Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Perino: "Don’t Know" If White House Will Seek Congress' OK for Permanent Iraq Occupation

Posted by Satyam Khanna, Think Progress at 1:11 PM on March 6, 2008.


As justification, the Bush administration cites the 2002 authorization of force against Saddam Hussein and the resolution passed after 9/11.
Perino: ‘Don’t Know’ If White House Will Seek Congress’ Approval Of Permanent Iraq Occupation

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get Video in your
mailbox!

 


Earlier this week, State Dept. Coordinator for Iraq David Satterfield refused to say whether it was “a constitutional requirement” for the administration to “consult with Congress” on a long-term agreement with Iraq.

This morning on Fox News, White House Press Secretary Dana Perino echoed Satterfield, saying that “we don’t know” whether Congress has any constitutional role in authorizing such treaties:


The negotiations on it have just started. In fact, there was a hearing on Capitol Hill yesterday. And members will be fully briefed. We don’t know if this is going to result in something that Congress will need to approve or not. But they are going to be fully consulted all along the way.

But the administration does know it will bypass Congress. In a follow-up letter to Satterfield’s testimony obtained by ThinkProgress, Assistant Secretary of State Jeffrey Bergner said the President does have “constitutional authority” to “continue combat operations” in Iraq without Congress’s authorization.



As justification, Bergner cited the 2002 authorization of force against Saddam Hussein and the resolution passed after 9/11:

[T]he U.S. military has the authority to conduct operations in Iraq beyond the end of the year under the laws passed by Congress and the President’s authority as Commander in Chief under the Constitution.

“I don’t think anybody argues today that Saddam Hussein is a threat,” said Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) in response. “Is it the government of Iraq that’s a threat?”


In defending the executive agreement, Perino cited “the long-term relationship we have with countries Japan and Germany and South Korea.” Indeed, these “strategic framework agreements” were approved by Congress first, as Oona Hathway of Yale Law School noted.

Digg!

Tagged as: iraq, bush administration, perino

Satyam Khanna is a Research Associate for The Progress Report and ThinkProgress.org at the Center for American Progress.


Video: New Ad Takes Obama to Task for Ditching Public Option
The Progressive Change Campaign Committee is hitting the president hard -- with his own words -- for backing a health-care bill with a mandate and no public option.
Post by AlterNet Staff. December 23, 2009.
Are Hewlett Packard Computers Racist?
There's something wrong with HP's webcam face recognition software. Specifically, it doesn't see black people.
Post by Staff. December 21, 2009.
Is Techno Chicken Gay (Not That There's Anything Wrong with That)?
I mean, the techno, the gaudy feathers ...
Post by Staff. December 20, 2009.
Advertisement
You've chosen to turn comments off for the entire site. Would you like to turn them back on?