MercoPress. South Atlantic News Agency
Overriding Saudi Arabia bill veto, “a mistake and dangerous precedent”, warns Obama
President Obama has said Congress made a “mistake” by overriding his veto and pushing through a bill that allows legal action against Saudi Arabia over the 9/11 attacks. He added that the bill would set a “dangerous precedent” for individuals around the world to sue the US government. Wednesday's vote was the first time Obama's veto power was overruled. Read full article
Comments
Disclaimer & comment rulesWhat starts out as good intentions, may well end up suing us all,
Sep 29th, 2016 - 06:57 pm - Link - Report abuse 0they say it will turn bad,
time will tell .
'White House spokesman Josh Earnest told reporters the vote was ”the single most embarrassing thing the United States Senate has done“ in decades.'
Sep 29th, 2016 - 07:51 pm - Link - Report abuse 0-- And here I thought that the presidency of Obama was widely considered the single most embarrassing thing the United States had done in decades.
Obamy:
Sep 30th, 2016 - 11:22 am - Link - Report abuse 0Arguably the worst president in US history.
Arguably the most destructive - domestically and internationally.
The only beneficiary of Obamy's time in office is the failed legacy of Carter who is now saved the stinging distinction of being the worst president.
Obamy has officiated over the longest and most impactful US post recessionary non recovery.
This economic stagnation and weakening of the economy is the domestic legacy of Obamy.
The destruction of the balance of the remaining political stability in the middle east and the emboldening of Russian and Chinese international military adventurism is his international legacy.
And yet Obamy is proud for it seems that his single guiding principle is to humble America and in doing so to punish it and the west for what he perceives as our past excesses.
Obamy has made it his life's work to travel the world apologizing for our past transgressions - both real and imagined.
Fortunately in the end the amount of damage that Obamy could ultimately inflict was capped by his preoccupation with golf and seeking celebrity.
”It has to do with me not wanting a situation where we're suddenly exposed to liabilities for all the work that we're doing all around the world and suddenly finding ourselves subject to private lawsuits.“
Sep 30th, 2016 - 06:01 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Does he mean killing innocent citizens in military “accidents”, sticking their noses into other countries and then leaving them worse off than before after they run away, things like that?
The overturn of the veto was due to Obummas OWN misreading of the frustration the country felt with his 'presidency' and he should have defused the problem early on, not leave to blow up in his face.
I was really hopeful when he was elected and saw a new way for the USA: he turned out to be the same old, the same old.
And there are those who think Trump would be a disaster!
Not half as much as the lying, big business shoe-in 'Hill'. Her health issues may take care of her before the election, fingers crossed.
l agree, Chris.
Oct 01st, 2016 - 11:38 am - Link - Report abuse 0l too, was hopeful when Obama was elected.
And although every American that l speak to doesn't like him, he was elected for a second term.!
GF, Go figure.
S. Arabia simply can't show their total ignorance regarding the involvement of their own citizens in the 09/11 disaster. Without some level of the Saudi Govt. participation; it would never have been possible.
Oct 01st, 2016 - 05:26 pm - Link - Report abuse +1# 3 chronic
Oct 01st, 2016 - 10:25 pm - Link - Report abuse -1“Obamy:
Arguably the worst president in US history.
Arguably the most destructive - domestically and internationally.”
Absolutely.
Just remember how he started the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which have a total cost of around 13 trillion dollars and he wasn't even the president then. He was probably also the one who the Vietnam war.
He is not to be trusted, last year Obama said he was 54, this year he says he is 55 - which is it, Obama?
Obama has been a disappointment, but to call him the worst president in US history is silly.
To have voted for him once is kind of comical in a narcissistic way. For a rational person to have voted for him twice beggars belief.
Oct 02nd, 2016 - 02:24 pm - Link - Report abuse -1----------------------
36. Which of these twelve presidents we have had since World War II would you consider the worst president: Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, George Bush Senior, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush or Barack Obama?
.....................................Totals
Harry Truman.................0
Dwight Eisenhower...........1
John Kennedy..................0
Lyndon Johnson...............3
Richard Nixon................13
Gerald Ford......................2
Jimmy Carter..................8
Ronald Reagan.................3
George Bush Senior...........2
Bill Clinton......................3
George W. Bush..............28
Barack Obama...............33
DK/NA............................4
www.qu.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2056
keywords: “would you consider”
Oct 02nd, 2016 - 09:16 pm - Link - Report abuse 0Ready for some facts?
Guess what: Barack Obama has been a great president for job creation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
Obama's record on jobs versus five other presidents
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
The United States has only added about 9.3 million jobs during Obama's term - from the time Obama took office in January 2009 through December 2015. https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
U.S. economy adds 2.65 mio. jobs in 2015, 2nd best year of jobs gains since 1999
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
US: Total nonfarm payroll employment (seasonally adjusted) 2006.01-2016.06
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
The Obama economy in 10 charts, Economic growth (GDP)
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
The Obama economy in 10 charts, Stock market
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
The Obama economy in 10 charts, U.S. manufacturing
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
The Obama economy in 10 charts, Home prices
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/01/08/guess-what-barack-obama-has-been-a-great-president-for-job-creation/
Overall disappointing, but far from the worst president in real numbers.
Annual USA GDP growth numbers:
Oct 02nd, 2016 - 10:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 02009:........ -2.8 percent
2010:..........2.5 percent
2011:..........1.6 percent
2012:..........2.2 percent
2013:..........1.5 percent
2014:..........2.4 percent
2015:..........2.4 percent
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/barack-obama-is-on-track-to-be-the-only-president-in-history-to-never-have-a-year-of-3-gdp-growth
----------
WSJ: ”In terms of average annual growth, the pace of this expansion has been by far the weakest of any since 1949. (And for which we have quarterly data.) The economy has grown at a 2.1% annual rate since the U.S. recovery began in mid-2009, according to gross-domestic-product data the Commerce Department released Friday.“
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/barack-obama-is-on-track-to-be-the-only-president-in-history-to-never-have-a-year-of-3-gdp-growth
----------
Michael Snyder: ”This entire seven year stretch has come while Barack Obama has been in the White House. After more than seven and a half years, he is solidly on track to be the only president in U.S. history to never have a single year when the U.S. economy grew by at least three percent.
And unlike many presidents, he has had two terms in which to try to accomplish that feat.”
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/barack-obama-is-on-track-to-be-the-only-president-in-history-to-never-have-a-year-of-3-gdp-growth
The bill is narrowly crafted. It is unlikely that any plaintiff would prevail in court.
Oct 04th, 2016 - 02:06 am - Link - Report abuse 0But I do not understand on what basis the administration is objecting. For instance, the US government may be sued by foreigners, not in a US court but in back room kangaroo courts. This is the so called ISD provisions of such 'free trade' treaties such as NAFTA and the yet to be ratified TPTT. So, the administration cannot have an in principle objection to the US government being sued. And, by extension, it cannot have an objection to foreign governments being sued by US citizens.
@11 Hepatia
Oct 04th, 2016 - 08:40 pm - Link - Report abuse 0At the moment the US cannot be sued for such helpful and legal things as Abu Ghraib, drone strikes, and sponsoring coups in other nations. Other governments only agree to this because the US gives them reciprocal protection. Except now it doesn't.
Does that explain it for you?
http://en.mercopress.com/2016/09/29/overriding-saudi-arabia-bill-veto-a-mistake-and-dangerous-precedent-warns-obama#comment451237: But the US government can be sued in a back room kangaroo court under what is known as ISD now. So, what possible objection can there be to the ability to sue the government in a constitutionally mandated court? Does that explain it to you?
Oct 06th, 2016 - 11:07 pm - Link - Report abuse 0@13 Hepatia
Oct 07th, 2016 - 09:23 pm - Link - Report abuse -1Nope, doesn't explain it.
ISDs only allow investors in the US to demand neutral arbitration for such things as expropriation of property or discrimination by the government.
They don't let people in other countries sue government officials or members of the armed forces for stuff they have done as part of their jobs. They don't let people whose family members are killed by drone strikes in Iraq sue the US government either.
Basically, the US government does have an in-principle objection to being sued. But they have made an exception in order to facilitate international investment, and the rights given have been carefully drawn up and limited by government lawyers.
Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!