No response returned

Washington — Senate Republicans blocked a war powers resolution on Thursday aimed at preventing President Trump from conducting strikes against Venezuela after a bipartisan group of senators warned that a continued campaign against alleged drug smugglers in the region could escalate.

The vote to advance the resolution failed with 49 supporting it and 51 senators opposing. Sens. Rand Paul of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska were the only Republicans to support it. 

The , led by Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine, would direct the president "to terminate the use of United States Armed Forces for hostilities within or against Venezuela, unless explicitly authorized by a declaration of war or specific authorization for use of military force." The resolution had 15 cosponsors, including Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California and Paul. 

"Congress should not cede its power to any president," Kaine told reporters at the Capitol on Thursday. "If colleagues believe that a war against the narco-traffickers in the ocean or a war against Venezuela is a good idea, then put an [authorization of military force] on the table and debate and vote it, but don't just hand the power over to an executive. That runs against everything that this nation was founded on."

The U.S. military is building up forces in waters off South America and has conducted at least 17 strikes on alleged drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific since Sept. 2, killing at least 70 people. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth hours after the Senate voted, saying three "narco-terrorists" were killed in the Caribbean.

Kaine introduced the bipartisan resolution on Oct. 16, one day after Mr. Trump that he had authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations inside Venezuela.

"A lot of the Venezuelan drugs come in through the sea," Mr. Trump said at the time. "But we're going to stop them by land also." 

Mr. Trump said last week he had not made a decision about strikes within Venezuela. 

The Trump administration recently began briefing lawmakers on the strikes ahead of Thursday's vote, allowing them to read the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel opinion that the administration argues justifies the strikes. Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth met with congressional leaders and national security committee heads on Wednesday as lawmakers in both parties demand more details on the intelligence and legal basis for the strikes. 

Democrats left the briefing saying that the administration's answers on the legal rationale were insufficient, but expressed confidence in the U.S. intelligence community's capabilities.  

"Nothing in the legal opinion even mentions Venezuela," said Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. 

Warner added that intelligence assets on alleged drug trafficking operations in the region are "quite good," but argued that the U.S. should be intercepting the boats and bringing the alleged traffickers to justice. 

"I'm not too worried that they're going to take out a fishing boat, because our intelligence community is very, very good. But I'm not confident that we know precisely who are in those boats and why they're there," said Rep. Jim Himes of Connecticut, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. 

House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, disagreed with the characterization, telling reporters that "we know the contents of the boats" and "we know the personnel, almost to a person." 

Kaine said Thursday the Office of Legal Counsel opinion is based on a misreading of constitutional text. Schiff added that the opinion "is broad enough to authorize just about anything." 

"If that opinion were to be adopted, it would not constrain any use of force anywhere in the world," he said. 

Schiff also questioned the U.S. military buildup in the region, calling it "an open secret that this is much more about potential regime change." In last week, Mr. Trump said Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro's days are numbered. After Wednesday's briefing, Himes, a Democrat, said "there is no apparent plans to expand this beyond what they say that they are doing." 

Kaine said some of his Republican colleagues are uncomfortable with the potential for escalation, but have not told him they plan to support his resolution. Schiff added that some of them "may have been more comfortable with the idea when they thought it was a very short campaign, but now that it is an ongoing thing with no definite endpoint, I think the concern has increased."

Kaine's resolution would require the U.S. to remove its armed forces from "hostilities within or against Venezuela that have not been authorized by Congress." It said U.S. actions in the region "indicate imminent involvement" in hostilities within or against the South American nation.

In October, Senate Republicans aimed at preventing continued U.S. strikes on alleged drug-carrying boats off the coast of Venezuela. Kaine said he and Schiff planned to keep renewing their efforts to force votes on the war powers issue.

Under the War Powers Resolution of 1973, the president is required to consult Congress "in every possible instance" before introducing armed forces into hostilities, unless there has been a declaration of war or other congressional authorization. In emergency situations, the administration must report to Congress within 48 hours and cease hostilities within 60 days absent congressional authorization. The 60-day deadline expired Monday. 

When asked how the administration plans to proceed, a senior administration official told Autos News that the 1973 resolution "has been understood to apply to placing U.S. servicemembers in harm's way." The strikes have been largely carried out by drones launched from naval vessels "at distances too far away for the crews of the targeted vessels to endanger American personnel," according to the official. The official added that the administration does not consider the strikes against the alleged drug traffickers as "hostilities." 

In a floor speech on Oct. 8, Paul said the strikes risk killing innocent people and decried the lack of due process. 

"If anyone gave a you-know-what about justice, perhaps those in charge of deciding whom to kill might let us know their names, present proof of their guilt, show evidence of their crimes," Paul said. "Is it too much to ask to know the names of those we kill before we kill them? To know what evidence exists of their guilt? At the very least, the government should explain how the gang came to be labeled as terrorists." 

On Thursday, Paul asked why the two survivors were repatriated if they were such a threat to the U.S.