JASTA wouldn’t make America great again
© Greg Nash

A friend of mine called me up the other day and in the course of conversation he reminded me of the time we both got sick after drinking a really fine bottle of French vodka. 

It wasn’t a normal sick either. This was one of those multi-day hangovers that had me binge watching really boring “House of Cards” episodes and eating only Ritz crackers to calm the demons that were unleashed by the vodka bottle with the French flag and large birds on it.

How could the French do this to me? I asked over and over again. I mean I never did anything to them. When I got well I decided to get back. Now I only order Freedom Fries and make Patriot Toast for breakfast.

But that was never enough.

Fortunately, I — and many other Americans like me — now have a recourse against foreign governments that would support those companies that infiltrate our supermarkets with dangerously unsafe products like vodka. 

We can thank our congress.

In choosing politics over principle, our “leaders” in Congress overturned President Barack ObamaBarack ObamaCongress needs to assert the war power against a dangerous president CNN's Don Lemon: Anyone supporting Trump ‘complicit' in racism DOJ warrant of Trump resistance site triggers alarm MORE’s veto of the 9/11 lawsuit bill last week. The bill, known as Justice Against Sponsors of Terrorism, essentially turns over a cornerstone of international law, known as “sovereign immunity.” 

On its face the bill allows citizens who lost family members in the 9/11 attacks to sue Saudi Arabia for supporting the terrorists who pulled off the attack. 

I’d love to delve into the twisted logic that led to this. But, for a moment, consider this question: If Saudi Arabia is responsible for 9/11 why did we attack the Taliban in Afghanistan, kill Osama Bin Laden and seek regime change in Iraq?

Just asking.

The override opens up a Pandora’s box of unintended consequences. Without sovereign immunity a whole host of lawsuits can make their way into international courts. 

Wait? International courts? Globalism? Isn’t that what the whole “Make America Great Again” movement is fighting against. But I digress. Hopefully you see the illogic. 

Just look at the Monday’s news for how this will directly affect our country. Reports claim that the “Arab Project in Iraq” have asked the Iraqi parliament to demand compensation for the 2003 U.S. invasion. That’s just for starters. As there doesn’t appear to be any statute tied to this brilliant piece of populist and purely political legislation, what’s to keep any country from suing us because they don’t like our foreign policy or our products.

This is dangerous legislation in dangerous times. It’s another step in the diminishment of our reputation in the world. We’re not going to “Make America Great Again” by electing Donald TrumpDonald John TrumpAssange meets U.S. congressman, vows to prove Russia did not leak him documents A history lesson on the Confederacy for President Trump GOP senator: Trump hasn't 'changed much' since campaign MORE, we’re only going to get more of this sort of legislative garbage from the ill-educated ‘Murica crowd.

Pass the Jack Daniels.  

Girardot is an award-winning former editor and columnist with the Los Angeles News Group. He is co-author of true crime tales "A Taste For Murder" and the soon-to-be released “Betrayal in Blue: The Shocking Memoir of the Scandal that Rocked the NYPD.” Follow him on Twitter @FrankGirardot


 

The views expressed by Contributors are their own and are not the views of The Hill.