State Department Confirms Obama Lied and the $400 Million Iran Payment was a Ransom for American Hostage Release
WHAT A SHOCK, OBAMA LIED ABOUT THE $400 MILLION RANSOM TO IRAN JUST LIKE HE LIED ABOUT OBAMACARE …
As reported at The Politico, State Department spokesman John Kirby all but admitted that the $400 million paid to Iran was a conditional ransom for the release of American hostages. President Barack Obama had previously lectured us that this was not a ransom; however, State Department spokesman Kirby addressed questions about a Wall Street Journal report by explaining that the U.S. held onto the $400 million cash payment until American prisoners were on a plane and safely away from Iran to “retain maximum leverage.” A note to the lying and deceitful Obama administration, what Kirby just defined was a ransom.Obama claimed that he would have the most transparent administration, EVER! It has been nothing short of Nixonian. But what would you expect from a president who lied about Obamacare, lied that you could keep your insurance and your doctor, lied that Obamacare we will reduce your insurance premiums by $2,500, per family per year, lied that he cannot pass amnesty through executive action… I am not a dictator, lied about the strength of ISIS and on and on and on.
Republicans are claiming vindication after the State Department confirmed on Thursday that the United States conditioned the release of a $400 million cash payment to Iran on the departure of American prisoners from Tehran.
At a Thursday news briefing, State Department spokesman John Kirby addressed questions about a Wall Street Journal report by explaining that the U.S. held onto the $400 million cash payment until American prisoners were on a plane and safely away from Iran to “retain maximum leverage.” Kirby said the arrangement did not in any way constitute a ransom payment, as President Barack Obama’s Republican critics have alleged.
For those that are definition challenged:
“We deliberately leveraged that moment to finalize these outstanding issues nearly simultaneously,” he said. “With concerns that Iran may renege on the prisoner release, given unnecessary delays regarding persons in Iran who could not be located as well as, to be quite honest, mutual mistrust between Iran and the United States, we of course sought to retain maximum leverage until after American citizens were released. That was our top priority.”
Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump seized on the announcement during a campaign rally in Charlotte, North Carolina, saying it proved that Obama had “lied” about the payment and said it had “put every American traveling overseas, including our military personnel, at greater risk of being kidnapped.”
“He denied it was for the hostages, but it was,” Trump said. “He said we don’t pay ransom, but he did. He lied about the hostages — openly and blatantly — just like he lied about Obamacare.”
Does the United States of America really need four more years of a continuation of the LIES!!! Hillary Clinton is already not trustworthy and has repeatedly lied to the American people and she isn’t even president yet. Stop her now, don’t elect another LIAR to office. When are the American people going to say enough is enough?
WHAT, YOU THOUGHT IRAN RELEASED THE AMERICAN HOSTAGES BECAUSE THEY RESPECTED AND FEARED OBAMA?
The WSJ is reporting that the Obama administration sent $400 million to Iran as Americans were freed from the terror state. However, Barack Hussein Obama claims that there was no quid pro quo, and it was not a ransom as critics have charged. Oh, of course it was just a coincidence. REALLY? And if you believe that one I have a private email server to sell you from Hillary Clinton’s bathroom that did not contain top secret emails. Interestingly enough, the Iranian press reports have quoted senior Iranian defense officials describing the cash as a ransom payment. How sad has it become in America when one believes the Iranian media over the President of the United States?
The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.
Wooden pallets stacked with euros, Swiss francs and other currencies were flown into Iran on an unmarked cargo plane, according to these officials. The U.S. procured the money from the central banks of the Netherlands and Switzerland, they said.
The money represented the first installment of a $1.7 billion settlement the Obama administration reached with Iran to resolve a decades-old dispute over a failed arms deal signed just before the 1979 fall of Iran’s last monarch, Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi.
Senior U.S. officials denied any link between the payment and the prisoner exchange. They say the way the various strands came together simultaneously was coincidental, not the result of any quid pro quo.
“As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim…were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home,” State Department spokesman John Kirby said. “Not only were the two negotiations separate, they were conducted by different teams on each side, including, in the case of The Hague claims, by technical experts involved in these negotiations for many years.”
But U.S. officials also acknowledge that Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange said they wanted the cash to show they had gained something tangible.
Powerline points out some of the specifics of the Obama ransom for hostages deal with Iran.
(1) It was indeed a ransom payment – negotiators originally established a formula of people for people: American nationals held by Iran for Iranian nationals held by America. But then the Iranians started demanding billions of dollars as well. Iranian officials later bragged they coerced the ransom out of U.S. diplomates —
The U.S. and Iran entered into secret negotiations to secure the release of Americans imprisoned in Iran in November 2014… The discussions… initially focused solely on a formula whereby Iran would swap the Americans detained in Tehran for Iranian nationals held in U.S. jails… But around Christmas, the discussions dovetailed with… the old arms deal. The Iranians were demanding the return of $400 million… They also wanted billions of dollars as interest accrued since then… a report by an Iranian news site close to the Revolutionary Guard, the Tasnim agency, said the cash arrived in Tehran’s Mehrabad airport on the same day the Americans departed. Revolutionary Guard commanders boasted at the time that the Americans had succumbed to Iranian pressure. “Taking this much money back was in return for the release of the American spies,” said Gen. Mohammad Reza Naghdi, commander of the Guard’s Basij militia, on state media.
(2) The administration hid the details from Congress – Lawmakers have been pressing the administration for six months to provide more details about how and where the money went, among other things because Iran has been transferring money for military purposes. They’ve made little progress —
The Obama administration has refused to disclose how it paid any of the $1.7 billion, despite congressional queries, outside of saying that it wasn’t paid in dollars. Lawmakers have expressed concern that the cash would be used by Iran to fund regional allies, including the Assad regime in Syria and the Lebanese militia Hezbollah, which the U.S. designates as a terrorist organization. The U.S. and United Nations believe Tehran is subsidizing the Assad regime’s war in Syria through cash and energy shipments. Iran has acknowledged providing both financial and military aid to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and deploying Iranian soldiers there.
Obama’s White House Gets Higher Wall, But a Wall Between Mexico and USA for Border Security is A Bad Thing
WALLS AND SECURITY FOR ME, NOT FOR THEE …
It is the ultimate show of hypocrisy, The White House, the house that Barack Obama lives in; however, thankfully not for long, will be getting a higher fence for better security and to keep people out. The new 11-foot-7-inch barrier surrounding the White House facility will replace the 7 foot one to prevent individuals from jumping or scaling the current one. OH THE IRONY. So from the president who says fences and walls are not the answer comes the following that they are the answer when it comes to White House security. Hmm, this reeks of do as I say, not as I do and that Obama and the house he lives in is more important than the country we live in.
In a commencement speech at Rutgers, see the VIDEO below, Obama makes the point that walls are bad and evil. REALLY? Of course the fool made a reference to the Iron Curtain, and any literate person knows that it was a wall to keep people in, not out. Maybe Obama should take his own advice in that ignorance is not a virtue. Obama said the following: “Building walls won’t do that. It won’t boost our economy, and it won’t enhance our security either. [...] Suggesting that we can build an endless wall along our borders, and blame our challenges on immigrants — that doesn’t just run counter to our history as the world’s melting pot; it contradicts the evidence that our growth and our innovation and our dynamism has always been spurred by our ability to attract strivers from every corner of the globe. That’s how we became America. Why would we want to stop it now?”
But higher and more secure walls are perfectly okay for Obama. And with regards to ignorance not being a virtue Mr. President, the United States of America is a governed by rule of laws. We have never allowed all immigrants into this country. They have always had to pass a standard. And they certainly could not come into the country illegally. Sorry, but that was not how we became America. Also, since you brought up the “melting pot”. What melting pot are you referring to when in today’s society I see Mexican flags being flown at rallies and a Muslims in the USA want Sharia law? The melting pot meant assimilation into the American way of culture and society, not keeping your own.
The federal Commission of Fine Arts has given its preliminary approval for a taller White House fence to better protect the presidential mansion after a rash of fence-hopping incidents.
The commission on Thursday voted to approve an 11-foot-7-inch barrier surrounding the White House facility after a presentation by the U.S. Secret Service and the National Park Service. The new fence would replace the current 7-foot barrier.
The new fence “incorporates anti-climb and intrusion detection technology, while respecting the historical significance and visitor experience at the White House and President’s Park,” the Secret Service and Park Service said in a joint statement.
The commission, an independent federal agency charged with reviewing design and aesthetics at federal facilities, among other things, will still need to sign off on the final design, which will be refined and finalized in the coming months. The Secret Service and the Park Service hope to begin construction on the new White House fence by 2018.
A set of temporary barriers have been placed around the White House since last year to keep visitors away from the current White House fence after a number of security incidents showed that it could be easily scaled. The temporary barricades prevent tourists and visitors from approaching the fence itself.
How come Obama’s “OPEN BORDERS” philosophy is not implemented at his own house? Next up, Barack and Michelle will be telling us to eat cake.
ONE MORE BIG LIE AND COVERUP FROM OBAMA AND CLINTON …
Why would anyone vote for Hillary Clinton when what Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are doing in the cover up of the private Email server. Judge Jeanine connects the dots, why is Hillary so confident she is in the clear? How could some one so corrupt ever run for president, let alone win it. So why is she so confident, because Barack Obama was just as complicit in her dealings.
The Fix is in …
NOTE TO THE CORRUPT IRS, 426 IS MUCH LARGER THAT 298 …
As reported at the Washington Times, the IRS has finally released a list of the Conservative Tea Party groups that were illegally and purposely targeted for so-called “extra scrutiny.” The IRS, that acted like a political hit-man for the Obama administration, released names of 426 organizations. However, there was another 40 organizations that were not released as part of the list because they were not part of the class-action suit. This is a far cry from the number of 298 groups that the IRS identified back in 2013. Imagine that, the IRS lied. So in the run up to the 2012 presidential elections. the IRS willfully and purposely targeted over 400 conservative groups in an effort to affect an election. Mission accomplished. Not only should individuals have been fired, IRS officials should be in prison.
More than three years after it admitted to targeting tea party groups for intrusive scrutiny, the IRS has finally released a near-complete list of the organizations it snagged in a political dragnet.
The tax agency filed the list last month as part of a court case after a series of federal judges, fed up with what they said was the agency’s stonewalling, ordered it to get a move on. The case is a class-action lawsuit, so the list of names is critical to knowing the scope of those who would have a claim against the IRS.
But even as it answers some questions, the list raises others, including exactly when the targeting stopped, and how broadly the tax agency drew its net when it went after nonprofits for unusual scrutiny.
The government released names of 426 organizations. Another 40 were not released as part of the list because they had already opted out of being part of the class-action suit.
That total is much higher than the 298 groups the IRS‘ inspector general identified back in May 2013, when investigators first revealed the agency had been subjecting applications to long — potentially illegal — delays, and forcing them to answer intrusive questions about their activities. Tea party and conservative groups said they was the target of unusually heavy investigations and longer delays.
As the Gateway Pundits opines, “Can you even imagine the outcry if George Bush or any other Republican had done this to liberal groups like Move On or Code Pink?” Maybe if The Donald is elected he should do just that to see what happens.