America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 years ago by Speyside. 19 replies replies.
Obama Smack-Down..!!
DrafterX Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
Congress on Wednesday overwhelmingly rejected President Obama’s veto of a bipartisan bill letting families of Sept. 11 victims sue the Saudi Arabian government, in the first successful veto override of Obama’s presidency.

Marking a significant defeat for the White House, the House ensured the bill will become law after voting 348-77 to override Wednesday afternoon. This followed a 97-1 vote hours earlier in the Senate.

Despite last-ditch warnings from the Obama administration that the legislation could hurt national security and was “badly misguided,” lawmakers dismissed the concerns.

"This bill is about respecting the voices and rights of American victims," Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, said.

Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., speaking on the Senate floor moments before Wednesday's vote in that chamber, pushed back hard on Saudi government objections to the legislation.

“It’s very simple. If the Saudis were culpable, they should be held accountable. If they had nothing to do with 9/11, they have nothing to fear,” Schumer said.

Lawmakers in both chambers needed to muster a two-thirds majority to override, and did so easily. The lone "no" vote in the Senate was Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

Film at 11... Think
dstieger Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 06-22-2007
Posts: 10,889
I admit that I don't know enough about this issue....but I am willing to comment :)

This is rather strange to me and seems to be a pretty risky bill. Does this mean that any individual should be able to sue any foreign nation-state any time they've been 'wronged'? Won't this come back to haunt us? What about the civilians that are killed and injured by military action? Does this erode the rights of our military (and diplomats, and other civilians) when they are working in other countries?

What little I heard about this...sounds like a bill to rectify a single event; not to legislate future actions/events -- that's always a risky proposition.

If the Saudi government was involved -- then isn't it up to our government to deal with them?
DrafterX Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
A war zone is prolly excluded... but there's prolly more to the story too... If you ask me, Obama was clearly just trying to protect the Saudis in exchange for somethin... Mellow
banderl Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 09-09-2008
Posts: 10,153
dstieger wrote:
I admit that I don't know enough about this issue....but I am willing to comment :)

This is rather strange to me and seems to be a pretty risky bill. Does this mean that any individual should be able to sue any foreign nation-state any time they've been 'wronged'? Won't this come back to haunt us? What about the civilians that are killed and injured by military action? Does this erode the rights of our military (and diplomats, and other civilians) when they are working in other countries?

What little I heard about this...sounds like a bill to rectify a single event; not to legislate future actions/events -- that's always a risky proposition.

If the Saudi government was involved -- then isn't it up to our government to deal with them?



Why didn't we deal with the Saudis back in the early 2000s?
Speyside Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
This bill negates sovereign immunity in one limited area, anyone can sue a foreign county over acts of terrorism, the issue is the plaintiff would have to prove that the foreign country aided the terrorist /terrorists. I think it is a mistake as in I expect other countries to pass similar laws. What effect would similar laws have on the CIA, special forces, and so on? Also, how would an individual prove a foreign countries involvement?
teedubbya Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
So now we are for more lawsuits. I thought the republicans were normally for fewer...... well except for trump but he's not really a republican.
ZRX1200 Online
#7 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,477
I thought the Republicant's were for no spine and a lot of obstructionist "TALK" not action.

Guess the addition of DemoncRats gave them some courage.

Right or wrong, the fact that this is the first thing the R''s have gotten almost overturned is pathetic. EAD Ryan, McConnell, Mcshame and Priebus.
DrafterX Offline
#8 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
'Marking a significant defeat for the White House, the House ensured the bill will become law after voting 348-77 to override Wednesday afternoon. This followed a 97-1 vote hours earlier in the Senate.'







I don't think this was just Republicans saying No... Mellow
Abrignac Offline
#9 Posted:
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,217
This could be problematic. What's to stop another nation from doing the same thing opening the US to similar suits. Slippery slope I'm afraid.

That being said this could have been handled differently if the pansy-in-Cheif had some nutz.
tonygraz Offline
#10 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,175
The one senator that voted no is not running for re-election. This is a 9/11 inspired law and those not wanting to lose votes felt they had to vote for it.
gummy jones Offline
#11 Posted:
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
Abrignac wrote:
This could be problematic. What's to stop another nation from doing the same thing opening the US to similar suits. Slippery slope I'm afraid.

That being said this could have been handled differently if the pansy-in-Cheif had some nutz.


slippery because of the anti americans that run the pathetic un (even though we fund the un)
DrafterX Offline
#12 Posted:
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,508
I think the counter-suit threat was just that.. a threat.. Obama was just trying to protect his buddies.. Mellow
Mr. Jones Offline
#13 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,359
Barry is getting free use of the top floor of one of those LUXURY HOTELS ON THOSE MAN MADE ISLANDS....off the Saudi coastline...

THE APARMENT / CONDO IS FILLED WITH:

# TWO dozen hot blond swedish models dressed in French maid outfits
# one dozen THAI 85 pound hot as hell "spinners"
# 50 LB DRUMS OF PHARMACEUTICAL BLOW
# cases of 100 year old Remy Martin Congac
# and anything else he desires...
frankj1 Offline
#14 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
who among us is strong enough to say no to that?
Mr. Jones Offline
#15 Posted:
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,359
#14frankj1 ^^^

NOT ME!!!

Sign me up, I'll be Barry's "BUTLER IN CHARGE"
of all hot women's staff and ordering of all said items....
The best job on planet earth.
DrMaddVibe Offline
#16 Posted:
Joined: 10-21-2000
Posts: 55,309
Mr. Jones wrote:
Barry is getting free use of the top floor of one of those LUXURY HOTELS ON THOSE MAN MADE ISLANDS....off the Saudi coastline...

THE APARTMENT / CONDO IS FILLED WITH:

# TWO dozen hot blond male swedish models dressed in French maid outfits
# one dozen THAI 85 pound hot as hell "twinks"
# 50 LB DRUMS OF KY-GEL
# cases of golf balls, gerbil toys and ball-gags
# and anything else he desires...



Fixed it for you...
frankj1 Offline
#17 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 44,211
Mr. Jones wrote:
#14frankj1 ^^^

NOT ME!!!

Sign me up, I'll be Barry's "BUTLER IN CHARGE"
of all hot women's staff and ordering of all said items....
The best job on planet earth.

count me in!
tonygraz Offline
#18 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,175
Seems that congress now is having second thoughts about this act, not sure they did the right thing.
Speyside Offline
#19 Posted:
Joined: 03-16-2015
Posts: 13,106
I think they know they did the wrong thing, but caved to election pressure.
Users browsing this topic
Guest