Let me clarify - I got the same email response twice. One about 2 minutes after the other.
So it's just one response, sent twice.
Just to clarify.
He starts:
Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding the United States military strikes on Iran and the ongoing conflict in the region. Your feedback is essential as we work together to shape policies that benefit Pennsylvania and our country, and I recognize that many Pennsylvanians hold strong and differing views on this issue.
Ok, so it's about Iran.
I've already asked the senator about Iranian school destroyed by a US Tomahawk cruise missile and here is his response.
And here's how he characterizes our current situation in Iran:
After giving the Iranian regime until off ramps through peace negotiations, on February 28, 2026, the United States, in coordination with Israel, conducted a series of precision military strikes targeting elements of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, military assets, and senior regime leadership. These strikes resulted in the death of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and several senior IRGC officials. The Administration has stated that these operations were conducted in response to Iran’s continued advancement of its nuclear and missile programs and its longstanding support for terrorist proxy forces that threaten the United States, Israel, and partners throughout the Middle East.
My heart goes out to the families of the American servicemembers who have lost their lives. Their courage and sacrifice in defense of our nation will never be forgotten, and we must remain steadfast in supporting those who serve in uniform.
Of course this is the case. However let's remember that more than 100 children were killed by a US Tomahawk missile.
[As I was writing this blogpost, I received from the senator's office a response to that bombing - so we'll note that and move on. I'll address this latest letter letter.]
The senator continued:
I believe the President acted within his constitutional authority, consistent with the War Powers Resolution of 1973, and following precedents set by administrations of both parties. The President has a responsibility to protect American national security interests, defend our allies, and respond to direct threats when necessary. Members of Congress were briefed in advance of these operations as well as after they commenced, in compliance with US law, and I expect the Administration to continue providing regular updates so Congress can fulfill its oversight responsibilities.
Let's put some context into the whole "Members of Congress were briefed..." part as it requires a lot of context.
From Time:
The White House said that the so-called Gang of Eight, the bipartisan group of top House and Senate leaders and intelligence committee chairs who are briefed on the nation’s most sensitive security matters, were notified by Secretary of State Marco Rubio shortly before the strikes began. Administration officials had also briefed congressional leadership and intelligence committee heads earlier in the week on escalating tensions with Iran. But those notifications fell short of formal authorization from Congress, which the Constitution assigns the power to declare war under Article 1.
And:
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer added in a statement that the Trump Administration had not provided “critical details about the scope and immediacy of the threat,” urging Congress to reconvene quickly to reassert its constitutional role.
Many rank-and-file lawmakers from both parties echoed that message and told TIME this week that they had received little information about the Administration’s objectives or legal rationale before the strikes were carried out, reinforcing complaints that Congress was again being asked to respond to military action after the fact rather than debate it beforehand.
So if, when the senator wrote "Members of Congress were briefed in advance..." you thought (as I suppose the senator wanted you to think) that all members of Congress were fully briefed, you'd be wrong.
Imagine how would it have looked had Pennsylvania Senator Dave McCormick instead written:
Only some members of Congress were briefed but with incomplete information.
Which one is closer to the truth? And which one did my senator go with ?
See my point?
Then there's this:
I support President Trump’s efforts to hold Iran accountable, eliminate the growing threat it poses, and commend the close coordination with Israel and regional partners. The Iranian regime has the blood of Americans, our allies, and its own people on its hands. For decades, the ayatollahs have threatened our destruction and funded global terror. In my view, these strikes represent a necessary response to a regime that has continued to advance its nuclear ambitions and support violent proxy forces. President Trump’s maximum pressure campaign is hitting hard and the regime is crumbling: its economy is in ruins, its military decimated, and its people are rising up. The United States and our allies must continue to squeeze.
There is no doubt about the crimes committed by the Iranian regime (on its own people, on others). They are not guiltless. But this does not excuse any misdeeds by the United States.
For example, I asked both Pennsylvania Senators about Trump's threatened war crimes and have yet to receive a response. Is the threat of wiping out a whole civilization just simply a "maximum pressure campaign" as the senator characterizes it?
But isn't genocide a war crime, Senator? That's what he threatened.
You never seem to answer that question, sir. Why not?
The letter:
