Veto #8

The President shocked a lot of people today by announcing plans for a "pocket veto" of the latest, massive defense authorization bill (different from the $555 billion spending bill he signed earlier in the week). Why? Because of "a provision deep in the defense authorization bill, which would essentially allow victims of state sponsored terrorism to sue those countries for damages." The Bush administration says the provision "could make Iraqi assets held in U.S. banks vulnerable to lawsuits," thereby hampering Iraqi reconstruction efforts.

As Steve Benen notes, though, this explanation doesn't make sense. Moreover, congressional leaders say Bush raised no objections as the bill was debated and passed. The refusal to veto it directly is also very unusual. I'm sure our fine national journalists will demand a more full and detailed explanation from The Decider immediately.

[PS- Just to clarify the rules of civilized political debate in modern America, when Bush is chastising the Democrats for not caving/passing these bills quickly enough, it is important for him to remind everyone that failure to do so will help evildoers murder the troops and your family. But when Bush or Republicans have objections, we have nothing but time. Oh, and it's still Congress' fault. Natch.

UPDATE: Are the circumstances of the veto unconstitutional? Someone check on that.]