easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,076
- 2,645
Obama Threatens Veto on Defense Bill over Spending, Gitmo
As the Associated Press notes, the defense policy bill “is one of the few bipartisan measures in Congress that has readily become law for more than a half-century,” but President Obama is threatening to veto this one, with Senate Democrats standing behind him.
President Obama is also concerned that the bill will make it more difficult to shut down the U.S. military facility in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Buried in the middle of a Wall Street Journal story on the matter is what could be the more significant reason for the President’s veto threat: “Obama also is upset about provisions in the bill that would make it harder for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as part of his plan to close it before he leaves office.” His failure to deliver on that promise has long been a sore point with his far-Left constituency, especially after his outreach to the Castro regime.
Obama has continuously, quietly, been emptying GITMO - releasing terrorists caught on the battle field - as part of a Presidential promise, one of a very few he ever intended to keep and one only a very few Americans (liberals) ever WANTED him to keep!
One of the biggest Obama stories consisted of how he PAID terrorists for the release of Army Deserter Bo Bergdahl and also released the 'Taliban 5', the 5 worst terrorists we were holding, falsely (LYING) declaring they were part of this deal. In reality, Obama would never be able to release the '5' like he was doing with the others because they were too 'high profile', so he needed another reason. Enter the Bergdahl swap.
Obama claimed he was negotiating with terrorists because America doesn't leave a man behind (try telling that to the 4 who died in Benghazi), but the only reason he gave a damn about Begdahl was because it gave him an excuse to release the '5'! With them gone he is now free to continue to release the rest of the prisoners in GITMO.
As the article says, his failure to keep his promise and his time in office drawing near, his FAR-LEFT base is unhappy, something Obama wants to change. So, to appease them, Obama has rallied the Liberals and intends to hold the US Military (and the defense of our nation) until he gets his way - the ability to finish emptying out GITMO by releasing known terrorists and closing the prison (at which point he will probably order the US-held military base be turned over to Cuba).
“I wish I could say it surprised me that President Obama might – for the sake of unrelated partisan games – actually contemplate vetoing a bipartisan defense bill that contains the level of funding authorization he asked for. I’m calling on him not to, especially in times like these,” said Majority Leader
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
-- Of course, McConnell is a complete Obama arse-kisser who has been giving Obama whatever he wants, so Conservatives should expect no REAL opposition from McConnell on this.
"Let’s see if the media portrays them as “obstructionists”, as they so often describe Republicans who refuse to go along with spending plans. For bonus points, the media can try explaining to the American people that a big part of the reason for this obstruction is Obama’s eagerness to close Guantanamo Bay."
As the Associated Press notes, the defense policy bill “is one of the few bipartisan measures in Congress that has readily become law for more than a half-century,” but President Obama is threatening to veto this one, with Senate Democrats standing behind him.
President Obama is also concerned that the bill will make it more difficult to shut down the U.S. military facility in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba. Buried in the middle of a Wall Street Journal story on the matter is what could be the more significant reason for the President’s veto threat: “Obama also is upset about provisions in the bill that would make it harder for him to transfer suspected terror detainees out of the military prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as part of his plan to close it before he leaves office.” His failure to deliver on that promise has long been a sore point with his far-Left constituency, especially after his outreach to the Castro regime.
Obama has continuously, quietly, been emptying GITMO - releasing terrorists caught on the battle field - as part of a Presidential promise, one of a very few he ever intended to keep and one only a very few Americans (liberals) ever WANTED him to keep!
One of the biggest Obama stories consisted of how he PAID terrorists for the release of Army Deserter Bo Bergdahl and also released the 'Taliban 5', the 5 worst terrorists we were holding, falsely (LYING) declaring they were part of this deal. In reality, Obama would never be able to release the '5' like he was doing with the others because they were too 'high profile', so he needed another reason. Enter the Bergdahl swap.
Obama claimed he was negotiating with terrorists because America doesn't leave a man behind (try telling that to the 4 who died in Benghazi), but the only reason he gave a damn about Begdahl was because it gave him an excuse to release the '5'! With them gone he is now free to continue to release the rest of the prisoners in GITMO.
As the article says, his failure to keep his promise and his time in office drawing near, his FAR-LEFT base is unhappy, something Obama wants to change. So, to appease them, Obama has rallied the Liberals and intends to hold the US Military (and the defense of our nation) until he gets his way - the ability to finish emptying out GITMO by releasing known terrorists and closing the prison (at which point he will probably order the US-held military base be turned over to Cuba).
“I wish I could say it surprised me that President Obama might – for the sake of unrelated partisan games – actually contemplate vetoing a bipartisan defense bill that contains the level of funding authorization he asked for. I’m calling on him not to, especially in times like these,” said Majority Leader
Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY).
-- Of course, McConnell is a complete Obama arse-kisser who has been giving Obama whatever he wants, so Conservatives should expect no REAL opposition from McConnell on this.
"Let’s see if the media portrays them as “obstructionists”, as they so often describe Republicans who refuse to go along with spending plans. For bonus points, the media can try explaining to the American people that a big part of the reason for this obstruction is Obama’s eagerness to close Guantanamo Bay."
