Bush to Veto Pentagon Funds Over Iraq Provision

[ProSense]

Bush to Veto Pentagon Funds Over Iraq Provision

By DAVID STOUT
Published: December 28, 2007

WASHINGTON — President Bush will veto a huge Defense Department bill because of concerns by the Iraqi government that Iraqi assets in American banks could be vulnerable to claims from victims of Saddam Hussein, the Texas White House said Friday.

“The new democratic government of Iraq, during this crucial period of reconstruction, cannot afford to have its funds entangled in such lawsuits in the United States,” Scott Stanzel, a White House spokesman, said in a statement.

Mr. Stanzel said the president objects to a section in the National Defense Authorization Act that would permit plaintiffs’ lawyers to freeze Iraqi funds and expose Iraq to “massive liability in lawsuits concerning the misdeeds of the Saddam Hussein regime.” At least one pending lawsuit reportedly seeks $1 billion or more.

<...>

“Despite the administration’s earlier support for the Department of Defense authorization bill, it appears that President Bush plans to veto this legislation, which is crucial to our armed forces and their families,” the Democratic leaders said in a joint statement.

The bill is important to members of the military and their families, since it provides for a 3.5 percent pay raise for the troops and contains measures intended to improve the much-criticized health-care system for veterans.

more

It's okay for Blackwater, Halliburton and the corrupt Iraqi government to steal funds!

Why is Bush threatening to veto the bill: Democratic provisions.

[BOSSHOG]

1. Okay so now we can sit back

and listen to limbaugh-hannity and the rest of the brilliant minds on right wing airwaves savage bush for not supporting the troops. Any minute now, its sure to come. Just listen. Maybe toby keith can write a song about this veto.

[Bitwit1234]

2. Toby Keith is an opportunist he now says he is for the other side.

Since he thinks Democrats will win he has switched sides to sell some new records. He is a piece of you know what. I think most of the CW group now are. They are a disgrace to the real country singers.

[ProSense]

3. Hurry Up And Veto

Bush to veto funding for the troops

Posted December 28th, 2007 at 2:45 pm

The president went nearly six years in office without vetoing a single bill, but has now had seven — including funding the war in Iraq, stem-cell research (twice), and healthcare for low-income kids (twice). In each instance, lawmakers were well aware of the White House’s opposition, but passed the bills anyway, hoping Bush would either change his mind or they could override the veto.

Which is what makes today’s news so odd.

<...>

This is just bizarre. If the provision of the bill was so offensive, why didn’t the White House, which was aware of the legislation’s progress as it passed, say something sooner?

more

Hurry Up And Veto

by digby

Hey, remember this?

President Bush on Thursday called on Congress to approve billions of dollars in additional funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan before lawmakers leave for their Christmas break.

He said the Army will have to shut down bases and start furloughing between 100,000 and 200,000 civilian workers by mid-February if Congress does not clear the funds. "Pentagon officials have warned Congress that the continued delay in funding our troops will soon begin to have a damaging impact on the operations of this department," Bush said Thursday. "The warning has been laid out for the United States Congress to hear."

Naturally, the congress got all askeered and scurried to pass the Bush approved legislation so that they wouldn't be accused of not supporting the troops.

Today, the Bush administration says it's going to veto it. Why? Because the Iraqi government says one section could expose Iraqi assets in U.S. banks to requests for compensation for American victims of Saddam Hussein.(Oh no!)

The problem is that Bush never objected to the provision before he ordered the congress to pass this vital and necessary emergency legislation that couldn't even wait until after Christmas or all hell would break loose (which they dutifully did.) Now, without even blinking an eye, he's going to veto it.

It sure is a good thing that Bush is held to absolutely no standards because otherwise he and his fellow fearmongering Republicans might just start to look like idiots over things like this. But they have nothing to worry about. Only the Democratic leaders in congress are still foolish enough to believe anything they say.

Update: This is bizarre. Steve Benen flags this AP report which says that Iraqi funds are already exempted from such lawsuits. What's going on?

As the AP noted, "sovereign nations are normally immune from lawsuits in U.S. courts. An exception is made for state sponsors of terrorism and Iraq was designated such a nation in 1990. After the 2003 invasion of Iraq, however, Congress passed a law and Bush issued a decree stating that Iraq was exempt from such lawsuits."

Bush's excuse is BS. He's vetoing it because it includes too many Democratic provisions.

[wicket]

4. My head is spinning

Thanks for all of the info. He's such a shitbag.

[MH1]

6. Benen's link is bad, or has been updated - "AP noted" the OPPOSITE.

Whatever you think of the provision, what it says at that AP link is (now?) the following:

The disputed section of the bill would reshape Iraq's immunity to lawsuits, exposing the new government to litigation in U.S. courts stemming from treatment of Americans in Iraq during Saddam's reign. Even cases that had once been rejected could be refiled.

But it also says,

When adjourning before Christmas, the House instructed the House clerk to accept any communications — such as veto messages_ from the White House during the monthlong break.

So, if Bush does anything other than signing the bill or returning a formal veto message to the House clerk, he is playing games and has another goal in mind besides just fixing a provision.

[ProSense]

8. Agree!

If it was simply that provision, he'd have objected to it before hand.

[bigtree]

5. that would work

do it, already

[KharmaTrain]

7. The Deciderererer Needs To Stay "Relevant"

I expect Reid to cave like a house of cards on this one, but if this veto is all but baiting for a fight and one that Democrats should stick up his ass. He's about to veto a pay increase for troops and more funding for veterans. And he's rolling the dice expecting the corporate media to do it's usual "weak on defense Democrat" mantra and hope to get carte blanche for his war for profit.

boooshie wants his war with no strings attached...no questions asked. He doesn't care about the military...even his own corrupt party. This is all about fleecing the treasury for as long as possible and playing politics with the military. Shameless.