Skip to content

Pot Meet Kettle

The Republicans just pushed through a law that will allow victims of 9/11 to sue Saudi Arabia in US courts. The law would allow courts to waive claims of foreign sovereign immunity (because terrorism). Obama vetoed it, and the Republicans swiftly overrode his veto.

There’s just one huge problem. The new law will open up the US to lawsuits for things we have done in other countries. You know, like invading Iraq on false pretenses for starters. Not to mention torturing people. And a long list of other things we have done around the world, where the US is at least as complicit as Saudi Arabia was in 9/11. The bill will also of course make it more difficult for Saudi Arabia to continue helping us fight terrorism and the Islamic State.

Now here’s the ironic part. The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell is now blaming the White House for not warning the Republicans that this bill could have these disastrous unintended consequences.

Thanks Obama.

You know, the problem isn’t just Trump. It is time to take a long close look at the Republicans and their “shoot first and ask questions later” attitude. They were in such a hurry to pass this bill to make it look like they support 9/11 victims they didn’t pay any attention to what a disaster it would turn out to be. And now they are trying to blame it on Obama.

© Rob Rogers



  1. Hassan Mushtaq wrote:

    Veto was overturned 97-1, except democrats did not blame Obama for it.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 5:46 am | Permalink
  2. Wildwood wrote:

    But, but, we are the good guys. Surely no one in another country would blame us for the stuff we did. Someone is piping in stupid to the D.C. area.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 7:03 am | Permalink
  3. Hassan wrote:

    “And a long list of other things we have done around the world, where the US is at least as complicit as Saudi Arabia was in 9/11.”

    Can you defend this? USA has active drone policy, torture policy (Under GWB) and many more things from government. I doubt Saudis had that much influence in a non-government entity.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 7:33 am | Permalink
  4. Ralph wrote:

    Obama warned of the likely repercussions of passing this unprecedented bill in several speeches and interviews. But I guess the cable reception was too weak to get through McConnell’s thick skull…er, shell.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 8:30 am | Permalink
  5. Dave, TN wrote:

    Ralph, it must be the tin foil hat blocking his reception, that or the pig “headedness”.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 8:53 am | Permalink
  6. ThatGuy wrote:

    Agree with Hassan that blame needs to be assigned to both parties. The bill was co-authored by Schumer (D-NY) and Cornyn (R-Texas) and the huge majorities in both chambers make the Dems just about as culpable for this foreign policy nightmare.

    Hassan, Saudi Arabia may not have the sort of direct governmental ties to Al Qaeda that people seem to want to find, but they bear an immense responsibility for the spread of Wahhabi Islam and certainly provides financial support to a very significant amount of terror groups. That doesn’t make this bill a good idea, but one can’t seriously excuse Saudi Arabia’s direct ties to terrorism and proliferation of terrorism.

    “Someone is piping in stupid to the D.C. area.”
    Yep. That’d be the rest of the country.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 11:32 am | Permalink
  7. Wildwood wrote:

    Thatguy, I would almost bet that some of the Dems voted for it thinking, (at least in part), that if they were for it, the other side would vote against it. If I were sitting in Congress for the last 7 plus year, that might be my first thought. There is little to indicate that the two sides would both vote for the same thing at the same time. It’s sort of like a lightening strike, odds wise. I bet some bookies had to pay a pretty penny to those who bet it would pass.

    I think when this vote was taken, the stupid gas was perhaps mixed a little too strong.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 2:56 pm | Permalink
  8. Iron Knee wrote:

    Wildwood, a possibly easier reason for the Dems voting for it was that voting against it would have looked (to your standard Fox News viewer) like voting against 9/11 victims, which would have been political suicide. My guess is that they realized that the override was going to pass anyway and that the Republicans would have to backpedal after it passed (which they are doing now). That fits in with the GOP complaining that Obama didn’t warn them of the negative consequences.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 4:15 pm | Permalink
  9. paradoctor wrote:

    If this mistake discourages the USA from other imperial misadventures, then maybe it’s not a mistake after all.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 5:23 pm | Permalink
  10. Ralph wrote:

    Hey good point, Paradoc! But I wouldn’t count on it. We have a way of dismissing these inconveniences, like much of the rest of the world.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 9:38 pm | Permalink
  11. notycoon wrote:

    IK, the idea that Dems voted for the veto override so that they wouldn’t lose cred with regards to 9/11 victims is an interesting theory. Problem is, the Publicans have blocked bill after bill that would directly benefit first responders without apparently losing their seats in Congress. I’m with the “stupid gas” theory.

    Tuesday, October 4, 2016 at 10:36 pm | Permalink
  12. Jonah wrote:

    Its probably not too surprising that the dems voted for the override. They are typically against foreign excursions unlike the republicans. Its mostly republicans who should not have overridden the veto.

    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 2:01 am | Permalink
  13. Wildwood wrote:

    Nootycoon, did those blocked bills have the “magic” words in the title? 9/11

    This might be a way out of impasse. Put 9/11 in the title of every bill. Funding for highways. The 9/11 road rescue bill. A bill for providing funds for day care for poor parents. The 9/11 parents rescue bill.

    Wednesday, October 5, 2016 at 1:38 pm | Permalink
  14. ThatGuy wrote:

    Wildwood, it was called the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act. Zadroga died of respiratory issues five years after being a rescue worker in the rubble of the WTC.

    Thursday, October 6, 2016 at 6:47 am | Permalink
  15. Redjon wrote:

    The U.S. does not submit to the authority of the World Criminal Court… Why does anyone think we would submit to the negative (for us) outcome of any lawsuit against the US of A for any wrong we may (arguably) have done.

    I say, “arguably,” for the benefit of those who claim the United States has done nothing, ever, for which we should apologize.

    Monday, October 10, 2016 at 1:39 pm | Permalink