SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Wharf Rat who wrote (963523)9/12/2016 5:20:37 PM
From: Broken_Clock  Read Replies (1) of 1576160
 
bull

you have nothing but Clinton talking points.

HRC's push on Libya destroyed the country.

Your home in the Forrest of Denial doesn't change reality.
===

In fact:

Obama to Veto 9/11 Lawsuit Bill Says US Is At Risk to Lawsuits as Anyone
by Jason Ditz, September 12, 2016

Print This | Share This
White House officials continue to insist that President Obama intends to veto the Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism Act (JASTA), which unanimously passed in both the House and Senate, claiming that the weakening of the principle of sovereign immunity is a danger to the US.

JASTA is designed to allow victims of 9/11 to sue Saudi Arabia over the attack, based on Saudi government involvement in the scheme, as detailed by the 9/11 Report’s 28 pages. Saudi Arabia has threatened to collapse the US Treasury market in retaliation.

While the Saudi threats are believed to play a significant behind the scenes role in the White House veto threat, today they insisted that the chief concern was that the weakening of sovereign immunity is as much a risk to the US as anyone “given the way the United States is engaged in the world.”

Sovereign immunity is a legal doctrine that insists governments cannot commit any legal wrongs, and are thus immune from civil lawsuits. The US largely supports this, except for a few hand-picked exceptions, like allowing 9/11 victims to sue Iran, even though Iran had nothing to do with the attack.

The Obama Administration argument boils down to the idea that the US commits so many atrocities abroad itself that opening this Pandora’s box could really open the US government up to similar suits from its assorted victims. In that regard, they’re probably not wrong, though the US has tended to pick and choose with sovereign immunity, protecting its allies from lawsuits while setting up suits against international rivals.

The White House also faces the very serious possibility of a veto override, which would be the first in Obama’s presidency, since both the House and Senate unanimously passed the bill, and many are likely to continue to do so even in the face of presidential opposition.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext