Democrats' campaign to limit Trump's war powers is dead in the water



Democratic lawmakers pushed legislation in both chambers of Congress last week with the aim of limiting President Donald Trump's war powers — something they sought in his first term and began gunning for again ahead of his second inauguration.

This campaign, spearheaded in the House by Republican Thomas Massie (Ky.) and in the Senate by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine (Va.), picked up steam in the wake of Israel's June 12 military strikes on Iran's nuclear infrastructure and amid suggestions by the likes of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) that America's direct involvement in the conflict was a foregone conclusion.

Although greatly strained by a continued exchange of explosives, the ceasefire between Iran and Israel that Trump announced on Monday and repaired Tuesday morning appears to have sapped much of the energy from lawmakers' war power delimitation campaign.

After all, it appears that Trump's controversial bombings — the kind that Democratic Reps. Ro Khanna (Calif.), Rashida Tlaib (Mich.), Chuy Garcia (Ill.), and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (N.Y.) don't think the president should be able to order — did not pave America's way into another protracted Middle Eastern entanglement but rather paved the way to an exit for all parties involved.

In other words, campaigners must now convince their peers that Trump must be deprived of the powers he just used for a back-burn that spared Israel and its neighbors from a greater conflagration.

Massie noted several hours before Trump announced the ceasefire that his war powers resolution to prohibit America's involvement in Iran had 57 co-sponsors.

RELATED: Trump’s strike wasn’t an escalation — it was an exit

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

"Whether you like it or not Congress will be voting on U.S. hostilities in Iran," tweeted Massie. "Under the War Powers Act, the President is required to withdraw from hostilities in Iran within 60 days (+30 days ext.) unless he gets a vote of Congress."

The congressman changed his tune Monday evening, telling reporters, "I talked to the speaker on the floor just now and told him we wouldn't push [the measure] if the ceasefire holds, so it's really in their court," reported Politico.

'I still think we need to do it.'

Regardless of whether the ceasefire holds, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) made clear that the measure had no chance of survival, adding that Massie should "do right by the country and do right by the Republican team here" by dropping the measure.

Democrats, meanwhile, indicated that they still want to hold the doomed vote on the basis of hypotheticals and with the aim of virtue-signaling.

"We may ... have a conflict in the future, and we need to be on record saying no offensive war in Iran without prior authorization," Khanna told Axios.

Democratic Rep. Jim McGovern (Mass.) said, "I still think we need to do it."

"This is a serious matter. Congress ought to debate this," McGovern told Axios. "I complained about when Obama took action without congressional authorization; I complained when Biden did as well."

With Massie's initiative now virtually dead, New York Rep. Greg Meeks (D) is reportedly preparing to introduce his own war powers resolution, which looks to be an exercise in futility, given the "hostilities against the Islamic Republic of Iran" he seeks to end are apparently already finished.

'I acted pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive.'

Over in the Senate, the delimitation campaign similarly shows signs of stalling.

Kaine has delayed scheduling a vote on his resolution until he and his colleagues receive a classified briefing Tuesday afternoon on the conflict. Even if the vote proceeds, it's unlikely to go anywhere.

Blaze News senior politics editor Christopher Bedford noted that "most senators hate hard votes, war is a hard vote, and most of them like a belligerent foreign policy. So there's not really any serious, broad will in the Senate to retake war powers. It would take a whole lot more than this to change that."

RELATED: 'They don't know what the f**k they're doing': Trump cusses out Israel, Iran for nearly blowing up his ceasefire

Bloomberg / Contributor via Getty Images

Contrary to his critics' framing, Trump insists that he had the right to order the the strikes on the Iranian nuclear sites.

"I directed this military action consistent with my responsibility to protect United States citizens both at home and abroad as well as in furtherance of United States national security and foreign policy interests," he noted in a Monday letter to House Speaker Johnson. "I acted pursuant to my constitutional authority as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive and pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct United States foreign relations."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The White House Can Lower Drug Prices By Fixing The Market, Not Price Controls

President Trump shouldn’t adopt socialist-style price controls.

Clinton judge blocked workforce cuts — yet Rubio just proved with USAID that where there's a will, there's a way



A Clinton judge barred the Trump administration last month from executing any large-scale reductions in force in order to "preserve the status quo."

Secretary of State Marco Rubio ordered on Tuesday the termination of the U.S. Agency for International Development's remaining overseas staff, demonstrating that some obstacles created by meddlesome federal judges can easily be surmounted.

How it started

A gang of labor unions, leftist NGOs, and local governments sued the Trump administration in late April, hoping to block the government's reduction-in-force plans.

Their complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, suggested that the "president does not possess authority to reorganize, downsize, or otherwise transform the agencies of the federal government, unless and until Congress authorizes such action" and argued that President Donald Trump's Feb. 11 executive order aimed at "eliminating waste, bloat, and insularity" was unlawful.

'Every day that the preliminary injunction remains in effect, a government-wide program to implement agency RIFs is being halted and delayed.'

The plaintiffs demanded the court: declare that Trump had violated the Constitution; declare that the White House's Office of Management and Budget, the Office of Personnel Management, and the Department of Government Efficiency "exceeded statutory authority and acted in an arbitrary and capricious manner"; vacate Trump's executive order and relevant agency memoranda; and restrain the Trump administration from enforcing Trump's workforce executive order.

They found a sympathetic U.S. district court judge in Susan Illston, a Clinton appointee who came recommended by former Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer and the late Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California.

RELATED: USAID program contractor defrauds taxpayers of $100,000 in latest agency scandal

Photo by John Moore/Getty Images

Illston granted the gang of change-averse plaintiffs a temporary restraining order on May 9, then hit the administration with an injunction on May 22, blocking Trump's executive order and barring 20 executive-branch entities and "any other individuals acting under their authority or the authority of the president" from executing any reductions in force.

Illston stated that "the president likely must request congressional cooperation to order the changes he seeks."

After the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit refused to overturn the Clinton judge's order, the Trump administration asked for the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene.

U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer noted in the government's request for a stay that "every day that the preliminary injunction remains in effect, a government-wide program to implement agency RIFs is being halted and delayed, maintaining a bloated and inefficient workforce while wasting countless taxpayer dollars."

"The inevitable consequence is to compel federal agencies to keep large numbers of employees on the payroll without necessity, at unrecoverable taxpayer expense, thereby frustrating the government’s efforts to impose budgetary discipline and build a more efficient workforce," wrote Sauer.

The solicitor general also suggested that the "district court's novel imposition of limits on the president’s ability to control executive agencies in exercising their power over personnel is the same type of important question of federal law that warrants this Court’s review."

The gang responded on Monday, asking the high court to keep Illston's order in place.

How it's going

On Tuesday, Rubio told American embassies around the world to get cracking on abolishing all USAID positions, noting in a cable obtained by the Guardian that the State Department "is streamlining procedures under National Security Decision Directive 38 to abolish all USAID overseas positions."

The national security directive cited by Rubio gives the highest-ranking diplomat assigned to a given country control of the size, composition, and mandate of overseas staffing for U.S. government agencies.

'It shouldn't surprise anyone.'

All USAID positions will reportedly be erased by Sept. 30. This will impact hundreds of staff, including contractors, locally employed workers, and foreign service officers.

The secretary noted further that the State Department would take over the agency's foreign assistance programs by next week.

RELATED: Rubio, Vance outline the 'work of a generation,' next steps for the American renewal: 'This is a 20-year project'

Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce told reporters Tuesday "that was not a surprise. It shouldn't surprise anyone."

"It’s nothing new, and it is exactly what we previewed in February and March of this year," said Bruce, adding that the aim of the change is to make sure that America's aid efforts around the world correspond with the "America First agenda."

Rubio made the order days after Bill Gates reportedly made a secret visit to the White House and begged him to reverse course on changes to the foreign aid regime.

It appears that Gates' last-ditch charm offensive, first reported by Tara Palmeri of the Red Letter, was no more effective than his USAID-themed smear campaign, where he characterized Elon Musk as a hard-hearted killer of millions.

The plaintiffs for whom Judge Illston blocked Trump's executive order claimed that Rubio's recent action appears to violate the federal court's injunction, reported the Associated Press.

However, Daniel Holler, Rubio's deputy chief of staff, clarified in a Monday court filing that the actions taken with regard to USAID staffers predate the blocked Trump order.

Holler noted that:

  • Rubio got the ball rolling on developing "a plan to reorganize the Department to be more streamlined and to advance the administration's core America First diplomatic priorities" in late January;
  • Rubio informed Congress of his intention to explore "a potential reorganization of USAID and/or its potential absorption by the Department of State" in a Feb. 3 letter;
  • subsequent reorganization efforts were "undertaken solely at the direction and discretion of Secretary Rubio" and predate Trump's February order;
  • the reorganization is intended to address foreign policy needs, an assertion that appears to hint at the limits of Illston's jurisdiction.

When asked about the significance of these firings and the broader cleanup at USAID, a State Department spokesperson told Blaze News, "Under President Trump's leadership, Secretary Rubio is taking a historic step in realigning how the United States delivers foreign aid and implements its America First Foreign Policy to ensure foreign assistance advances U.S. national interests."

"In connection with the Department assuming responsibility for limited former USAID programming, the Secretary approved the hiring of certain positions for both American (U.S. direct hire) and locally employed staff," added the spokesperson.

In terms of next steps, the spokesperson indicated that the U.S. will continue to provide lifesaving humanitarian assistance but noted "the United States cannot feed the world alone. We ask capable nations to increase their share of the burden for life-saving foreign aid."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump-backed conservative wins Polish presidency, can torpedo Tusk's liberal agenda: 'Rebuff to the Brussels oligarchy'



Polish boxer-turned-historian Karol Nawrocki met last month with President Donald Trump and attended an event at the White House marking the National Day of Prayer. Nawrocki reportedly shared with Polish media that Trump told him he would win the Polish presidential election.

Trump was right again.

Nawrocki, backed by Poland's national-conservative opposition Law and Justice (PiS) Party, defeated the liberal mayor of Warsaw — whom Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem deemed a "train wreck" — in Poland's presidential election runoff on Sunday. The results, published on Monday, showed that Nawrocki beat Rafał Trzaskowski 50.89% to 49.11%, thereby securing a five-year term.

'You picked a WINNER!'

Upon taking office on Aug. 6, Nawrocki can continue former President Andrzej Duda's work of preventing Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk's "globalist liberal government" from simultaneously advancing its leftist, pro-European Union agenda and from undoing the reforms undertaken by the previous PiS government.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio congratulated Nawrocki on his "hard-earned victory," noting that "together, the United States and Poland will forge the most ambitious alliance in our shared history on defense, energy, and commerce."

Trump said in a Truth Social post, "Congratulations Poland, you picked a WINNER!"

RELATED: Liberals freaked out over Vance's Munich speech. Just wait till they read the State Department's Substack.

Photo by Jakub Porzycki/NurPhoto via Getty Images

Nawrocki noted in response that his top priorities are a "strong alliance with the USA, as well as partnership based on close cooperation."

In addition to opposing illegal immigration and the EU's ruinous migration frameworks, the former boxer made abundantly clear on the campaign trail his opposition to leftist social policies, promising to axe any legislation that threatens to weaken Poland's pro-life legislation or normalize non-heterosexual unions, reported the Catholic News Agency.

Nawrocki also emphasized that Poland's national culture is rooted in traditional Catholic values, telling supporters, "Poland's strength lies in its faith and family values."

'It's bad news for the EU, Ukraine and women.'

Homeland Security Secretary Noem likened Nawrocki to Trump last month at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Poland and suggested that under his leadership, Poland could "steer Europe back toward conservative values."

Various European conservatives and populists celebrated Nawrocki's victory, including Jordan Bardella, the president of France's right-wing populist National Rally party, who tweeted, "The Polish people have spoken and their free and democratic choice must be respected, including by the Brussels leaders who ardently hoped for their defeat."

"Faced with a European Commission whose authoritarian policies and federalist ambitions are brutalizing national sovereignty, Karol Nawrocki's victory in the Polish presidential election is welcome news," said Marine Le Pen, former National Rally president. "It is a rebuff to the Brussels oligarchy, which intends to impose a standardization of legislation on member states, contrary to any democratic will."

Hungarian Prime Minister Orbán Viktor called the election a "nail-biter," calling the outcome a "fantastic victory."

Western liberals, meanwhile, clutched pearls and ramped up their fear-mongering.

Adam Simpson, a lecturer at the University of South Australia, wrote, "Nawrocki's win has given pro-Donald Trump, anti-liberal, anti-EU forces across the continent a shot in the arm. It's bad news for the EU, Ukraine and women."

RELATED: Rubio wages war on foreign free-speech tyrants with visa ban

The White House

Simpson acknowledged that it's harder to frame Nawrocki as "Russia-friendly" — a framing routinely used by critics of other national conservatives and populists in the region.

'More anti-European, nationalist and pro-Trump.'

It'd be an especially hard case to make that Nawrocki is sympathetic to Moscow given he has called Russia a "barbaric state," recommended cutting off diplomatic relations with the Kremlin, and has personally been put on a Russian wanted list after leading efforts to topple Soviet monuments while director of the Museum of the Second World War and head of the Institute of National Remembrance, reported ABC News.

Nevertheless, critics have made hay out of the incoming Polish president's vow to oppose NATO membership for Ukraine and suggestion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy "treats Poland badly."

Piotr Buras, head of the European Council on Foreign Relations' Warsaw office, told the Washington Post that Nawrocki will be a "much more radical politician" than his predecessor — "more anti-European, nationalist and pro-Trump."

Anne Applebaum, the Atlantic staff writer who smeared as propagandists early proponents of the pandemic lab-leak theory and wasted ink last year imagining parallels between Trump and various 20th-century dictators, made sure to repeatedly label Nawrocki as an "authoritarian populist."

In the wake of the election, Tusk, now facing some calls to step down, indicated the Polish parliament will hold a confidence vote on his government.

Jacek Sasin, a PiS parliamentarian, suggested that Tusk was a "completely frivolous man who got a red card from the Poles."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FACT CHECK: Ilhan Omar Is Already Off The Foreign Affairs Committee

A post shared on X claims Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar was voted off the House Foreign Affairs Committee. 🚨BREAKING: #Ilhan Omar has been removed from the House #Foreign AffairsCommittee. Remove her from #Congress next! 👏👏 Rep. #MarjorieTaylorGreene had a few choice words for Ilhan. Safe to say, she is not a fan of Rep. Omar. […]

UFC contender Curtis Blaydes says he'd be marketed more if he were 'anything but just your standard American'



UFC heavyweight Curtis Blaydes said if he were a different nationality, he would likely get a bigger push from his company.

Blaydes is set to fight for the UFC heavyweight title at UFC 304 against interim-champion Tom Aspinall and was a bit of a surprise booking for the promotion given the lingering fight between Jon Jones and Stipe Miocic for what is considered the true heavyweight belt.

The Illinois native appeared on "The MMA Hour" with Ariel Helwani to discuss the details on how the fight came to be.

"I knew I was an option," Blaydes said regarding his potential at getting a title shot. The fighter recognized that there were other options for the UFC, though, saying "you never know."

Blaydes cited other fighters like Jones, Alex Pereira, and even seemingly retired fighter and WWE wrestler Brock Lesnar as possible options for the UFC.

Then, Helwani brought up the No. 2-ranked fighter Cyril Gane, a former champion who apparently turned down the fight offer to act in a movie.

"What about Cyril Gane?"Helwani asked. "It comes out that they asked him too, right? So, how do you feel about them asking him and apparently he turned it down because he had a movie."

'I highly doubt they pay him what you're gonna get for a title shot.'

"I'm not surprised," Blaydes replied. "I've been saying for two years now he gets what he gets because he's French. He brings in all the French. If I was a Jamaican or German or just anything but just your standard American, I would be getting more push," he claimed.

Gane is the only UFC titleholder to come from France and has headlined the only two UFC events to take place in the country.

In September 2022, he beat Tai Tuivasa at Accor Arena in Paris, then in September 2023, he beat Sergei Spivac in the same arena.

"I don't mind it. It's business," Blaydes continued. He added that he didn't understand the reason why Gane would take less pay to appear in a movie.

"It's the marketing and that's fine, I'm happy he turned it down. I have no idea why he would turn it down even if he is in a movie, I highly doubt they pay him what you're gonna get for a title shot, but whatever. I'm just happy that I get this opportunity."

The heavyweight went on to say that he feels Aspinall is the legitimate champion, and although it may upset Jones to hear, he said that he believed Aspinall to be the best heavyweight in the world right now.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Senate Border Security Bill Offers Potential Massive Payday To Defense Industrial Complex

The Senate border security bill offers a massive payout of potentially close to $50 billion to the U.S. defense industry in replenishing weapons stocks sent to Ukraine, Taiwan and Israel as security assistance. The legislation unveiled Sunday evening authorizes $19.85 billion to replenish U.S. military equipment provided to Ukraine, $1.9 billion invested toward restocking U.S. […]

Israeli Defense Forces Pilots Boycott Training To Protest Netanyahu Judicial Reforms

Protests against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have spread to the Israel Defense Forces, according to reports. Boycotts from IDF reservists take aim at the controversial judicial reforms have become the cornerstone of Benjamin Netanyahu’s sixth term as the prime minister of Israel, Reuters reported. The proposed legislation, which would curb the powers and independence […]