Obama stole money from victims of Iranian terror and gave it to Iranian terrorists

[AliHajiSheik]

I live in the present. I don't care about this issue. Nobody does, but you Trump devotees.

I did reply to you because as usual, you had a meltdown when he correctly pointed out that you Trump fans are constantly trying to deflect to Obama. You're alone. Time to move on.

Trump isn't even mentioned on this thread, it is people like you who introduce him on every thread. The repetition is boring, and you are repetitive. Go bait someone else.

 

[tres borrachos]

Trump isn't even mentioned on this thread, it is people like you who introduce him on every thread. The repetition is boring, and you are repetitive. Go bait someone else.

He's the President, and I know you know that. You think about it constantly.

 

[Felis Leo]

My bad. People who can't let go of Obama and move into the present care. Like you.

Have him arrested if he hurt your family so much. Let the rest of us move on to the present.

So you presume that the reason I dislike Obama's actions is not because I thought the policy decision was a terrible one, but that it is solely because I have an animus against Obama? Well, let me disabuse you of that notion. I don't care which President gives a literal ton of cash to the Iranian Revolutionary Regime. Anyone who does so has made a terrible policy decision.

I actually prefer discussing the effects of policy decisions, rather than attacking the character of my interlocutors and trying to needle them. If you honestly believe that we should not discuss the actions of past presidents (including those of immediately preceding administrations) and how those past policies led to present situations for good or ill, fine. I won't hold myself to such strange standards.

EDIT: And out of curiosity Tres Borrachos, back when you were a Republican did you use that same argument when Obama took charge after the financial crisis? Were you one of those Republicans going around saying "Bush is no longer president. Obama is. Who cares?" when people criticized the decisions of the Bush administration and you wanted to allay blame and responsibility?

 

[tres borrachos]

So you presume that the reason I dislike Obama's actions is not because I thought the policy decision was a terrible one, but that it is solely because I have an animus against Obama? Well, let me disabuse you of that notion. I don't care which President gives a literal ton of cash to the Iranian Revolutionary Regime. Anyone who does so has made a terrible policy decision.

I actually prefer discussing the effects of policy decisions, rather than attacking the character of my interlocutors and trying to needle them. If you honestly believe that we should not discuss the actions of past presidents (including those of immediately preceding administrations) and how those past policies led to present situations for good or ill, fine. I won't hold myself to such strange standards.

EDIT: And out of curiosity Tres Borrachos, back when you were a Republican did you use that same argument when Obama took charge after the financial crisis? Were you one of those Republicans going around saying "Bush is no longer president. Obama is. Who cares?" when people criticized the decisions of the Bush administration and you wanted to allay blame and responsibility?

No, I don't presume anything. You posted about how it hurt your family. So sue him or arrest him and let the rest of us move on.

Yes, I was one of those people who told the idiots who brought up Bush to move on. I tell the idiots who bring up Obama the same thing. You can check my posts from 2012-2016 for yourself.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

I actually do care, tres borrachos. And before you sneer, I am not a Trump devotee. I care because my mother's family and friends were victims of the terror regime that Obama gave a literal ton of cash to. I realize that you don't care, and perhaps no one important to you cares. But do not say that nobody cares. It is plainly untrue. Obama helped to strengthen the Iranian Revolutionary regime. We are now living with that result.

I'm sorry for your losses, life or otherwise. Unlike others, I can segregate my thoughts between one topic and the next. I don't want any President to violate the law and I accepted that the original poster has specific thoughts on the subject of this particular transaction during the Obama administration. I myself am most offended by the need to send cash in foreign currency to Iran because it was illegal to send US funds to Iran. I know these funds were in dispute and could have been subject to claims from victims and families who were impacted by the Islamic Republic.

As our currency says: "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private". I can't agree with the title of the thread, as I don't believe the money was stolen, but I believe an argument could be made that aid was given in the laundering.

 

[AliHajiSheik]

He's the President, and I know you know that. You think about it constantly.

Boring bait rejected.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

Give what a rest, discussing the powers of the president to do some things that people disagree with? provide a source? How about this:

Supreme Court Rules Frozen Iranian Money Be Turned Over To U.S. Terrorism Victims, NPR, April 20,2016.

Oops. Sorry, American victims of Iranian terror. Obama already stole the money and gave it to the terrorists in spite of the federal law forbidding that, and which the Supreme Court just upheld.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...an-money-be-turned-over-to-u-s-terror-victims

Good thing for the commandeering in chief the fact that he stole the money and gave it to the Iranians despite federal law is that the Obama administration kept the illegal transaction secret for 6 months, giving him cover to let the crime be minimized in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court upheld the very law he unilaterally illegally violated.

You are seriously conflating different money issues with money belonging to Iran, and interest paid on that money.

The original $400M was money that Iran paid to the U.S. for weapons and war ships prior to the American hostages taking in 1979. Because of the hostage situation our government froze those assets and had held them since then. The $1.3B paid to the Iranian government (not terrorists as you assert, but certainly involved in supporting terrorist acts) was based on estimated interest that would have accrued had the money been properly placed in an interest bearing account as required by law.

There is still a great deal of Iran’s money being held by the U.S. government itself and jointly with allied countries.

As it can be confusing knowing what money belongs where and how that money can be disposed of, it would be prudent of you to do the appropriate research before posting in order to avoid gaffs like yours in starting this thread.

 

[Myview]

Give what a rest, discussing the powers of the president to do some things that people disagree with? provide a source? How about this:

Supreme Court Rules Frozen Iranian Money Be Turned Over To U.S. Terrorism Victims, NPR, April 20,2016.

Oops. Sorry, American victims of Iranian terror. Obama already stole the money and gave it to the terrorists in spite of the federal law forbidding that, and which the Supreme Court just upheld.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo...an-money-be-turned-over-to-u-s-terror-victims

Good thing for the commandeering in chief the fact that he stole the money and gave it to the Iranians despite federal law is that the Obama administration kept the illegal transaction secret for 6 months, giving him cover to let the crime be minimized in spite of the fact that the Supreme Court upheld the very law he unilaterally illegally violated.

If you disagree with the Iran nuclear deal fine disagree. Five detained Americans came home. It lifted sanctions in Jan 2016 which freed up frozen Iranian money. The Iran nuclear deal was between Iran and the 5 permanent members of the UN security council plus the European Union. Only the US pulled out of it. Most of the money was in frozen accounts around the world in oil payments to Iran. Some in the US was frozen for payments made by Iran for military equipment paid for but never delivered by the Us after the 1979 Revolution in Iran. Yes Congress passed a law after the fact and the SCOTUS up held it. Read John Roberts dissenting opinion. The point is that the political mumbo jumbo law was passed after the Iran Nuclear deal was a done deal. You can disagree with the deal all you want. It avoided war and Iran was complying with all considerations set by the deal until Trump stepped in. Obama happened to be President when the deal was done. Five permanent members of the Security Council and the European Union agreed to the deal. Conservatives yell about Obama thief, commandeer in chief all the time but seldom provide any context. Again, why do Conservatives continue to bring up Obama? HE IS NOT THE PRESIDENT, TRUMP IS.

 

[independentusa]

American victims of worldwide terror and their survivors have been fighting Iran to pay damages for the crimes they committed against Americans over the last 3 decades. Congress passed a law in 2012 authorizing the US to hold Iranian assets in escrow until the many lawsuits could be settled. Obama signed that law. There were 1,300 American victims seeking relief from Iran who filed suit to claim damages according to that law. Obama signed that law.

However, in January 2016 Obama decided on his own to take that money and give it back to Iran, the same day the hostages were released. 19 days later he sent $1.3 billion more to Iranian terrorists, supposedly because he thought the US owed them that money. The US was holding that money to settle American lawsuits. That was the law. Obama in essence said to hell with the law and to hell with the victims I am going to take it upon myself to give these terrorists the money under the pretense that I think it is still their money.

The SCOTUS ruled in April. 2016, that the money did belong to the American victims, not to Iran. Whew, that was close. If Obama had waited just two more months he would not have been allowed to break the law that SCOTUS upheld just a matter of weeks after he violated the law.

Obama screwed American heroes at Ft. Hood in favor of the Muslim terrorists he refused to call a terrorist. Obama screwed the victims of iranian terrorism by stealing their money before the lawsuits could be settled in accordance with ongoing legal proceedings. He screwed the families of those killed in Benghazi by lying about the cause of the terror attack. He screwed a good cops by calling him stupid for arresting a drunk and disorderly black man who was fighting cops. And many other such embarrassing and despicable things.

And democrat dupes think Trump is bad.

This is one of the dumbest op's on the board. That money belonged to Iran and not to us to spend in any way. How would you feel if another country took our money kept in another country and gave it away to its citizens for whatever slights they think they might have. You would be yelling for us to go to war with that country. Again, that money was not ours to do whatever we wanted to do with it. It belonged to Iran and the people who think they have claims will have to go to Iran to get them paid, just as people who tink they have claims against our country have to eventually come to our courts.

 

[Acadia]

So you presume that the reason I dislike Obama's actions is not because I thought the policy decision was a terrible one, but that it is solely because I have an animus against Obama? Well, let me disabuse you of that notion. I don't care which President gives a literal ton of cash to the Iranian Revolutionary Regime. Anyone who does so has made a terrible policy decision.

I actually prefer discussing the effects of policy decisions, rather than attacking the character of my interlocutors and trying to needle them. If you honestly believe that we should not discuss the actions of past presidents (including those of immediately preceding administrations) and how those past policies led to present situations for good or ill, fine. I won't hold myself to such strange standards.

EDIT: And out of curiosity Tres Borrachos, back when you were a Republican did you use that same argument when Obama took charge after the financial crisis? Were you one of those Republicans going around saying "Bush is no longer president. Obama is. Who cares?" when people criticized the decisions of the Bush administration and you wanted to allay blame and responsibility?

How could they when Obama blamed Bush for 6/8 years? But I digress. I'm sorry that your family has been affected by terrorism.

 

[marke]

The difference? Look at the titles and seriousness of the entities lined up against trump. Then look at the titles and seriousness of the entities that were lined up against Obama for these supposed Obama misdeeds. Seriously lets all take at least some comfort in knowing that rational thought in the end usually prevails. Why do rank and file Conservatives constantly bring up Obama or Clinton thinking that some how defends Trump? I hope we all live long enough to see the unfolding of history. I realize that there are some who won't accept even that. They are probably the same people who believe numerous other conspiracy theories.

Lefties have an agenda. They are out to help themselves in the name of helping the people they are hurting. In other words, lefties lie. They falsely accuse Trump of hurting people while at the same time they brutalize Americans as they march forward towards their goal of effecting a democrat Bolshevik coup.

Obama took away the money that belonged to the victims of Iranian terrorism and gave it to the American enemies responsible for murdering countless Americans and other innocent people around the world. That is not something to be lightly overlooked. If lefties want to purge the government of crooks and thugs then let them start recognizing the crimes committed by those crooks and thugs, instead of turning a blind eye to the worst offenders among them.

 

[OlNate]

And democrat dupes think Trump is bad.

I think this does a good job of clearing up where you are confused.

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...nald-trump-iran-150-billion-and-18-billion-c/

 

[Acadia]

Lefties have an agenda. They are out to help themselves in the name of helping the people they are hurting. In other words, lefties lie. They falsely accuse Trump of hurting people while at the same time they brutalize Americans as they march forward towards their goal of effecting a democrat Bolshevik coup.

Obama took away the money that belonged to the victims of Iranian terrorism and gave it to the American enemies responsible for murdering countless Americans and other innocent people around the world. That is not something to be lightly overlooked. If lefties want to purge the government of crooks and thugs then let them start recognizing the crimes committed by those crooks and thugs, instead of turning a blind eye to the worst offenders among them.

Getting that Faustian Iranian nuclear deal done was Obama's Tolkienian ring. No way, no how was anyone taking it from him, not even after his precious was in jeopardy after Trump got elected.
Kerry then actively tried to undermine Trump's dealings with Iran, as a sitting American President.

Were Trump to have done anything like this, D.C. would implode on itself from the sheer outrage.

 

[Myview]

Lefties have an agenda. They are out to help themselves in the name of helping the people they are hurting. In other words, lefties lie. They falsely accuse Trump of hurting people while at the same time they brutalize Americans as they march forward towards their goal of effecting a democrat Bolshevik coup.

Obama took away the money that belonged to the victims of Iranian terrorism and gave it to the American enemies responsible for murdering countless Americans and other innocent people around the world. That is not something to be lightly overlooked. If lefties want to purge the government of crooks and thugs then let them start recognizing the crimes committed by those crooks and thugs, instead of turning a blind eye to the worst offenders among them.

Hey, there is no way to argue with an ideolog, there is plenty of context on this thread that clearly tells you and anyone else where the money came from and how it was released. You choose to ignore it and that's fine by me. That's what ideologs do.

 

[Myview]

Lefties have an agenda. They are out to help themselves in the name of helping the people they are hurting. In other words, lefties lie. They falsely accuse Trump of hurting people while at the same time they brutalize Americans as they march forward towards their goal of effecting a democrat Bolshevik coup.

Obama took away the money that belonged to the victims of Iranian terrorism and gave it to the American enemies responsible for murdering countless Americans and other innocent people around the world. That is not something to be lightly overlooked. If lefties want to purge the government of crooks and thugs then let them start recognizing the crimes committed by those crooks and thugs, instead of turning a blind eye to the worst offenders among them.

Look at the context (Iran Nuclear Deal) all over this thread....O I C you are an ideolog so you choose to ignore context. Trump is President not Obama. And yes we might effect an orderly transition of power in a relatively short period of time. I wouldn't characterize it as a coup. I doubt we can dispatch with Trump before the 2020 elections.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

Okay so Obama stole money now...that's the claim sorry but as US taxpayer I would have rather have given them 1.7b instead of the 10 billion they sued for or the 4b the court was said to be ready to award.
Obama did many things I did not agree with but one of the main ones was not fighting the right wing narrative effectively. Hopefully the next Democrat realizes just how serious it is and can fight effectively.

You can't really fight the right-wing narrative. You just have to ignore them. These are irrational people. If Trump's presidency has done any good, it has made it clear that most of the Republican party is comprised of irrational people.

These people will believe ANY accusation against a Democrat no matter how little evidence there is. And they will insist that even the smallest molehill is the highest mountain. And at the same time they will ignore any accusation no matter how well established against Republicans.

It's not a fair fight. You can't reason with these people.

 

[manofknowledge]

American victims of worldwide terror and their survivors have been fighting Iran to pay damages for the crimes they committed against Americans over the last 3 decades. Congress passed a law in 2012 authorizing the US to hold Iranian assets in escrow until the many lawsuits could be settled. Obama signed that law. There were 1,300 American victims seeking relief from Iran who filed suit to claim damages according to that law. Obama signed that law.

However, in January 2016 Obama decided on his own to take that money and give it back to Iran, the same day the hostages were released. 19 days later he sent $1.3 billion more to Iranian terrorists, supposedly because he thought the US owed them that money. The US was holding that money to settle American lawsuits. That was the law. Obama in essence said to hell with the law and to hell with the victims I am going to take it upon myself to give these terrorists the money under the pretense that I think it is still their money.

The SCOTUS ruled in April. 2016, that the money did belong to the American victims, not to Iran. Whew, that was close. If Obama had waited just two more months he would not have been allowed to break the law that SCOTUS upheld just a matter of weeks after he violated the law.

Obama screwed American heroes at Ft. Hood in favor of the Muslim terrorists he refused to call a terrorist. Obama screwed the victims of iranian terrorism by stealing their money before the lawsuits could be settled in accordance with ongoing legal proceedings. He screwed the families of those killed in Benghazi by lying about the cause of the terror attack. He screwed a good cops by calling him stupid for arresting a drunk and disorderly black man who was fighting cops. And many other such embarrassing and despicable things.

And democrat dupes think Trump is bad.

This entire thread has no merit, the facts stated are incorrect and the entire story is made up.

https://www.apnews.com/727282bdead6489a8521059936375210

 

[Felis Leo]

No, I don't presume anything. You posted about how it hurt your family. So sue him or arrest him and let the rest of us move on.

I do not claim Obama somehow hurt my family. It was the Iranian regime that had done so, and continues to do so against members of the Iranian Baha'i community which is subject to the same level of repression as the Jews of Germany faced in the 1930s after the passage of the Nuremberg Laws. Rather, I claim that Obama helped to strengthen that regime through this cash transfer, because even the Obama administration admitted that some of that money would go towards terrorist activities.

If you wish to throw this in your personal memory hole and move on tabula rasa, I shall not stop you or hound you with a constant string of reminders of all the terrible decisions President Obama made. But in turn for that modicum of respect, please do not presume to tell me how I should live my life and conduct my discussions on a debate forum in which we debate matters of public policy.

Yes, I was one of those people who told the idiots who brought up Bush to move on. I tell the idiots who bring up Obama the same thing. You can check my posts from 2012-2016 for yourself.

I can appreciate your honest adherence to principle, even if I disagree with the underlying principle itself, tres borrachos. But I do not think those who criticized the policies of the Bush presidency or the policies of past administrations, the consequences of which reverberate long after those administrations end, are automatically idiots. Some may indeed be idiots, or intellectually dishonest hypocrites. Or both. But I am going to give the most basic courtesy and presume that most people who bring up the problems of past administrations have honest grievances that merit discussion.

 

[marke]

You are seriously conflating different money issues with money belonging to Iran, and interest paid on that money.

The original $400M was money that Iran paid to the U.S. for weapons and war ships prior to the American hostages taking in 1979. Because of the hostage situation our government froze those assets and had held them since then. The $1.3B paid to the Iranian government (not terrorists as you assert, but certainly involved in supporting terrorist acts) was based on estimated interest that would have accrued had the money been properly placed in an interest bearing account as required by law.

There is still a great deal of Iran’s money being held by the U.S. government itself and jointly with allied countries.

As it can be confusing knowing what money belongs where and how that money can be disposed of, it would be prudent of you to do the appropriate research before posting in order to avoid gaffs like yours in starting this thread.

You are wrong. The original $400 million was exactly the money Congress gave to victims of Iranian terrorism in the 2014 law which the Supreme Court upheld and which Obama unilaterally illegally broke by his own unlawful actions in support of Iranian terrorists.

 

[Felis Leo]

It avoided war and Iran was complying with all considerations set by the deal until Trump stepped in.

And that is something that I disagree with in this entire narrative:

It was either this lousy deal, or war with Iran. Why were those the only two options? Was Obama seriously going to launch an all out military strike on Iran if a deal could not be reached? Was Iran going to invade our shores if the sanctions continued? I am not impressed with the false urgency created by false binaries.

 

[SonOfDaedalus]

And that is something that I disagree with in this entire narrative:

It was either this lousy deal, or war with Iran. Why were those the only two options? Was Obama seriously going to launch an all out military strike on Iran if a deal could not be reached? Was Iran going to invade our shores if the sanctions continued? I am not impressed with the false urgency created by false binaries.

Israel would have launched a strike against Iran if a deal could not be reached. That could have been the beginning of a war.

 

[marke]

If you disagree with the Iran nuclear deal fine disagree. Five detained Americans came home. It lifted sanctions in Jan 2016 which freed up frozen Iranian money. The Iran nuclear deal was between Iran and the 5 permanent members of the UN security council plus the European Union. Only the US pulled out of it. Most of the money was in frozen accounts around the world in oil payments to Iran. Some in the US was frozen for payments made by Iran for military equipment paid for but never delivered by the Us after the 1979 Revolution in Iran. Yes Congress passed a law after the fact and the SCOTUS up held it. Read John Roberts dissenting opinion. The point is that the political mumbo jumbo law was passed after the Iran Nuclear deal was a done deal. You can disagree with the deal all you want. It avoided war and Iran was complying with all considerations set by the deal until Trump stepped in. Obama happened to be President when the deal was done. Five permanent members of the Security Council and the European Union agreed to the deal. Conservatives yell about Obama thief, commandeer in chief all the time but seldom provide any context. Again, why do Conservatives continue to bring up Obama? HE IS NOT THE PRESIDENT, TRUMP IS.

Obama had no authority to disallow the 2007 judgment of the DC court or the 2012 federal law which gave those former Iranian assets to victims of Iranian terrorism. If Obama wanted to swing a deal with Iran he was bound by existing laws and justice to craft such an agreement in a way that did not violate federal laws. He should have known that and probably did.

 

[beefheart]

You can't really fight the right-wing narrative. You just have to ignore them. These are irrational people. If Trump's presidency has done any good, it has made it clear that most of the Republican party is comprised of irrational people.

These people will believe ANY accusation against a Democrat no matter how little evidence there is. And they will insist that even the smallest molehill is the highest mountain. And at the same time they will ignore any accusation no matter how well established against Republicans.

It's not a fair fight. You can't reason with these people.

Yup, its like dealing with the imbeciles that keep bringing up Uranium One(!) or Benghazi(!) because they got nothing, and they think that if they continue to bring it up, it will somehow become true.

 

[marke]

This is one of the dumbest op's on the board. That money belonged to Iran and not to us to spend in any way. How would you feel if another country took our money kept in another country and gave it away to its citizens for whatever slights they think they might have. You would be yelling for us to go to war with that country. Again, that money was not ours to do whatever we wanted to do with it. It belonged to Iran and the people who think they have claims will have to go to Iran to get them paid, just as people who tink they have claims against our country have to eventually come to our courts.

You say the money belonged to Iran and yet you ignore the fact that the SCOTUS declared the money belonged to the victims of Iranian terrorism. Ruth Ginsburg provided excellent argument in favor of giving that money to victims of Iranian terrorism. Obama had no right to violate federal law, the judgment of the DC court in 2007 or the decision of the SCOTUS in 20126.

 

[RaleBulgarian]

You are wrong. The original $400 million was exactly the money Congress gave to victims of Iranian terrorism in the 2014 law which the Supreme Court upheld and which Obama unilaterally illegally broke by his own unlawful actions in support of Iranian terrorists.

How many times do you have to be encouraged to acquire knowledge of something before you post about it?

In November 1979, Iran’s revolutionary government took 52 Americans hostages at the U.S. embassy, and the U.S. severed diplomatic relations with Tehran. In retaliation, Washington froze $12 billion in Iranian assets held on our shores. The hostage crisis was resolved in 1981 at a conference in Algiers, and the U.S. returned $3 billion to Iran, with more funds going either to pay creditors, or into escrow. The two nations also established a tribunal in the Hague called the Iran United States Claims Tribunal to settle claims both leveled by each government against the other, U.S. citizens versus Iran, and vice versa.

The major issue between the two governments was a $400 million payment for military equipment made by the government of the Shah of Iran, prior to the 1979 uprising that topped him. The U.S. banned delivery of the jets and other weapons amid the hostage crisis, but froze the $400 million advance payment.

https://www.google.com/amp/amp.timeinc.net/fortune/2016/08/05/money-america-iran

The money was Iran’s.