Obama Vetoes 9/11 Bill, Defends Saudi Arabia from Lawsuits

[Spike]

WASHINGTON (AP) — Barack Obama has vetoed a bill that would have allowed the families of 9/11 victims to sue the government of Saudi Arabia. The move sets Obama up for a possible first veto override by Congress.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/obama-veto-911-bill-saudi-arabia-202339289.html

Obama: “I stand with Islam.”

 

[IndySteel]

Of course. He protects terrorists because he is one.

 

[POP]

Obviously, he won't allow for this. A suit would mean a real investigation; a real investigation would mean the true criminals would be exposed. The real criminals were the shadow US govt. and Israel.

Those truly in power were in on it. They won't let this happen. Saudis were part of the plot, but certainly not the prime criminals; they just had their role, of coming up with names of fake terrorist, some of
which have been found alive, which would be impossible of the official story were true.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

The upside of this, my understanding is that it would also let other countries sue us too.

 

[Spike]

Override veto in the works



Congress was expected to move rapidly to try to override the veto, which requires a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate. A successful override would be the first of Obama's presidency.

With lawmakers eager to return home to campaign ahead of the November election, a vote could come as early as Tuesday. Even House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, an Obama ally, indicated support this week for an override, saying members believe the families “should have their day in court.”

Democratic New York Sen. Chuck Schumer called the veto a “disappointing decision that will be swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...1-bill-setting-up-showdown-with-congress.html

 

[POP]

Override veto in the works



Congress was expected to move rapidly to try to override the veto, which requires a two-thirds vote in the House and Senate. A successful override would be the first of Obama's presidency.

With lawmakers eager to return home to campaign ahead of the November election, a vote could come as early as Tuesday. Even House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi, an Obama ally, indicated support this week for an override, saying members believe the families “should have their day in court.”

Democratic New York Sen. Chuck Schumer called the veto a “disappointing decision that will be swiftly and soundly overturned in Congress.”

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...1-bill-setting-up-showdown-with-congress.html

It won't be long until the get the "word from uptop" and they will suddenly "change their minds" on this.

 

[Ron Burgundy]

It won't be long until the get the "word from uptop" and they will suddenly "change their minds" on this.

It depends. Bammy is a lame duck but Congress wants to keep their phoney baloney jobs. Harrumph, harrumph. Hey, I didn't get a harrumph outta that guy.

 

[deljzc]

I'm not a big fan of civil lawsuits in general so I'm a bit torn on this issue. Remember, those god damn lawyers are going to skim 30% off the top.... And lawyers are politicians....

Sounds too much like the lawyer lobby is pulling Congress' strings...

 

[IndySteel]

Ha Ha! The senate overrode that terrorist's veto!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/28/senate-votes-to-override-obama-veto-on-911-bill.html

 

[21STEELERS21]

I guess Iraqi's can sue us for blowing up their country under false pretenses. Lawyers win both ways, suing other countries and
defending USA.

 

[SteelerInLebanon]

I guess Iraqi's can sue us for blowing up their country under false pretenses. Lawyers win both ways, suing other countries and
defending USA.

It states this bill is narrow and only cover terrorist attacks on US soil.

 

[TDX27]

This is actually one I may side with Odumma on. Other countries are going to sue the **** out of us. Even if people sue another country, there is no way in hell they will ever pay up. Who is going to enforce a lawsuit victory? The whole concept makes little sense.

 

[21STEELERS21]

Iraqi's can say we were the terrorist on their soil. It doesn't matter what our laws are. If US citizens
use reasoning and justifications for suing foreign entities, then foreign citizens can sue the US if they
believe the same reasoning and justifications apply to them. We are at much greater risk of being
sued because our military is applying force all over the world. The first to sue us and likely to win
would be any innocent person damaged by a US drone strike.

 

[Steeltime]

I'm not a big fan of civil lawsuits in general so I'm a bit torn on this issue.

Bite your tongue!!

 

[Steeltime]

It states this bill is narrow and only cover terrorist attacks on US soil.

Yep.

Anybody who thinks that Congress would enact a law permitting foreign citizens to sue the United States for some sort of "war injury" is crazy.

And has never been in Federal court before a Federal judge. Getting a Federal judge to permit a claim against the Fed to go forward is extremely difficult.

How difficult? I don't take cases against the Federal government. City or County? If the facts are reallllllly good. Otherwise, the state court judge will simply boot the case.

 

[Coach]

Par for the course for a man who loves Islam, can't say radical Islam, blames Christians for wars, bows / apologies to Arabs, gives Iran billions, and a sweet deal and tells our best ally in the region in Isreal to go back to 1967 boarders.

WTF is going on here. Sorry, but even if you are as far left as you can get, the above is very concerning.

Furthermore, Obama bankrupts the USA. Oh, it's coming. The debt he has accumulated is at least nine trillion. Now sit down, there're only 1.45 trillion dollars of money out there. No way can we pay it down, which means China and others really lent us money so they can control our government.

 

[ark steel]

I'm not a big fan of civil lawsuits in general so I'm a bit torn on this issue. Remember, those god damn lawyers are going to skim 30% off the top.... And lawyers are politicians....

Sounds too much like the lawyer lobby is pulling Congress' strings...

I'm with ya. Sounds like a lawyer's paradise. Seems unlikely to also be a waste of everyone's time as I doubt anyone wins a suit or even a settlement.

 

[hamster]

Obviously, he won't allow for this. A suit would mean a real investigation; a real investigation would mean the true criminals would be exposed. The real criminals were the shadow US govt. and Israel.

Those truly in power were in on it. They won't let this happen. Saudis were part of the plot, but certainly not the prime criminals; they just had their role, of coming up with names of fake terrorist, some of
which have been found alive, which would be impossible of the official story were true.

Hey doofus. Did you even watch your clip? The BBC apologizes for causing confusion. Dumbass.

 

[Steeltime]

Hey doofus. Did you even watch your clip? Dumbass.

I think we know the answer to that question, ark.

 

[Steeltime]

I'm with ya. Sounds like a lawyer's paradise.

Hmmm ... tell me more ...

 

[USDA#1]

they shouldn't have had to resort to this anyway.

Riyahd should be a pit......a pit that once was a smoking pit, but hey, it's been a decade now, the fire would be out.

 

[DBS1970]

Pop once again blames da Jooooooos!

 

[ark steel]

Hmmm ... tell me more ...

don't make me microaggress your *** off this board, staletame!!

 

[Steeltime]

don't make me microaggress your *** off this board, staletame!!

 

[Tibs]

Par for the course for a man who loves Islam, can't say radical Islam...

For the 10,000th time, and for the love of God, maybe just maybe you guys will finally understand. No, who am I kidding, of course you won't.


<iframe src="https://www.facebook.com/plugins/video.php?href=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fcnn%2Fvideos%2F10155377498941509%2F&show_text=0&width=560" width="560" height="315" style="border:none;overflow:hidden" scrolling="no" frameborder="0" allowTransparency="true" allowFullScreen="true"></iframe>