Adam Schiff CAUGHT Off Guard By Obama’s War Powers Statement

>> Continued From the Previous Page <<

“This statement from the administration, The President had constitutional authority to direct use of military force because he could reasonably determine that such use was in national interest. That’s too vague for you?” Maher asked.

Schiff did not hesitate in his response.

“Totally vague.”

Moments later, Maher delivered the reveal that stunned the panel.

“Okay cause thats from Obama about Libya,” he said.

The quote came from the legal reasoning offered by the Obama administration during the 2011 military intervention in Libya, when U.S. forces joined a NATO-led campaign against the regime of Muammar Gaddafi.

At the time, the Obama White House argued that American involvement in the air campaign did not meet the legal definition of “hostilities” under the War Powers Resolution. Because of that interpretation, the administration concluded it did not need explicit congressional authorization before continuing the operation.

The argument was controversial at the time and sparked significant criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. Critics said the administration was stretching the meaning of the War Powers Act to justify military action without Congress.

After Maher revealed the origin of the quote, Schiff attempted to pivot the conversation by referencing a different foreign policy dispute from the Obama years.

“Well Obama made an argument initially that he can go into Syria without authorization I and many others pushed back on this argument,” the senator said. “Ultimately he did not forward with going after Assad even though Assad was gassing his own people because he thought that might lose the vote in congress. But I respect uh… that was important to him and the fact he did not have support of Congress meant we weren’t going forward,” he added.

Critics immediately pointed out that the explanation sidestepped the earlier Libya intervention, which proceeded without the congressional approval Schiff now says is essential.

The tense exchange highlights a broader debate currently unfolding in Washington about presidential war powers. Under the Constitution, Congress has the authority to declare war, while the president serves as commander in chief of the armed forces.

Over the decades, presidents from both political parties have stretched those powers, often launching military operations without a formal declaration of war. The War Powers Resolution of 1973 attempted to establish limits by requiring presidents to notify Congress within 48 hours of deploying troops and restricting military action beyond 60 days without congressional approval.

In recent weeks, lawmakers have revived the issue amid the growing confrontation with Iran. A War Powers Resolution aimed at limiting the president’s ability to conduct further military operations recently failed to move forward in Congress.

According to reports from Capitol Hill, nearly every Democrat supported the measure, with one notable exception: John Fetterman. On the Republican side, Rand Paul broke ranks with most of his party and voted in favor of the resolution.

Despite the partisan divide, the exchange on Maher’s show illustrated how the legal arguments surrounding presidential war powers have often been used by administrations from both parties when defending military action abroad.

For critics of Schiff, however, the moment served as a revealing reminder that the same justification he labeled “totally vague” was once used by a president many Democrats previously defended.

And it all unfolded in real time on national television.