A rare bipartisan move to rein in Donald Trump on Venezuela

0:00In recent weeks, without any say from Congress, President Trump has ordered several lethal strikes on boats in the Caribbean, most of which the White House originated originated from Venezuela. The president says we're at war with narco-terrorists and that the ships were carrying drugs. Members of Congress are still pressing the president to provide more evidence on that front. And yet on Wednesday, Trump said the U.S. could even invade Venezuela itself to stop the shipment of deadly drugs into America. We've almost totally stopped it by sea. Now we'll stop it by land. Consider this. According to the Constitution, only Congress can declare war on another country.

0:39Still, Trump has shown he might be willing to attack Venezuela without any congressional approval.

0:52From NPR, I'm Andrew Limbaugh.

1:03It's Consider This from NPR. The Trump administration's threat of a possible attack on or a land invasion of Venezuela has left a few members of Congress concerned that the president is unilaterally leading the country into war there without congressional approval. One of those concerned is Democratic Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia. Along with Republican Senator Rand Paul and fellow Democratic Senator Adam Schiff, Senator Kaine has introduced a resolution to force a vote to bar ground strikes in Venezuela. Senator Kaine serves on the Senate Armed Services Committee and joins me now. Senator Kaine, welcome.

1:42Andrew, glad to be with you. I want to start with a resolution you introduced on Thursday. What is it specifically calling for? It is a resolution that's very simple, very short. It just says we should not be at war with Venezuela or conducting military operations in Venezuela without a vote of Congress. And it follows up on a resolution that Senator Schiff led against the strikes against boats in international waters. And again, it's Senator Schiff, Senator Paul, and I basically are just asserting this most sacred constitutional responsibility. No war-unless Congress votes. Presidents can't go it alone.

2:18You know, your last vote to limit Trump's war powers earlier this month got only two Republican supporters and failed. Why do you think this effort will be different? First, I was really disappointed that we failed in that earlier vote. But action against a sovereign nation or an invasion of a sovereign nation is a different matter entirely. And some of those Republican members who voted against us on the boat strikes said they were nevertheless very troubled by this. And I think that degree of concern escalates dramatically when you talk about the prospect of invading another nation. What's the next step here if this vote falls short?

2:57Well, this is a hurdle. You've got to get over a lot of hurdles. Say it passes in the Senate. It would have to pass in the House. Donald Trump would likely veto it. Do I have two-thirds votes in both houses to overturn a veto? I don't. But I noticed something in Donald Trump's first term. He's pretty sensitive to the message it sends when Republicans start to say, hold on a second. Even though we normally do whatever you want, we are very uncomfortable with this. Yeah, that path you laid out there was if this vote got some numbers. But I'm wondering, like, if you do only get like two Republican senators and it falls short.

3:30Well, I think I'm going to get more than two. We fell barely short. We needed four votes and we only got two. But again, I think the difference between striking boats in international waters and the prospect of an invasion, which the president has talked about. He said he's authorized covert operations inside Venezuela. And then he's also said he's prepared plans for land invasion. We also see public reporting of massing of U.S. troops, the biggest massing of troops in the region probably for 40 years. I think that we're going to get the votes on this because I think my colleagues are going to be real reticent about giving a green light for a war without them weighing in as Congress.

4:12Yeah. What's your take on the correct path forward for the U.S. in Venezuela? Well, I think the correct path forward is to unify with other nations and continue to put economic pressure on Venezuela to open up political space for true political competition. The military intervention strategy sounds like it's tough talk here at home, but it really drives away the nations that you need, the nations of Europe and other regional partners who could be helpful in pressuring Venezuela. The other thing that has happened this week that's sort of newsworthy is that the head of Southcom, the American military command, in South America and Central America stepped down two years early.

4:56I was feeling in my stomach a gut feeling that many in the military are having real concerns about the legality of these strikes. I don't know that that was the issue around the resignation of the South Com commander, but I have some significant suspicions about it, and my colleagues do too. And I just want to note, a U.S. official did confirm to NPR that Admiral Alvin Halsey, head of U.S. Southern Command, did step down from his post because of reservations over the boat strikes in the Caribbean and the widening effort against Venezuela. But I want to think back for a second. President Obama faced bipartisan criticism along similar lines for his actions in Libya.

5:36And I'm just wondering, isn't this par for the course? Isn't it common for presidents to push the line, to exercise as much power as they can when it comes to using the military? You're right. Presidents have always overreached, and that's frankly why the framers of the Constitution put the decision about war in the hands of Congress. What has been unfortunate, and frankly, it's been bipartisan, Andrew, is that Congress has often abdicated. War votes are really tough. They are really hard. They're the hardest votes that you have to cast. And so members of Congress in both parties over many decades have often kind of, well, why don't we let the president make the call?

6:15And if it goes well, we'll congratulate him. And if it goes badly, we'll say we were never supporters of this anyway. I imagine it's difficult for Congress to own a decision without information, right? And we're told that Congress is getting a, quote, trickle of information about the strikes so far that have killed more than two dozen people at sea. What can you tell us about those strikes and the claims from the administration that the vessels were transporting narcotics? We have pressed the administration on the 10th of September. Twenty five of us wrote the administration a letter and said, give us evidence that these craft were in fact carrying narcotics.

6:48Give us your legal rationale for striking them. And then really importantly, tell us why you struck rather than interdicted. Because if you interdict, you seize evidence. You get people. You squeeze them and they rat out the higher ups. And then you use that to build criminal prosecution. If you sink a boat to the bottom of the ocean, you don't get the evidence. They have not answered any of those questions to our satisfaction. I open this by talking about like a civics 101 sort of lesson, right? And like the civics 101 question here is that Congress is meant to play the role of oversight of the executive branch, not just in this instance, but broadly, right?

7:25Yep. How would you assess the way it's carrying out that role now? I would say I'd give us pretty much a failing grade. And, you know, I think that's part of why millions of people were marching on no kings rallies yesterday. At 250 years of American democracy, we still should be embracing democracy and democratic institutions and not allowing executive overreach. I don't think Congress is checking clearly illegal actions by this president to the degree that we should. but I also believe there's starting to be a little bit of a wake-up. That was my conversation with Virginia Senator Tim Kaine.

8:06This episode was produced by Avery Keatley. It was edited by Adam Rainey and Anna Yukononoff. Our executive producer is Sammy Yannigan.

8:20It's Consider This from NPR. I'm Andrew Limbaugh. Want to hear this podcast without sponsor breaks? Amazon Prime members can listen to Consider This sponsor-free through Amazon Music. Or you can also support NPR's vital journalism and get Consider This Plus at plus.npr.org. That's plus.npr.org.