I donât understand why this is an issue. We had previously agreed to make the payment, so it was due to Iran. We said, âYouâre not getting the money unless we get our soldiersâ and Iran bent. It was not a payment for the return of our people, but a holdout until we got what we wanted.
We gave up nothing we hadnât already committed, and this is an issue?
Because Republicans.
And because Democrats canât explain spit.
These critics are so full of shit itâs coming out their ears and they need to be called on it.
Refusing to return to Iran $400M of their money weâve have owed to them for 47 years without a dimes worth of interest until they release prisoners sounds like a perfect deal. We had zero claim to this money and they have every right to interest which they would get in any court.
Had we returned the money and not gotten the release of prisoners, Republicans would be screaming from every rooftop at what a fool and doop we have for a president.
These jerks need to be called out.
âIf it quacks like a duck, itâs a duck. If a cash payment is contingent on a hostage release, itâs a ransom. The truth matters and the president owes the American people an explanation,â Sen. Ben Sasse, R-Neb., said.
Senator Sasse - considering that we have had their money longer than they have had our people, if this was a ransom, then they were turning over our people in exchange for the money weâve been holding hostage since the birth of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
The correct messaging is: We wouldnât give them their money unless they released the Americans they were holding. It isnât ransom unless you pay someone with your money.
This is exactly the kind of great deal for us that Trump always says he would make. Reagan sold weapons to Iran to get hostages. We held their money hostage until we got our people back. If Reagan had done that (and he could have since this money goes back to 1979) the GOP would have declared him a hero.
If you would have to pay the money anyway itâs NOT a ransom. It really is that simple.
The only âransomâ would be the change in the timing of the payment.
Also, this is one of those âno-winâ situations for Obama. If he made the payment before the hostages were released, the GOP would be screaming âHOW COULD OBAMA POSSIBLY GIVE $400M TO A REGIME HOLDING US HOSTAGES?!?!â
As with most GOP anti-Obama, anti-Clinton memes, this is a big fat nothingburger.
Plus as I read/hear it was supposedly their money from old accounts that had gotten locked down by us years ago. If weâd been figuratively holding a gun to their head to release the prisoners, this just seem like an additional gun.
I can understand the GOPâs confusion. Someone like Trump would have given the Iranians the money without securing the return of the prisoners.
Yep. No âsupposedlyâ about it. This money was money they paid us under the Shah to purchase weapons - like the F-14s we were supplying them with at the time - that werenât delivered before the Islamic Revolution. So we never delivered the product they paid for. This wasnât a ransom, it was a refund.
If Cheney/Bush had done it they would have an airport named after them.
And hereâs the real grind, if they hadnât held back the money and the release was delayed or something happened to the prisoners, the right wing would be bitching and moaning that Obama should have used that money as leverage or even ransom. Itâs a no win situation no matter what the hell Obama does with the right wing propaganda machine motherfuckers! Have I mentioned I hate their constant goddamned bullshit lately! I swear itâs anti-American at least and on the verge of treasonous in my tiny mind.