Democrats lash out at ‘erratic' Trump over Iran strikes, demand vote to rein in war powers
Advertisement
Members of the Senate and House of Representatives argued that US intelligence had not shown an imminent threat from the Middle Eastern country that justified
Trump's unilateral action.
'President Trump's actions in bombing
Iran puts the US on the brink of a wider war in the Middle East, all without constitutionally required Congressional approval,' Senate Democratic Whip Dick Durbin said in a statement.
Democrats were divided between those demanding a vote on a war powers resolution to constrain Trump's authority to launch further action and a smaller group, who maintained that the strikes were grounds for the Republican leader's impeachment.
They included Illinois moderate Sean Casten and New York leftist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who accused the president of having 'impulsively risked launching a war that may ensnare us for generations'.
Advertisement
Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leaders in the Senate and House respectively, said Trump had 'dramatically increased' America's risk of becoming embroiled in a new Middle Eastern conflagration.
'No president should be allowed to unilaterally march this nation into something as consequential as war with erratic threats and no strategy,' Schumer said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AllAfrica
4 hours ago
- AllAfrica
US willfully ceding the energy innovation race to China
During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union were locked in a desperate race to develop cutting‑edge technologies like long-range missiles and satellites. Fast forward to today and the frontiers of global technology have pivoted to AI and next‑generation energy. In one domain, AI, the US has far outpaced any other nation – though China looks to be closing the gap. In the other, energy, it has just tied its shoelaces together. The reason isn't technology, economics or, despite the government's official line, even national security. Rather, it is politics. Since returning to the White House in January, Donald Trump has handed out huge wins to the coal and oil and gas industries. This is no great surprise. Trump has long been supportive of the US fossil fuel industry and, since his reelection, has appointed several former industry lobbyists to top political positions. According to the Trump administration, national security requires gutting support for renewable energy while performing political CPR on the dying coal industry. The reality is that, since 2019, the US has produced more oil, gas and coal annually than Americans want to use, with the rest exported and sold overseas. It is currently one of the most prolific exporters of fossil fuels in the world. In short, the US does not have an energy security problem. It does, however, have an energy cost problem combined with a growing climate change crisis. These issues will only be made worse by Trump's enthusiasm for fossil fuels. Over the past six months, the Trump administration has upended half a decade of green industrial policy. It has clawed back billions of US dollars in tax credits and grants that were supercharging American energy innovation. Meanwhile, China has roared forward. Beijing has doubled down on wind, solar and next‑generation batteries, installing more wind and solar power in 2024 than the rest of the world combined. To China's delight, the US has simply stopped competing to be the world's clean energy powerhouse. Roughly one-in-five lithium‑ion batteries, a key component in clean energy products, are made in China. Many of the newest high‑tech batteries are also being developed and patented there. While Trump repeats the tired mantra of 'drill, baby, drill', China is building factories, cornering the market for critical minerals such as lithium and nickel, and locking in export partners. At the same time, household energy spending in the US is expected to increase by $170 each year between now and 2035 as a result of Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The bill, which includes sweeping changes to taxes, social security and more, will raise energy costs mainly because it strips away support for cheap and abundant renewables like wind and solar. Household energy costs could go up even more as Trump threatens to make large‑scale clean energy development much more onerous by putting up bureaucratic hurdles. The administration recently issued a directive requiring the Secretary of the Interior to approve even routine activities for wind and solar projects connected to federal lands. Meanwhile, climate change is hitting American communities harder with each passing year. As recent flooding in Texas and urban fires in California and Hawaii have shown, fewer Americans still have the luxury of ignoring climate change. As the cost of these disasters mount – $183 billion in 2024 – the grifting of the oil and gas industry will become an increasingly bitter pill for the nation to swallow. China, with its authoritarian government, is less susceptible to the petroleum-obsessed dogma fueling the Republican party. It does not have prominent leaders like US politician Marjorie Taylor Greene, who previously warned that Democrats are trying to 'emasculate the way we drive' by advocating for electric vehicles. Rather, China's leaders are seeing green – not in the environmental sense, but in a monetary one. It is generally cheaper nowadays to build and operate renewable energy facilities than gas or coal power stations. According to a June 2025 report by Lazard, an asset management company, electricity from new large-scale solar farms costs up to $78 per megawatt hour – and often much less. The same electricity from a newly built natural gas plants, by comparison, can cost as much as $107 per megawatt hour. Across the world, utilities are embracing clean energy, choosing lower costs for their customers while reducing pollution. China saw the writing on the wall decades ago, and its early investments are bearing a rich harvest. It now produces more than half of the world's electric vehicles and the vast majority of its solar panels. The US can still compete at the leading edge of the energy sector. American companies are developing innovative new approaches to geothermal, battery recycling and many other energy technologies. But in the battle to become the world's 21st-century energy manufacturing powerhouse, the US seems to have walked off the playing field. In Trump's telling, the US may have simply exited one race and reentered another. But the fossil fuel industry – financially, environmentally and ethically – is obviously a dead end. Stephen Lezak is program manager at the Smith School of Enterprise and the Environment, University of Oxford This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
South China Morning Post
5 hours ago
- South China Morning Post
US, Nato seek to supply Ukraine with weapons paid for by allies, target US$10 billion
The US and Nato are working on a novel approach to supply Ukraine with weapons using funds from Nato countries to pay for the purchase or transfer of US arms, according to three sources familiar with the matter. The renewed transatlantic cooperation on Ukraine comes as US President Donald Trump has expressed frustration with Moscow's ongoing attacks on its neighbour. Trump, who initially took a more conciliatory tone toward Russia as he tried to end the more than three-year war in Ukraine, has threatened to start imposing tariffs and other measures if Moscow shows no progress toward ending the conflict by August 8. The president said last month the US would supply weapons to Ukraine, paid for by European allies, but did not indicate how this would be done. Nato countries, Ukraine, and the United States were developing a new mechanism that would focus on getting US weapons to Ukraine from the Priority Ukraine Requirements List, known by the acronym PURL, the sources said. Ukraine would prioritise the weapons it needs in tranches of roughly US$500 million, and Nato allies – coordinated by Nato Secretary General Mark Rutte – would then negotiate among themselves who would donate or pay for items on the list.
RTHK
5 hours ago
- RTHK
Ghislaine Maxwell moved to minimum-security prison
Ghislaine Maxwell moved to minimum-security prison Ghislaine Maxwell's move to the minimum-security prison camp in Bryan, Texas, comes a week after she met Deputy US Attorney General and former Trump lawyer Todd Blanche. File photo: Reuters Ghislaine Maxwell has been transferred from a Florida prison to a lower-security facility in Texas to continue serving her 20-year sentence for helping the late financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein sexually abuse underage girls, the US Bureau of Prisons said. Maxwell's move from FCI Tallahassee, a low-security prison, to the Federal Prison Camp in Bryan, Texas, comes a week after she met with Deputy US Attorney General Todd Blanche, who said he wanted to speak with her about anyone else who may have been involved in Epstein's crimes. Maxwell's lawyer, David Markus, confirmed on Friday that she was moved but said he had no other comment. Asked during a White House interview with Newsmax on Friday about the possibility of pardoning Maxwell, President Donald Trump said, "I'm allowed to do it, but nobody's asked me to do it." He added, "I know nothing about the case." Asked about what was discussed between Maxwell and the deputy attorney general last week, Trump said he believed Blanche "just wants to make sure that innocent people aren't hurt" should documents in the Epstein probe be released. The Bureau of Prisons (BOP) classifies camps such as Bryan as minimum-security institutions, the lowest of five security levels in the federal system. Such facilities have limited or no perimeter fencing. Low-security facilities such as FCI Tallahassee have double-fenced perimeters and higher staff-to-inmate ratios than prison camps, according to the bureau. Asked why Maxwell was transferred, BOP spokesman Donald Murphy said he could not comment on the specifics of any incarcerated individual's prison assignment but that the BOP determines where inmates are sent based on such factors as "the level of security and supervision the inmate requires." Blanche's meeting with Maxwell came as Trump faces pressure from both his base of conservative supporters and congressional Democrats to release more information from the Justice Department's investigations of Maxwell and Epstein. The department is seeking court approval to release transcripts of law enforcement officers' testimony before the grand juries that indicted Maxwell and Epstein. Such transcripts are usually kept secret. Two federal judges in Manhattan are weighing the government's requests. Lawyers for Maxwell, Epstein, and their alleged victims are due to share their positions on the potential unsealing with the judges in filings on Tuesday. Epstein died by suicide in a Manhattan jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges. He had pleaded not guilty. Neither Markus nor Blanche has provided detailed accounts of what they discussed. Markus has said Maxwell would welcome relief from Trump. Maxwell was found guilty at a 2021 trial of recruiting and grooming girls for Epstein to abuse. She had pleaded not guilty and is asking the Supreme Court to overturn her conviction. (AFP)
