'The worst briefing I've had': Senate Iran briefing gets heated

(CNN)Senate Democrats -- and two key GOP senators -- slammed a classified briefing Wednesday on the strike that killed Iranian commander Qasem Soleimani, charging that administration officials failed to provide evidence to show the attack was imminent and dismissed the role Congress should play in deciding to take military action.

The sharpest of the criticism came from two of President Donald Trump's Senate allies: Republican Sens. Mike Lee of Utah and Rand Paul of Kentucky. Lee said after the briefing that it was the "worst briefing I've had on a military issue" during his nine years in the Senate.

(Emphasis added)

https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/politics/iran-briefing-senators/index.html

Wow.

Harsh Criticism from His OWN Party?

Apparently, this is what happens when you put an Unqualified AMATEUR in Charge?

Do you feel that Lee and Paul had valid reasons for criticism?

It wasn't "Just The Dems.".

Thoughts?

 

Why do they support Terrorist?

 

Oh well. Soleimani is still dead, and we're not invading Iran, so whoopity ****in do.

 

Yeah yeah yeah & Diane Feinstein spoke out against Pelosi today & told her to send the impeachment to the senate.

Nice to see that all are not lemmings.

 

Hard to say. I can only speculate that the briefing omitted the "evidence" because it would reveal methods and sources to a notoriously leaky, blabbermouth Congress.

The War Powers Act of 1973 specifically says that the President may take preemptive action to stop an imminent threat. That is consistent with the air attack upon the Shiite militia that attacked our troops and killed an American, and it is consistent with striking a commander who orchestrated that attack and the one on our embassy.

 

I think you missed the word "imminent". None of those things qualified. Now if they knew of the embassy attack prior to it, that would constitute 'imminent'. Attacking after the fact kinda makes the concept moot.

 

Of course they did I would expect nothing different no matter what they said. Now are they actually asserting that Solimani had ceased his terrorist activities and any future attacks? What is their evidence of this. As Pompeo said all his past attacks leading up to his death was the immance.

 

Not if the sonofabiscuit is planning additional attacks.

 

You do bring up an interesting point though.

Here is Trump's OWN Party (saying these things):

‪Lee called the way the briefing played out "un-American" and "completely unacceptable,"

Yet, even though it is Universally Accepted that Trump is a...

...TREASONOUS AMERICA-HATING IMBECILE...

This latest Trump Installment of Trump's Amateur Hour probably won't cost Trump any support.

And, even people like Lee and Rand Paul will fall back in line (like obedient puppies).

 

Are you asserting he had stopped his terrorist war all of a sudden? There were going to be more attacks, he was breaking up his proxy network of terrorist groups and call of all future planned attacks? We had every beyond a reasonable doubt he would IMMINENTLY attack again. What more "imminence" do you need?

 

I'd love to see this evidence the Democrats must have that he had had some epiphany and would longer engage in his terrorist war and there would be no further attacks.

 

Lol ... yeah, he had an epiphany and came to Iraq with flowers and rainbows ...

 

Man, thats some stretch Armstrong levels of stretching the definition of the word.

He's been at it since the original Iraq invasion of 03. Where was the imminent threat attack then? Or prior to this? I mean, you can justify after the fact all you want but when guys like Paul Rand and Mike Lee are calling the briefing BS, you don't really have much of a leg to stand on.

 

Ever since this broke I have wondered how Moscow Mitch will keep the senate together long enough to acquit Trump

While he was not actively ramping up international tensions they could afford to ignore his more outrageous behaviour but with this action he has shown himself not only to be untrustworthy but ultimately dangerous

 

Haters gunna hate. You have proved yourself a hater. No matter what Trump does you will find fault.
I’m pretty happy that this “amateur “ has gave us the best economy in history.

 

The difference between a politician and a military general is absolutely maddening. The 'immence' of an attack? Whether it would have been prepared in a matter of days, or weeks, or even a few months if we've learned NOTHING from 9/11, we should preempetively disrupt and destroy terrorists before they plan, not afterward.

These same people complaining about the timeline, would also have complained if the Pentagon did nothing and this man successfully carried out the planned attacks and killed MORE Americans.

And the poor treatment of the Pentagon means that the Pentagon will be even less willing to divulge information into the future.

 

I don't know about an epiphany, but there was a brief period of time where tensions between the Iran and the US were cooling, and we were engaging in actual diplomacy. Iran and Soleimoani actually assisted us in fighting ISIS during this period. According to the Pentagon, Soleimani engaged in proxy warfare against the US in Iraq between the years 2004 to 2011. That is to say he was providing weapons to Shia militias in Iraq who were hostile to the US.

While such tactics should not be taken lightly, it should also be well noted that Iran is not the only country that has taken such hostile actions against the US. Russia has also been shown to be providing weapons to the Taliban in Afghanistan.. which is actually exactly what what we did to Russia when they were in Afghanistan, only back then the Taliban were known as the Mujahideen, and Russia was still the Soviet Union.

 

Which is one of the stupidest things I've heard from this administration... and that's NOT a high bar....

These people just have no clue what they are doing. I mean, nobody really does when they first start out, but most are capable of learning...

 

If not proper English language capabilities...

 

"an insult to the Constitution." - R. Paul

Good one, Rand.... there were other insults to the Constitution committed by this administration last year as well.... maybe this will cause the blinders to be removed to those acts as well...

 

Yes.... a strategy recommendation vs essentially lying to the American public and the world...

All things being equal, huh?

 

Good point. If Trump hadn't hit this guy, the next time Soleimani killed and wounded Americans, his political enemies would have said it was proof of his incompetence and a failure to connect the dots.

 

Exactly, EB.

Trump's Entire Presidency (Since 1/20/17) has been One, Long, Continuous "Insult to the Constitution".

That is is just how Trump rolls.

It is Universally Accepted That:

Trump = TREASONOUS AMERICA-HATER (Who Daily Craps on the Constitution).:smh:

SAD.

 

The only thing un-American going on here is progressives REEE-ing over the fact that Trump took out an enemy combatant responsible for the deaths of 100's of Americans.

 

Point of THIS thread is that he couldn't even convince the already convinced....

So I guess there was some Mike LEEEE-ing...