Lawmaker, Thomas Massie, Demonstrates He Doesn't Know the Law on War

 

Let me explain this absurd ruse: The Pentagon is pretending there have been two Iran wars separated by a brief cease-fire.

The reality: By going more than 90 days without congressional authorization @SecWar IS BREAKING THE LAW and must be held accountable. https://t.co/SuHcGkJcD3

— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 24, 2026

Or that he's a sly propagandist, controlled opposition, purposefully putting this poison pill out there.  Given the rumors about his largest donor being a Zionist and his previous butchering of the Constitution to justify not voting to censure Adam Schiff, who really knows.

Massie falsely asserts that the President's unlawful war in Iran was lawful on day eighty-nine.  That is two layers of false.  First, the War Powers Resolution in section 1541(c) only allows the president to engage in hostilities absent a declaration or authorization of war from Congress, if in response to an attack on the United States or its military.  So the reporting requirements that Massie is referring to here are not even implicated.

This would be like a rule that says "if you have a driver's license, you must drive on the right side of the road" and then Massie talking about a six year old with no driver's license and pointing out that it would be unlawful for them to drive on the left side of the road.  No, they're not supposed to be driving at all, Thomas.  Second, even if Trump engaged with Iran in response to an attack on the United States, he is only able to do so for SIXTY days (not ninety) absent a declaration or authorization of war from Congress.  The ninety day exception in Section 1544(b) is only implicated if there is an attack on the United States such that Congress physically cannot meet in order to vote to authorize or declare war.

Thomas Massie the lawmaker sure doesn't know shit about the law.  This is an embarrassing showing that must be purposeful propaganda as I see it, and yet Massie is supposed to be our own temporarily allowed voice among all the Israel puppets?  Yeah, when the people need a "dissenter," the oligarchy will provide one for them...

Here is the controlling law that seems to elude all the propagandists and military officers and politicians out there.  Article 1 of the Constitution gives Congress two relevant powers.  The first is the power to declare war.  The second is the power to make laws necessary and proper for bringing into "execution" (ie how they are executed) ALL laws granted by the Constitution to ANY part of the government.  This last power granted to Congress is the power:

To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof.

So for the clowns out there idiotically pointing to the Article 2 "commander in chief" phrase (as if that mere title means the POTUS can do whatever he wants simply because he has the title "commander in chief") make sure you check out the last power granted to Congress in Article 1 as quoted above.  The Congress can tell the President how to execute war.  Put in crayon words for all the dipshits making the idiotic Article 2 "argument," our Constitution says "Hey, President, you are commander in chief, and you will command and chief as you're told by Congress, bitch."

Congress did in fact exercise this power to tell the executive branch how to execute by passing the War Powers Resolution which lists three requirements in section 1541(c) before the president can engage in hostilities.  If the third condition is met, then the reporting requirements in section 1544(b) are appropriate.  Morons and liars love to quote 1544(b) to suggest, as Massie is doing here, that the POTUS is just allowed to start 60 day wars all around the planet until his heart's content and Congress can just lump it.  But that idea is not only absurd, it flies in the face of the clear text of our law.  But Massie certainly isn't making it any more clear to Americans on his social media by pushing out this pro-Israel pro-war anti-America tweet that misrepresents our law.

Section 1541(c):

The constitutional powers of the President as Commander-in-Chief to introduce United States Armed Forces into hostilities, or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, are exercised only pursuant to

(1) a declaration of war,

(2) specific statutory authorization, or

(3) a national emergency created by attack upon the United States, its territories or possessions, or its armed forces.

And if the third requirement is met (which it most certainly was not and is not in our unlawful war in Iran), then the sixty day period can only be extended to ninety days if our homeland is actually being attacked so badly that Congress can't physically meet (think of the Capitol on fire).  Section 1544(b) states:

Within sixty calendar days after a report is submitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section 1543 (a)(1) of this title, whichever is earlier, the President shall terminate any use of United States Armed Forces with respect to which such report was submitted (or required to be submitted), unless the Congress

(1) has declared war or has enacted a specific authorization for such use of United States Armed Forces,

(2) has extended by law such sixty-day period, or 

(3) is physically unable to meet as a result of an armed attack upon the United States. Such sixty-day period shall be extended for not more than an additional thirty days if the President determines and certifies to the Congress in writing that unavoidable military necessity respecting the safety of United States Armed Forces requires the continued use of such armed forces in the course of bringing about a prompt removal of such forces.

When Thomas Massie isn't crafting his presidential run so that he can prove to be the very next POTUS controlled opposition disappointment, just as Trump has been, he might take a gander at our law before running his lawmaker mouth.