September 10, 2016
So, it’s been public for a while now that Saudi Arabia funded the 911 attacks. So it’s reasonable enough that the families killed in the attacks would be able to sue the people responsible for the deaths of their family members.
This reasonableness is why the bill allowing it has passed both the Senate and the House.
But Obama, of course, is planning to protect his terrorist allies, as he views 911 as a triumph of Islam.
Congress on Friday sent President Obama a bill that would allow families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia over its alleged ties to terrorism, but advocates of the legislation worry it could be defeated by a presidential veto.
The House passed the legislation by voice vote, with leaders calling it a “moral imperative” to allow victims’ families to seek justice for the deaths of loved ones as the country marks the 15th anniversary of the attacks that brought down the World Trade Center towers and damaged the Pentagon.
But bill supporters are bracing for a veto fight with the White House, which argues the bill could harm the United States’ relationship with Saudi Arabia and establish a legal precedent that jeopardizes American officials overseas. Advocates for the legislation are also warily eyeing the congressional calendar over fears the administration may try to pocket-veto the legislation if lawmakers leave Washington soon to focus on the election.
Victims’ families who have long implored Congress to pass the bill are now pressuring lawmakers to stick around Washington to prevent a pocket veto, arguing they have enough support for a successful override vote.
“This is more important than campaigning,” said Terry Strada, who lost her husband in the attacks and is national chair of the organization for victims’ families that is bringing a lawsuit against Saudi Arabia. “You can campaign after. You will never have a chance to pass [the bill] again. This is the priority.”
Once the president officially receives the bill, he will have 10 days to veto the legislation or the bill automatically becomes law. But if Congress adjourns before the 10-day clock runs out, it could trigger a pocket veto — a constitutional quirk that allows a president to defeat a legislative proposal by holding on to it until Congress is out of session.
The White House is in a difficult spot. While administration officials have strongly suggested the president should veto the bill, it would be a politically unpopular move that could fuel an emotional backlash and an uncomfortable debate in the weeks before Election Day.
A pocket veto could help the White House avoid some of the political fallout but would also probably prove controversial.
White House National Security Council Spokesman Ned Price on Friday declined to comment on whether the president will veto the bill.
I’m betting he’s going to do it.
He doesn’t care about popularity at this point, all he cares about is hurting America as much as possible on his way out.