‘None of us were made aware’: In Rock Hill, Sen. Booker talks Trump’s attack on Iran
Democratic presidential candidate Cory Booker was in Rock Hill on Friday to talk with voters at Rock Grove A.M.E Zion Church.
After the event, the New Jersey senator talked with The Herald about President Donald Trump’s authorized drone strike on Iranian’s Gen. Qassem Soleimani.
What do you think of Trump’s decision to attack Soleimani?
Well, look, Soleimani is responsible for a lot of violence and the deaths of Americans and injuries. But two things are critical — number one, did he meet our standards in this country for the use of military force?
He says he had this intelligence information that led him to do this. We have to see that intelligence information. We’ve seen times before, us being dragged into conflicts. The Iraq War was like that, based upon claims from presidents about justifications.
So, we really need to get to the bottom of that standard. And I’ve seen this president before violate what I believe is his legal authorizations to use force.
The next thing is there’s a larger strategic context here. And this is the president that doesn’t seem to be acting with any kind of strategic plan in that region. He does foreign policy by impulse, by tweet that often has a very bad repercussion; often catches his general off guard and our allies.
What he did is going to have a lot of challenges. He’s already shown with Iran to be seeming like he wants to march to war. And we want to make sure that there is a larger strategy at hand, because I worry that there’s not.
And pulling out of the Iran anti-nuclear deal ended up, frankly, making the area more unstable. Iran has grown in influence under (Trump’s) leadership. So, I have a lot of concerns with his policies and lack of strategy. I think there’s a lot more information we need to know. And unfortunately, we’re in increasingly dangerous times.
But being on the committee for foreign relations, were you made aware of the attacks?
None of us, as members of the Senate Foreign Relations, were made aware before the attacks happened, so I was not made aware.
Trump said (Friday) that Soleimani was planning “sinister” and “imminent” attacks on American diplomats — was the committee made aware of that at all?
No. No. We have not seen any intelligence reports to justify any of the actions he’s taken to this point.
If you were president, how would you have handled the situation?
I would’ve had different policy with Iran from the very beginning. By him pulling out of the Iran anti-nuclear deal, he isolated us away from our allies. He pushed Iran further and more quickly going towards their nuclear action. They’ve already started upping their enrichment and everything.
He’s allowed Iran to have more sway in that region with Syria.... We’re seeing them having better opportunities to arm Hezbollah. We’re seeing them through their proxy wars, and our involvement in that, which I think was unjust.
And so this is a president who’s had no larger strategic plan and has now plunged us further and further into an unstable region. So again, for a president to use military force, there are standards they must meet. I don’t know if he’s met them or not.
But I know if I’m the commander-in-chief, we’re gonna have a larger strategy standing with our allies, which only magnifies and multiplies our strength. And we’re going to make sure we understand what a lot of our generals are saying in that region.
When I was in Afghanistan, they told us that this is not going to be a military solution. It has to be a diplomatic one. Well, this president’s failures in diplomacy — whether it’s with North Korea or with Iran — are more testimony that he has been a reckless and even dangerous president when it comes to American foreign policy.
We’ve had a lot of candidates come through the area and they’re trying to target black voters in South Carolina. They come to A.M.E Zion churches or they go to the HBCU. But what we’re seeing is that the top four candidates, they’re all white. While, the minority candidates are falling behind and even dropping out. So, why do you think that is?
Well, Obama remember, he was way behind in black voters in South Carolina until he won in Iowa, and that shifted things here dramatically. We really think we’re going to follow that same pathway.
And that we need someone, frankly, that can follow that same pathway. Because we can’t win this election without someone that’s going to inspire and activate African American voters to turn out. There’s no way to take back the Senate without a strong African American vote.
In fact, Hillary Clinton would be president right now if she had received the same kind of turnout for African American voters.
So, I know I’m the best candidate to do that. And we’re going to win in Iowa. Right now, we’ve risen now to the number three candidate in net popularity in the state at favorabilities. We have the best ground game. We now lead in Iowa and New Hampshire. We’re in the top two or three in their whole race for endorsements from local leaders. Were surging at the right time.
Remember Obama, in national polls, in December was 15, 20 points behind Hillary Clinton nationally, but yet he still went on Iowa to win and then came down here in South Carolina and won.
That’s what I believe we’re going to do as well.
This story was originally published January 6, 2020 at 1:58 PM.
