President Barack Obama assembled a Team of Rivals.

As Hillary and her campaign have pointed out lately she has stood with the President.

Clinton responded by suggesting that Sanders had cast aspersions not only on her ties to financial corporations, but on President Barack Obama as well. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2016/01/bernie-sanders-attacks-hillary-clintons-ties-big-banks

Hayes added, “The political advantage she has is the degree to which she can hug Barack Obama close to her.” http://www.towleroad.com/2016/01/hillaryclinton_rachelmaddow_01/

Some have called this wrapping herself in the President.

Attacking her is the same as attacking the President.

Supporting her is the same as supporting the President.

Not totally unreasonable where she and the acting President were aligned on policy.

Like with Hillary Clinton, this President and the Iraq War:

President George W Bush. “You’re With Me or You’re Against Me.”

The bill H.J.Res. 114 (107th): Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 is often called the Iraq War Resolution, or, the Iraq Resolution, or, the Iraq AUMF.

The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Hillary Clinton sided with George W Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and most Republicans by voting for the Iraq War. Here is some of her company on that vote:

Party Name Senate Iraq AUMF: Some Notable Yeas R John McCain D Joseph Lieberman D Zell Miller R Mitch McConnell R Trent Lott R Chuck Hagel D Hillary Clinton R Jesse Helms R Rick Santorum R Arlen Specter R Strom Thurmond R Bill Frist R Fred Thompson R Phil Gramm R Kay Hutchinson R Orrin Hatch R George Allen R John Warner

Bernie Sanders sided with Barack Obama and most Democrats by voting against this. Here is some of his company on that vote:

Party Name Senate IRAQ AUMF: Some Notable Nays D Barbara Boxer D Bob Graham D Daniel Inouye D Richard Durbin D Barbara Mikulski D Paul Sarbanes D Ted Kennedy D Carl Levin D Paul Wellstone R Lincoln Chafee I Jim Jeffords D Patrick Leahy D Patty Murray D Robert Byrd D Russell Feingold

Party Name House IRAQ AUMF: Some Notable Nays R Ron Paul D Nancy Pelosi D Barney Frank D Charles Rangel D Dennis Kucinich D Shelia Jackson Lee I Bernie Sanders D Tammy Baldwin D 120 more Democrats

Sources for the votes:

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/107-2002/h455

https://www.govtrack.us/congress/votes/107-2002/s237

How about that other guy? Where was President Barack Obama on the Iraq War?

The consequences of war are dire, the sacrifices immeasurable. We may have occasion in our lifetime to once again rise up in defense of our freedom, and pay the wages of war. But we ought not -- we will not -- travel down that hellish path blindly. Nor should we allow those who would march off and pay the ultimate sacrifice, who would prove the full measure of devotion with their blood, to make such an awful sacrifice in vain. — Barack Obama's Iraq Speech

Not only did Hillary vote for the Iraq AUMF, she voted against the Carl Level Amendment:



Hillary voted against the alternative to SJ Res 45, namely Carl Levin's Amendment on Iraq Levin himself explained the differences in the following way:

The White House compromise still specifically authorizes at this time the use of force on a unilateral, "go it alone" basis, that is - without U.N. Security Council authorization; and It authorizes the use of force beyond dealing with Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery. My resolution is consistent with how I think Americans want us to proceed. It emphasizes the importance of dealing with Iraq on a multilateral basis, and withholds judgment at this time on the question of whether the United States should "go it alone" unilaterally against Iraq, should the United Nations fail to act. And yet Hillary sided with the administration over this.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/12/435624/-

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of Al Qaeda. I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. — Barack Obama's Iraq Speech

Did George W Bush commit a War Crime by the preemptive war against Iraq?

Did Hillary Clinton authorize a War Crime by voting to give him the authority to do so?

Is authorizing a War Crime itself a War Crime?

There were serious legal questions surrounding the launching of the war against Iraq and the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war in general. On 16 September 2004, Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, said of the invasion, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the Charter point of view, it was illegal.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War

Since the Korean War of the early 1950s, waging such a war of aggression is a crime under the customary international law. ... Wars without international legality (e.g. not out of self-defense nor sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council) can be considered wars of aggression; however, this alone usually does not constitute the definition of a war of aggression; certain wars may be unlawful but not aggressive (a war to settle a boundary dispute where the initiator has a reasonable claim, and limited aims, is one example). The International Military Tribunal at Nuremberg, which followed World War II, called the waging of aggressive war "essentially an evil thing...to initiate a war of aggression...is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime, differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_aggression

The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_principles#Principle_III

The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law: (a) Crimes against peace: (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances; (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_principles#Principle_VI

Shock and Awe Bombing of Iraq in 2003.

Although Ullman and Wade claim that the need to "[m]inimize civilian casualties, loss of life, and collateral damage" is a "political sensitivity [which needs] to be understood up front", their doctrine of rapid dominance requires the capability to disrupt "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure", and, in practice, "the appropriate balance of Shock and Awe must cause ... the threat and fear of action that may shut down all or part of the adversary's society or render his ability to fight useless short of complete physical destruction." Using as an example a theoretical invasion of Iraq 20 years after Operation Desert Storm, the authors claimed, "Shutting the country down would entail both the physical destruction of appropriate infrastructure and the shutdown and control of the flow of all vital information and associated commerce so rapidly as to achieve a level of national shock akin to the effect that dropping nuclear weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki had on the Japanese." Reiterating the example in an interview with CBS News several months before Operation Iraqi Freedom, Ullman stated, "You're sitting in Baghdad and all of a sudden you're the general and 30 of your division headquarters have been wiped out. You also take the city down. By that I mean you get rid of their power, water. In 2, 3, 4, 5 days they are physically, emotionally and psychologically exhausted." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

George W Bush has never been tried, much less convicted, for war crimes because:

It has never happened in history that a nation that has won a war has been held accountable for atrocities committed in preparing for and waging that war. — Ramsey Clark, U.S. Attorney General in the administration of Lyndon Johnson. http://deoxy.org/wc/warcrime.htm

How does this impact your vote for the Democratic Nominee for President?

Do you attack George W Bush and War Crime by voting for Bernie Sanders?

Do you support George W Bush and War Crime by voting for Hillary Clinton?

"This is one of the biggest parts of the decision as you head toward Feb. 1 that I want you to keep in mind," Clinton said, telling voters that they're "not just picking a president, but a commander in chief." http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-sanders-shadowing-other-across-iowa-081708103—election.html

Reposted per kos’s suggestion that we only have until March 15 to save the Democratic party from itself.