Obama Administration Briefing Lawmakers on Syria Evidence

As the Obama administration prepared
to brief U.S. lawmakers on evidence it
says shows Syrian government
responsibility for using chemical
weapons against civilians, the White
House faced more tough questions
about that intelligence.
Americans' memories of past conflicts
remain fresh, such as the one in Iraq
launched by Republican president
George W. Bush that raised questions
about the reliability of intelligence.
With military action appearing more
imminent, the White House is being
bombarded with questions about U.S.
evidence concerning the August 21
chemical attack in Damascus.
Washington and key allies blame the
attack, which killed hundreds, on the
regime of Syrian President Bashar al-
Assad. The Syrian government denies it.
On Thursday, British Prime Minister
David Cameron said there is a "clear
legal basis" for military action, but also
that there is "no single smoking piece of
intelligence" that the Assad regime used
chemical weapons.
White House Deputy Press Secretary
Josh Earnest told reporters the United
States will rely on its own intelligence
assessment to back up the decision
President Barack Obama makes.
He also was pressed about the
credibility of intelligence, and asked
whether Obama believes Syria poses an
imminent threat to the United States
itself.
"I am not going to parse the president's
words any further on this. I think the
president has been very clear and I have
done my best to describe to you all of
the national interests that the president
believes are important, that he was
elected to protect, that are at stake
here."
Obama outlined some of those interests
in an interview Wednesday with the
Public Broadcasting Service.
"We have got allies bordering Syria,
Turkey is a NATO ally, Jordan a close
friend that we work with a lot, Israel is
very close by, we have got bases
throughout the region. We cannot see a
breach of the nonproliferation norm that
allows potentially chemical weapons to
fall into the hands of all kinds of folks,"
said the president.
Key Obama administration officials,
including Secretary of State John Kerry,
Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and
National Security Adviser Susan Rice,
were briefing members of Congress late
Thursday.
At least 116 lawmakers, most of them
Republicans, have signed a letter urging
Obama to seek clear congressional
authorization before giving the go-
ahead for any military strike.
Congressman Scott Rigell asserts the
president is required to do so under the
1973 War Powers Resolution and the
U.S. Constitution.
“To follow the United States
Constitution, he really does need,
provided he believes that use of force is
both warranted and imminent, he does
need to call us into a joint session,
make the case before the American
people, allow us a reasonable amount
of time to deliberate the matter and then
to issue specific statutory authority prior
to the use of force.“
The 1973 War Powers Resolution
reaffirmed Congress' constitutional
responsibility to declare war and put a
60-day time limit on the ability of a
president to take unauthorized,
emergency military action.
Deputy Press Secretary Earnest avoided
a direct response when asked if the
president believes Congress should have
a vote on military action, saying only
that Obama is committed to robust
consultations.
"What the president believes is that as
he considers the appropriate response
to this circumstance, it is important for
his administration to consult with
Congress in a very robust way and that
is what we are seeing has happened,"
said Earnest.
Obama spoke by telephone late
Thursday with the Republican Speaker
of the House of Representatives, John
Boehner.
Boehner, according to a spokesman,
sought answers about the legal
justification for any military strike and
the policy and precedent such a
response would set, and objectives and
strategy.

Congressional Vehicles are Seen Arriving at the White House