Sunday of last week marked the fifteenth anniversary of the September 11th attacks, the worst terror attack on American soil. During a memorial held at the site of the attacks, Hillary Clinton left early, fainting on her way out. She later revealed to the public that she had been diagnosed with pneumonia the prior Friday. She did attempt to politicize the tragedy, reminding us all that refugees didn’t cause 9/11, though I don’t think anyone ever argued that they did.
Meanwhile, Barack Obama had been busy trying to block a bill that would benefit families of the 9/11 victims. A bill that would allow the families of the victims of the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia had passed the House and Senate unanimously. Saudi Arabia threatened to divest heavily from American assets if the bill is passed, which seems like something of an admission of guilt to me.
Who could be against such a bill? Barack Obama, of course. As Downtrend reported:
Democrats are starting to show cracks in their support for legislation that would allow families of 9/11 victims to sue Saudi Arabia — suggesting White House opposition to the bill may be resonating with lawmakers preparing for the first veto override vote of Barack Obama’s presidency.
But to sustain his expected veto, Obama will need to persuade 34 senators to change course and oppose the bill — a very difficult task. The legislation sailed through both chambers with no opposition. And the White House now has scant time to make its case to Capitol Hill, with a veto override vote in the Senate expected this month.
Still, there are glimmers of hope for the administration. Key lawmakers are now making it clear they remain undecided on overriding Obama’s presumed veto — a notable departure from the overwhelming show of support behind the legislation when it unanimously passed both chambers earlier this year.
California Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee, indicated this week that she was rethinking her support for the Saudi Arabia legislation amid renewed arguments against the measure from the Obama administration.
“I do have some second thoughts with respect to that,” Feinstein said. “I think it could bring on a whole host of unintended consequences.”
Should the corrupt Congress be able to uphold Obama’s veto it will be one more piece of pre-election evidence as to whose side that our stalwart “representatives’ in Washington are truly on and will only serve to provide more fuel to the fire for the anti-establishment forces looking to pull off an unprecedented peaceful revolution at the ballot box.
What do you all think? Of all the disagreements I’ve had with the President, I think this may be my greatest. How can anyone argue with the families of those who lost loved ones in 9/11?
Get the word out – share this post on Facebook and Twitter.