Originally Posted by badhatharry
OK. So could the Congress have revisited the issue on its own? And since it didn't couldn't it be construed that the Congress wanted to stand pat? I'm not arguing, just really interested in your view on this 'cause I wasn't following that closely in those dark days.
Well, yes, that is a fair point as far as Congress exercising its own responsibility and legal authority -- a bit separate from the (not necessarily legal) question of what amounts to sufficient "consultation" by the president with Congress. And it applies to Congress today as well as in 2003. In other words, for a member of Congress
to publicly whine about no formal consultation before a military action, then do nothing themselves regarding the funding of that military action, is a complete abdication of his or her own responsibilities.
Though in 2003, the Senate had just flipped to the Republicans and the House was already Republican, so I don't think they were all that inclined to insist upon a fresh round of formal consultation before the bombs dropped.