Sen. Tom Cotton didn't have any good answers for Berman when he continually pushed him on the legality of what Trump and Whiskey Pete are doing in the Caribbean:
CNN host John Berman completely picked apart Sen. Tom Cotton’s (R-Ark.) defense of the U.S.’s military strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean.
Cotton, the top Republican of the Senate Intelligence Committee, defended Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Friday over the controversial military strikes on survivors on Sept. 2. During a heated exchange with
Berman on Friday, he claimed that President Donald Trump has “inherent authority” to authorize these strikes without approval from Congress.
The interview grew tense after Berman asked Cotton a hypothetical question on the legality of military strikes. Cotton dodged answering the question, prompting Berman to repeat himself.
“Would it be legal for police in Arkansas to kill suspected drug dealers in an overturn boat in a lake in Arkansas? Just answer that and then I will address your question on the other thing,” Berman said.
“John, the premise of your question is not well-founded. Criminals in Arkansas are not foreign nationals who are affiliates of a foreign terrorist designated organization,” Cotton responded.
Berman proceeded to answer his own question, and told Cotton "The answer is no. It would not be legal."
Cotton then tried doing some false equivalence to strikes that happened during the Obama administration, and Berman again fact checked him on the whataboutism.
COTTON: It's like saying like --
BERMAN: Hang on, Senator. The answer is no. It would not be legal to kill them.
Let me ask a follow-up question. If they are terrorists, when did Congress pass the authorized use of force to attack them?
COTTON: John, the reason why your question is not well-founded, it's like saying, would Barack Obama be okay droning in American citizen when he was president like he did to Anwar al-Awlaki over in the Middle East. These are totally different categories.
BERMAN: Senator. That's why I asked --
COTTON: The president has the inherent authority under our Constitution as our commander-in-chief.
BERMAN: That's why I asked when, Congress passed the authorized use of military force. There was an authorized use of military force against terrorists. I'm not saying what he was legal or not, but that's what they base it on. In this case, one was the authorized use of military force to attract -- to attack suspected drug dealers off the coast of Venezuela.
COTTON: John, the president has inherent authority as the commander- in-chief under the Constitution to protect America using our armed forces against a foreign terrorist organization. Congress has passed laws that allows the president to designate foreign terrorist organizations. That's what he's done with these cartels in Venezuela who are deeply intertwined with the illegitimate Maduro regime.
The president is -- we finally have a president --
BERMAN: They called non-state actors. I will say the latest explanation -- excuse me, Senator. You know the latest explanation from the administration is they are non-state actors in this case. That is important for them to designate. They're non-state actors here. They are not for purposes of attacking them off the coast of Venezuela, connected to the Maduro regime. They're non-state actors there.
And Andrew McCarthy and other conservative writers will say that they don't qualify by the statutory definition of what a terrorist is in U.S. Code.
After Cotton tried to claim that drug dealers are the same as terrorists, Berman asked him when they were going to vote on Trump's use of military force if he agreed that's true, and Cotton of course punted and tried putting this in the lap of Democrats, as though he and his party have no responsibility to make sure Trump follows the law here.
COTTON: John, I think the president has every legal authority he needs as the commander-in-chief. If my Democratic colleagues disagree, then they're perfectly entitled to offer an amendment when we start debating the defense spending bill to prohibit him from doing so. Congress has done that throughout our history. But until they get the votes for that, the president has the authority that he needs to protect our country from these drug traffickers.
Cotton is a shameless shill who's never had an issue dropping bombs on brown people if he believes it makes himself and his party look like they're tough guys. If this was a Democrat he'd be calling for them to be impeached.
