• 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!

Your Attorney General Just Pleaded the 5th

Mason66 said:
I thought the money was supposedly for a settlement from a case from the '70s.

Now you are saying it was part of the nuclear deal?

Either the money was owed for a court case or it was a term of the deal.

Which is it, it can't be both.

The US does not have a relationship with IRAN?

The US has a relationship with the world bank and they have a relationship with Iran, sop of course the money could have been wired, but if it was it would have been much harder to fund terrorism with it. Paper trails and all.
Click to expand...

The money was paid by the shah for fighter jets. When Ayatolla Khomeini took over, we didn't want to give him fighter jets. The nuclear deal was that we would pay back the money in exchange for them stopping their nuclear weapons project. Those are the facts of the case.
 
Dittohead not! said:
The money was paid by the shah for fighter jets. When Ayatolla Khomeini took over, we didn't want to give him fighter jets. The nuclear deal was that we would pay back the money in exchange for them stopping their nuclear weapons project. Those are the facts of the case.
Click to expand...

O)K now show me something, anything that the money was debited from that account.

I mean how do we know we don't still owe that same money that will be paid at a later time?
 
CanadaJohn said:
I know exactly what the money was - it was Iranian assets in US institutions at the time Iran was overthrown by the Ayatollas and took over the US Embassy in Teheran and the US hostages inside the building. As a result, the US has retained those funds, accruing interest, and that's what constitutes the $1.7 billion. As part of the nuclear deal, the US agreed to release those funds once Iran proved they were adhering to the conditions of the nuclear deal. Funny thing though, the Iranians aren't adhering to the conditions of the nuclear deal and the US released the funds anyway, as part of the hostage negotiations.

The only reason the money was sent, in cash, on pallets, was because to do otherwise would have required the White House to break US law - they break or fail to adhere to the law on a regular basis, but to do so to ransom out hostages, particularly after the botched soldier ransom/release would have caused immensely more trouble than just stacking up some free floating Pentagon/State Department cash for the swap. Their only problem was the Iranians made the cash payment public, much to President Obama's dismay.
Click to expand...

If you have proof that Iran is not living up to the agreement, don't post it here. Send it to the Six Nations that approved the agreement.
 
It's good to see people aren't still trying to claim Lynch pleaded the 5th Amendment. I think all those people who got suckered ran away from this thread.
 
Slyfox696 said:
It's good to see people aren't still trying to claim Lynch pleaded the 5th Amendment. I think all those people who got suckered ran away from this thread.
Click to expand...

Probably.
But, they'll be back with yet another absurd headline copied from the blogosphere.
 
CanadaJohn said:
Pardon me if I trust the opinions of the head of the United Nations as opposed to some anonymous internet Obama apologist.
Click to expand...

Can you link to the head of the United Nations saying that the nuclear accord included missile technology?
 
Casper said:
They already know that, so why bother playing their game, we are just watching our government operating as they usually do these days, ignore the real issues and make up stuff to keep the masses occupied, hey look a squirrel .......................
Click to expand...

The problem is that they do it because they know there are tens of millions of fools who'll suck it up like a slurpee.

The accusation is the tool of conservatism nowadays. Proof, validity, good faith; none of that is in the picture anymore. It used to be that people waited for evidence; now the mere accusation is enough to get the empty heads filled with all kinds of nonsense they take as truth.

So really, it's not the politician's fault. They're behaving in a manner consistent with what their voters want. And that's what's so troubling.

"Obama's gonna have death panels!" And they believed it.
"Obama's from Kenya!" And they still believe it.
"Obama's a Muslim!" And they still believe it.

Intellectual integrity was summarily shot in the back of the head before falling into the shallow grave the right dug for it sometime around 2004. Rush Limbaugh and his ilk been torturing it in the basement for years before that, but then they decided it was too much trouble so they just killed it.
 
Opopanax said:
The problem is that they do it because they know there are tens of millions of fools who'll suck it up like a slurpee.

The accusation is the tool of conservatism nowadays. Proof, validity, good faith; none of that is in the picture anymore. It used to be that people waited for evidence; now the mere accusation is enough to get the empty heads filled with all kinds of nonsense they take as truth.

So really, it's not the politician's fault. They're behaving in a manner consistent with what their voters want. And that's what's so troubling.

"Obama's gonna have death panels!" And they believed it.
"Obama's from Kenya!" And they still believe it.
"Obama's a Muslim!" And they still believe it.

Intellectual integrity was summarily shot in the back of the head before falling into the shallow grave the right dug for it sometime around 2004. Rush Limbaugh and his ilk been torturing it in the basement for years before that, but then they decided it was too much trouble so they just killed it.
Click to expand...

Well Said! :applaud
 
Dittohead not! said:
And personal insults are a sure sign that someone has lost a debate.
Click to expand...

You mean personal insults similar to your comments in posts 40, 44, 55 and 68 of this same thread where you impugn the intelligence of those who disagree with your views?

In my experience here on DP, a sure sign someone has lost a debate is when they try to change the subject accusing others of exactly what they've been dealing in themselves.
 
CanadaJohn said:
You mean personal insults similar to your comments in posts 40, 44, 55 and 68 of this same thread where you impugn the intelligence of those who disagree with your views?

In my experience here on DP, a sure sign someone has lost a debate is when they try to change the subject accusing others of exactly what they've been dealing in themselves.
Click to expand...

Pointing out that someone is believes nonsense is not insulting their intelligence, merely pointing out that they have a false belief. Back to the premise of this thread, which was not you or I, but whether the Attorney General plead the Fifth. She did not. That morphed into whether Iran did or did not violate the nuclear deal. They did not. Then the issue was whether or not the nuclear deal included missile technology. It does not. Those are the facts like it or not.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Pointing out that someone is believes nonsense is not insulting their intelligence, merely pointing out that they have a false belief. Back to the premise of this thread, which was not you or I, but whether the Attorney General plead the Fifth. She did not. That morphed into whether Iran did or did not violate the nuclear deal. They did not. Then the issue was whether or not the nuclear deal included missile technology. It does not. Those are the facts like it or not.
Click to expand...

That's your slant, on the issue of insults as well as on several of the other topics raised in this thread - that doesn't make them facts, like it or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom