Nader: Libya mission was 'impeachable offense'
© Getty Images

Ralph Nader on Tuesday said President Obama has committed impeachable offenses dating back to the United States' effort in 2011 to create a no-fly zone in Libya.

Nader, who has previously called for Obama's impeachment, said Congress would not take up articles of impeachment at the time of the Libya mission because it has “abdicated” its responsibility in matters of war.

"Libya was the most egregious violation of the Constitution by President Obama," Nader told ABC News-Yahoo News. "He attacked Libya with European nations without a declaration of war, he didn't ask Congress for an authorization of funds. He didn't get an appropriation of funds from Congress. He found a billion and a half dollars somewhere in the Pentagon budget. That is an impeachable offense flat out."

"The reason why Congress doesn't want to do it is because it abdicated its own responsibility under the Constitution."

In March 2011, the United States with the help of international partners bombed air defense systems in Libya to impose a no-fly zone authorized by a United Nations Security Council resolution.

At the time, lawmakers criticized the administration for not seeking congressional authorization. The administration countered that the strikes were limited in nature, duration and scope and fell within presidential authority.

"I have directed these actions, which are in the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States, pursuant to my constitutional authority to conduct U.S. foreign relations and as Commander in Chief and Chief Executive," Obama said in a letter to members of Congress at the time.

Nader also said the United States' use of lethal drone strikes around the world has violated international law. Nader made the remarks while promoting his book, Unstoppable: The Emerging Left-Right Alliance to Dismantle the Corporate State.

During the interview, Nader said he would support Sen. Elizabeth WarrenElizabeth Ann WarrenFix the flaw in financial self-regulation Power struggle threatens to sink bank legislation Feinstein faces new pressure from left over CIA nominee MORE (D-Mass.) for president in 2016 but thought she was unlikely to run. He said Sen. Rand PaulRandal (Rand) Howard PaulTrump informally offered Cohn CIA job before changing his mind: report Congress moving to end US involvement in Yemen Congress races to finish .2 trillion funding bill MORE (R-Ky.) would be the person to beat on the Republican side in 2016, unless former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush (R) decides to run.

Nader, a former perennial third-party presidential candidate, said he would oppose a Hillary ClintonHillary Diane Rodham ClintonTrump adds to legal team after attacks on Mueller Press: You can’t believe a word he says Feehery: March Madness MORE run, saying she is more hawkish than Obama. He also said a Bush-Clinton match-up in the 2016 general election would be dull.

"You want a dull campaign. Try Jeb Bush and Hillary Clinton in 2016," he said, adding, "It will only be exciting for people who are interested in dynasties and personalities."

Earlier this year, Nader pitched 20 billionaires for president, saying the super rich are the only ones that can break through the barriers to third-party candidates in the presidential election process.