• tegs_terry@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    5 months ago

    Regarding Palestine, not a single president would or could have done any different. You made your bed there, now you have to give it money. It’s the same with us here in the UK.

    • DAMunzy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The president could choose to not sign the bill sent by Congress for further funding. Congress might pass it with veto proof majority but it would still be making a statement. So, not exactly true

    • Shyfer@ttrpg.network
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      5 months ago

      The President has plenty of power here. They can halt shipments like he did one time, which proved he could try that. He could not veto ceasefire deals in the UN. He could assign a better secretary of state that doesn’t run interference for Israel. He could not jump the gun making pro Israel statements or supporting suppressing the protests, than staying otherwise silent when they do things wrong like even kill American aide workers or Palestinian journalists. He could veto laws that get to him. He could rile up the populace to contact their local Congressmen and publish Israel’s wrongdoings in press conferences, while he’s only been doing that for pro-Palestinian “wrong-doing”, often getting the facts wrong in the process. He could threaten Israel harder to let aid through the ground. Even if some of these fail, it shows who he supports at least.