• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Major Garret asks obama......

MickeyW

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 10, 2015
Messages
14,012
Reaction score
3,439
Location
Southern Oregon
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
....the only intelligent question from the gallery yesterday.


And obama putz gets all snippy and assholish in his answer....and Did NOT answer the question!


Back when, Spiro Agnew really pissed off the media and rightly so..... they crucified him for his comments for weeks afterward.

Too bad the media of today is so soft on obama. Major Garret asked a decent and honest question and put obie on the spot.

And his fellow journalists are bashing him for it. What a bunch of cowards!

Once again folks, this entire deal is all about obama's legacy for history.


The safety of the world be Damned!
 
Last edited:

:roll:
Actually he answered the question in full. Direclty..

"OK? Major Garrett?

QUESTION: Thank you, Mr. President. As you well know, there are four Americans in Iran, three held on trumped-up charges that, according to your administration, one whereabouts unknown.

Can you tell the country, sir, why you are content, with all the fanfare around this deal, to leave the conscience of this nation, the strength of this nation, unaccounted for in relation to these four Americans?

And last week, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said under no circumstances should there be any relief for Iran in terms of ballistic missiles or conventional weapons. It is perceived that was a last-minute capitulation in these negotiations.

Many in the Pentagon feel you've left the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff high out to dry. Could you comment?

OBAMA: I've got to give you credit, Major, for how you craft those questions.

The notion that I am content as I celebrate with American citizens languishing in Iranian jails, Major, that's nonsense, and you should know better. I've met with the families of some of those folks. Nobody's content. And our diplomats and our teams are working diligently to try to get them out.

Now, if the question is why we did not tie the negotiations to their release, think about the logic that that creates. Suddenly, Iran realizes you know what? Maybe we can get additional concessions out of the Americans by holding these individuals. Makes it much more difficult for us to walk away if Iran somehow thinks that a nuclear deal is dependent in some fashion on the nuclear.

And by the way, if we had walked away from the nuclear deal, we'd still be pushing them just as hard to get these folks out. That's why those issues are not connected. But we are working every single day to try to get them out, and won't stop until they're out and rejoined with their families.

With respect to the chairman's testimony, to some degree, I already answered with Carol (ph). We are not taking the pressure off Iran with respect to arms and with respect to ballistic missiles.

As I just explained, not only do we keep in place for five years the arms embargo under this particular new U.N. resolution, not only do we maintain the eight years on the ballistic missiles under this particular U.N. resolution, but we have a host of other multilateral and unilateral authorities that allow us to take action where we see Iran engaged in those activities, whether it's six years from now or 10 years from now.

So we have not lost those legal authorities, and in fact, part of my pitch to the GCC countries, as well as to Prime Minister Netanyahu, is we should do a better job making sure that Iran's not engaged in sending arms to organizations like Hezbollah. And as I just indicated, that means improving our intelligence capacity and our interdiction capacity with our partners."
Full text: Obama’s news conference on the Iran nuclear deal - The Washington Post
 

We should all be praying like mad that the Obama activities are better than meets the eye, because they easily have the potential of ruining the country.
 
I thought it was a good reply. The propagandist needed putting in his place for his skewed assumptions. Typical right wing flavored propaganda. Actually, the guy didn't deserve a response but kudos to the President for giving him one anyways. Love to watch a good bitch slapping now and again. Even if it was done eloquently.
 

No it wasn't decent and honest. He very clearly insinuated that Obama was content with four Americans remaining in Iranian custody. And like so many others, thinks that American hostages and nuclear weapons are related.
 
We should all be praying like mad that the Obama activities are better than meets the eye, because they easily have the potential of ruining the country.

Oh yes, so much continual right wing fear mongering. Come to find out, Hussein had neither the inclination nor the ability to deliver a mushroom cloud over a US city. But Americans were frightened into support of that gratuitous war by its declaration, nonetheless.
 
No it wasn't decent and honest. He very clearly insinuated that Obama was content with four Americans remaining in Iranian custody. And like so many others, thinks that American hostages and nuclear weapons are related.

They are!

It's ALL related!

Only a liberal douche would think otherwise!
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…