7
| 116 views | www.politico.com
President Barack Obama does not plan to veto a defense bill seeking to direct more terrorism suspects into military custody, the White House signaled Wednesday afternoon. White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said in a statement that changes lawmakers made to the legislation to accomodate White House concerns were sufficient to avoid a veto. The statement was issued just before the House was expected to vote on the conferenced House-Senate version of the National Defense Authorization Act.
Basically he got what he wanted, indefinite detention of US citizens.
"The National Defense Authorization Act was facing the threat of a presidential veto after the White House complained that it restricted the administration's ability to fight terrorism and raised "serious and unsettled legal questions." The conference committee working out the differences between the Senate and House versions of the bill added and amended several provisions in an attempt to produce legislation that would pass muster with President Barack Obama, who appealed personally for fixes."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/13/indefinite-military-detention-defense-bill-citizens_n_1146181.html?1323804429
No, he had the power to veto, and because the legislative language was not necessary for a veto, thus he had no reason to.
You seem to think your president is this vigilante that can just do whatever the fuck he wants. There are legislative processes that even he cannot deny, you do realize that, right? Then there's the small but important subject that congress could have veto'd anything obama veto'd, so not only would have there been a division in party lines over obama not vetoing, it would've caused ridiculous poltical drama that would have most certainly done damage to assemblies and party relationships. Not only that, the people would have seen just how much of a tool the president is to congress. You've got to realize congress has your president by the balls in an iron whinch. Your president is NOT the person running your country.
Do you even think before you post anything? Or do you just read a huffington post entry and zombie-paste?
No, he had the power to veto, and because the legislative language was not necessary for a veto, thus he had no reason to.
You seem to think your president is this vigilante that can just do whatever the fuck he wants. There are legislative processes that even he cannot deny, you do realize that, right? Then there's the small but important subject that congress could have veto'd anything obama veto'd, so not only would have there been a division in party lines over obama not vetoing, it would've caused ridiculous poltical drama that would have most certainly done damage to assemblies and party relationships.
Do you even think before you post anything? Or do you just read a huffington post entry and zombie-paste?
Yeah because indefinite detention is great...
No, he had the power to veto, and because the legislative language was not necessary for a veto, thus he had no reason to.
You seem to think your president is this vigilante that can just do whatever the fuck he wants. There are legislative processes that even he cannot deny, you do realize that, right? Then there's the small but important subject that congress could have veto'd anything obama veto'd, so not only would have there been a division in party lines over obama not vetoing, it would've caused ridiculous poltical drama that would have most certainly done damage to assemblies and party relationships.
Do you even think before you post anything? Or do you just read a huffington post entry and zombie-paste?
Yeah because indefinite detention is great...
If the language is legal there is nothing you have to say about it. And just so you know i did edit my post to include the facts that Obama could have done nothing anyways as Congress, the people who intially okay'd the drafts, would've veto'd him and made obama look like a fucking retard, as they would to any president that would try to fight congress.
Facepalm yourself, spot.