For some unfathomable reason that none of us ever may understand, the American people and their representatives don't seem to trust this president* to take the country into a war with Iran. They seem to think they should probably do something about that. 'ees a puzzlement, surely, but here we are. From the Los Angeles Times:

The resolution, sponsored by Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), gained steam in the wake of the U.S. drone strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Suleimani in early January. A vote was delayed by the impeachment trial of Trump, which under Senate rules had to take precedence over any other legislative action. It passed Thursday 55-45, with eight Republicans joining all Democrats in support. The resolution asserts that Congress must be consulted for a declaration of war or an authorization of the use of military force before the president can engage in “hostilities” against Iran. It specifies that the president can still act to defend against “imminent attack.”

Eight Republicans voted for the resolution. These included the usual suspects with a couple of surprises, most notably Todd Young of Indiana and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, which I am sure came as no shock to Mitch McConnell, who knows that he has the votes to sustain an inevitable presidential* veto. (Last week's hero, Mitt Romney, voted against the resolution.) The people opposed to the resolution gave us a preview of the inevitable kabuki veto fight.

Opponents of the resolution warned it would be viewed internationally as Congress tying the president’s hands and opening the door for bad actors to strike with impunity. “We are playing with fire,” Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said. Trump also urged the Senate not to pass the resolution. “If my hands were tied, Iran would have a field day. Sends a very bad signal. The Democrats are only doing this as an attempt to embarrass the Republican Party. Don’t let it happen!” he tweeted.

He alone can save us.

Kaine rejected the idea that it sends a negative signal, saying after committing American troops for nearly two decades in Afghanistan and Iraq to fight terrorism, “no one can question whether the United States will protect ourselves and our allies. But the choice of when to fight wars, and when to use other available tools, is always a question of such importance that the most careful deliberation is warranted. ... That’s not too much to ask, for us to deliberate carefully.”

Or, given the state of play these days, the Senate could overturn his veto only to have the president* start the war on his own. That would be an impeachable offense, of course, but c'mon, people. The House Democratic leadership won't even move on Bill Barr, let alone his boss. Christamighty, what a disaster.

Respond to this post on the Esquire Politics Facebook page here.

Charles P. Pierce Charles P Pierce is the author of four books, most recently Idiot America, and has been a working journalist since 1976.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io