first the literal, now the metaphorical bow. [rquoter]Justice Department Stands Up for Saudis in 9/11 Lawsuit Less than a week before President Obama's visit to Saudi Arabia, the Justice Department has filed a brief before the Supreme Court urging justices not to hear a lawsuit brought by families of some of the 9/11 victims against the Saudi royal family. The lawsuit, which was formally filed by the families' insurance companies, contends that members of the House of Saud helped finance Al Qaeda preceding the 9/11 attacks. A district court threw out the lawsuit, finding that the Saudi royal family has legal protection under the Foreign Sovereign Immunity Act. The Justice Department says their filing had nothing to do with the President's upcoming visit, and was just "coincidental." (A spokesperson explains that the brief had to be filed soon because the Supreme Court is deciding whether to hear the case before their June recess.) Kristen Breitweiser, a leader of the families, tells the Times, "I find this reprehensible. One would have hoped that the Obama administration would have taken a different stance than the Bush administration, and you wonder what message this sends to victims of terrorism around the world."[/rquoter]
I don't understand what any of this has to do with Obama. 1. Families sue Saudi's. 2. DOJ recommends case not be heard. 3. Obama visits Saudi Arabia = Obama fault. 1. I'm constipated and call the doctor. 2. Doctor says there is nothing he can do. 3. Obama visits Houston. = Obama's fault.
that's a good question, I'd like basso to explain exactly what the problem is with a DOJ filing an amicus brief in a tort case regarding the application of 28 U.S.C. 1606 et seq. - he appears to have a lot of opinions on legal matters as of late, so I am very interested to hear his take on this issue and to explain his thesis with respect to how this "metaphor" ically something...I assume that either he has one or he's just being the same asswipe he always is.
