Rep. Michael Waltz (R-Fla. 6th District), a U.S. Army officer, is defending the president's actions in authorizing a drone strike that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani last week and told Cheddar the president acted in self-defense, which Waltz said means he did not need to consult Congress first.
"Looking backwards, I'm fine with this strike," said Waltz. "I think the president has a duty if he has actionable intelligence that [Soleimani] is going to continue to kill Americans — he's operating in the country where he continues to plot and plan those attacks as he has done for decades — he is a lawful enemy combatant, completely within the president's authority to defend our diplomats and our soldiers."
White House officials have not yet provided any evidence showing a threat, which the president called "imminent," or revealed when an attack was expected. Senator Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, called on the president to release the intelligence.
Waltz, who is on the Armed Services Committee, said he is heading to the White House this afternoon to "take a look at it, myself."
Some Pentagon officials have said intelligence did not show an imminent attack and that the move was part of Secretary of State Mike Pompeo's push for aggressive action against Iran.
Waltz echoed remarks from Pompeo this morning, who said Soleimani's "long history of attacking Americans and killing people across the Middle East" led to Trump's decision to authorize the drone strike, at least in part.
The congressman also said the strike came "after a long string of Iranian provocations. This is not an escalation, this is a response, and it's a response designed to stop further escalation," similar to Trump's claim that he ordered the strike to stop war, not start it.
"No one in this administration that I've talked to is talking about a D-Day, Normandy style invasion, boots on the ground of Iran," Waltz said, which would necessitate an Authorization for Use of Military Force from Congress. "Self defense is always within the laws of land warfare and within the commander in chief."
Emily Hoeven, newsletter editor at CalMatters, joins Cheddar News to discuss California Governor Gavin Newsom's gun law modeled after Texas's abortion law.
Chuck Rocha, host of 'Nuestro' podcast and opinion contributor at The New York Times, joins Cheddar News to discuss why Democrats are losing Hispanic voters.
More businesses are requiring workers to return to the office, but there is concern that many employees in the middle class, especially women and people of color, need remote work options for reasons including childcare and financial security. Joan Williams, director of the Center for WorkLife Law at the University of California, joined Cheddar to discuss why office mandates could be detrimental to the middle class. She noted that while companies claim a return to offices would help foster more collaboration and efficiency, reports show that they are successfully able to do their jobs from home.
The U.S. postal service has confirmed that it secretly developed and tested a blockchain-based mobile voting system ahead of the 2020 election. Susan Greenhalgh, senior advisor on election security, Free Speech for People, joins Cheddar News to discuss the cybersecurity complications of a mobile voting system.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled to allow the controversial Texas abortion law to remain in effect, banning abortion at six weeks and allowing any private citizen to sue a person or doctor aiding or abetting someone seeking an abortion. Outraged at this decision, California Governor Gavin Newsom is working to draft a proposal in line with the law as it relates to guns. Shawn Hubler, California correspondent at the New York Times, joins Cheddar News to discuss.
Even as tech giant Google implements a vaccination mandate, charging its employees to declare their vaccine status within a time frame or risk dismissal, the federal government is tangled up in the court system trying to impose one of its own. Cindy Cohn, the executive director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Harry Nelson, founder and managing partner of Nelson Hardiman LLP, joined Cheddar to debate the ethics, efficacy, and legality surrounding the issue. While Cohn noted that she thinks the federal mandate might be legally sound, her organization is also concerned with a separate question of privacy. "At EFF what we're most interested in is the digital surveillance that's going along with some of these attempts to try to track and confirm whether people are vaccinated or not," she said.
