

The reporter, Hannah Natanson, is not the subject of the investigation, but federal agents seized:

  • Her cell phone
  • Two laptops (one personal, one work-issued)
  • A Garmin watch

According to the Washington Post, Natanson was inside her home at the time the warrant was executed.

The search was conducted at the request of the Department of War, according to Bondi.

Keep reading

Federal court reverses release of Columbia Gaza activist Mahmoud Khalil

A federal appeals court has overturned a lower court’s decision that released Gaza activist Mahmoud Khalil from an immigration jail earlier last year. The step brings the federal government a step closer to deporting the activist.

In a 2-1 decision on Thursday, the appeals court did not rule on the removal of Khalil, but said the lower court that released him from immigration jail did not have jurisdiction in the case. “That scheme ensures that petitioners get just one bite at the apple — not zero or two,” the panel wrote, per the AP. “But it also means that some petitioners, like Khalil, will have to wait to seek relief for allegedly unlawful government conduct.”

Khalil, a graduate student at Columbia who was involved with the Gaza encampment that led to agitators in the encampment occupying Hamilton Hall. Khalil was detained in an immigration jail after being detained on March 8 last year. He spent three months in the jail until a judge in New Jersey ruled that his jailing was unconstitutional and ordered his release.

The Trump administration challenged the ruling as the federal judge was not in an immigration court, which usually decides cases for detention of illegal immigrants in the country as well as deportations. It is not clear if federal law enforcement will not seek to detain Khalil after the order from the lower court was overturned by the panel.

The majority opinion from judges Thomas Hardiman and Stephanos Bibas, both appointed by Republicans, wrote, “Our legal system routinely forces petitioners — even those with meritorious claims — to wait to raise their arguments. To be sure, the immigration judge’s order of removal is not yet final; the Board has not affirmed her ruling and has held the parties’ briefing deadlines in abeyance pending this opinion. But if the Board ultimately affirms, Khalil can get meaningful review.”

The reversal on the order comes as an appeals board in the immigration system is looking at an order that has set Khalil up to be deported from the country. The judge in the immigration case said that he could be deported to Algeria, where he is a citizen, or Syria, where he was born in a refugee camp. His attorneys argue he would be in danger if he returned to either country.

Keep reading

Senate GOP blocks vote to limit President Trump’s authority on Venezuela

Senate Republicans voted Wednesday to dismiss a war powers resolution that would have limited President Donald Trump’s ability to carry out further military action against Venezuela, with two GOP senators reversing their earlier support for the measure.

Vice President JD Vance cast the tie-breaking vote to defeat a Democratic-backed motion after the Senate split 50-50 on a Republican effort to dismiss the resolution.

The outcome followed five Republican senators who originally joined Democrats to advance the legislation last week. Two of those Republicans, Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Todd Young of Indiana, ultimately withdrew their support.

Democrats forced the debate after U.S. forces captured Venezuelan leader Nicolas Maduro in a surprise nighttime raid earlier this month.

“Here we have one of the most successful attacks ever and they find a way to be against it. It’s pretty amazing. And it’s a shame,” President Trump said Tuesday during a speech in Michigan.

President Trump also criticized several Republicans who maintained their support for the resolution, blasting Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine. Even if the resolution had passed the Senate, it stood little chance of becoming law because it would have required President Trump’s signature.

Lawmakers also cited the release of a heavily redacted 22-page Justice Department memo outlining the legal basis for the operation that captured Maduro. The memo states that the administration currently has no plans for expanded military action.

“We were assured that there is no contingency plan to engage in any substantial and sustained operation that would amount to a constitutional war,” the memo said, signed by Assistant Attorney General Elliot Gaiser.

The administration has justified its actions by citing wartime authorities under the global war on terror, after designating drug cartels as terrorist organizations. It has also characterized Maduro’s capture as a law enforcement operation tied to longstanding U.S. criminal charges.

Keep reading

This Is What Tyranny Looks Like Now: No Crowns. No Coups. Just Unchecked Power.

In January 1776, Thomas Paine published Common Sense, a pamphlet that gave voice to the discontent of a nation struggling to free itself from a tyrannical ruler who believed power flowed from his own will rather than the consent of the governed.

Paine’s warning was not theoretical.

Two hundred and fifty years later, we find ourselves confronting the same dilemma—this time from inside the White House.

When asked by the New York Times what might restrain his power grabs, Donald Trump did not point to the Constitution, the courts, Congress, or the rule of law—as his oath of office and our constitutional republic require. He pointed to himself.

According to Trump, the only thing standing between America and unchecked power is his own morality.

If our freedoms depend on Donald Trump’s self-proclaimed morality, we are in dangerous territory.

Over the course of his nearly 80 years, Trump has been a serial adulterer, philanderer, liar, and convicted felon. He has cheated, stolen, lied, plundered, pillaged, and enriched himself at the expense of others. He is vengeful, petty, unforgiving, foul-mouthed, and crass. His associates include felons, rapists, pedophiles, drug traffickers, sex traffickers, and thieves. He disrespects the law, disregards human life, is ignorant of the Bible, illiterate about the Constitution, takes pleasure in others’ pain and misfortune, and is utterly lacking in mercy, forgiveness, or compassion.

Christian nationalists have tried to whitewash Trump’s behavior by wrapping religion in the national flag and urging Americans to submit to authoritarianism—an appeal that flies in the face of everything the founders risked their lives to establish.

That whitewashing effort matters, because it asks Americans to abandon the very safeguards the Founders put in place to protect them from men like Trump.

Trump speaks in a language of kings, strongmen, and would-be emperors advocating for personal rule over constitutional government. America’s founders rejected that logic, revolted against tyranny, and built for themselves a system of constitutional restraints—checks and balances, divided authority through a separation of powers, and an informed, vigilant populace.

All of their hard work is being undone. Not by accident, and not overnight.

The erosion follows a familiar pattern to any who have studied the rise of authoritarian regimes.

Trump and his army of enablers and enforcers may have co-opted the language of patriotism, but they are channeling the tactics of despots.

This is not about left versus right, or even about whether Trump is a savior or a villain. It is about the danger of concentrating unchecked power in any one individual, regardless of party or personality.

This should be a flashing red warning sign for any who truly care about freedom, regardless of partisan politics.

The ends do not justify the means.

Keep reading

Trump Class Battleships Could Get Megawatt Lasers: Navy’s Top Officer

The U.S. Navy’s top officer wants directed energy weapons to become the go-to choice for the crews of American warships when faced with close-in threats. He also said that more powerful megawatt-class lasers should not be seen as “beyond” the capabilities that could be found on the future Trump class warships. The Navy has been a leader within the U.S. military in fielding laser weapons and is actively pursuing systems that employ high-power microwaves, but there continue to be significant hurdles to these efforts.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Daryl Caudle talked with TWZ and other outlets about his service’s directed energy weapon plans at a roundtable at the Surface Navy Association’s (SNA) annual symposium earlier today. Caudle has long been an outspoken proponent of directed energy capabilities.

“My thesis research at [the] Naval Post Graduate School was on directed energy and nuclear weapons,” Caudle said. “This is my goal, if it’s in line of sight of a ship, that the first solution that we’re using is directed energy.”

In particular, “point defense needs to shift to directed energy,” the admiral added. “It has an infinite magazine.”

When it comes to point defense for its ships, the Navy currently relies heavily on Mk 15 Phalanx Close-In Weapon Systems armed with six-barrel 20mm M61 Vulcan rotary cannons and launchers for RIM-116 Rolling Airframe Missiles (RAM). Each Phalanx has enough ammunition to fire for a total of around 30 seconds, at most at the lower of two rate-of-fire settings, before needing to be reloaded. RAM launchers available today can hold either 11 or 21 missiles at a time, and the latest versions of those missiles cost around $1 million each. Many ships across the Navy also have 5-inch or 57mm main guns, and/or 30mm automatic cannons, which can also be used against close-in threats.

Keep reading