- Joined
- Feb 16, 2013
- Messages
- 13,893
- Reaction score
- 5,030
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Slightly Liberal
1. The Bolded is incorrect. "Any" arrest does not demonstrate that the Obama administration did not choose to hinder investigations into Iran and their clients, despite their abuses on our soil, in order to pursue a nuclear deal with Iran.
Here’s the part about extradicting Fayad. First, he was indicted contrary to the “narrative” of the “story”. Here the author “assures” us the Obama administration didn’t “try hard enough”.
But for the nearly two years Fayad was in custody, top Obama administration officials declined to apply serious pressure on the Czech government to extradite him to the United States, even as Putin was lobbying aggressively against it.
With Putin was lobbying against it, how does that prove “Obama administration officials declined to apply serious pressure”? It doesn’t. In fact it shows that the Czechs might have had a reason not to extradite him, “serious pressure” or not. After informing us that Fayad was back in business (and of course you assume its Obama’s fault”) we get this incoherent mess later in the “story”.
Former Obama administration officials declined to comment on individual cases, but noted that the State Department condemned the Czech decision not to hand over Fayad. Several of them, speaking on condition of anonymity, said they were guided by broader policy objectives, including de-escalating the conflict with Iran, curbing its nuclear weapons program and freeing at least four American prisoners held by Tehran, and that some law enforcement efforts were undoubtedly constrained by those concerns.
So several “unnamed sources” (remember, conservatives no longer accept “unnamed sources”) said they were guided by “broader policies”. Mmmmm, condemning the Czech decision was not driven by “broader policies”. It was driven by wanting to extradite Fayad. You are supposed to infer that not extraditing was part of “broader policies” because that’s the “narrative”. What the “author” leaves out is that the Czechs actually traded Fayad for Czech hostages. That is just a fact and since it undermines the “narrative” you don’t learn it in the “story”. I simply googled “US tries to extradite Fayad from Czechoslovakia 2014 “ and got this.
Czech Defense Minister Martin Stropnicky said five Czech citizens who went missing in Lebanon in July were released by their captors in exchange for a guarantee that Fayad would not be extradited.
https://www.rferl.org/a/prague-lebanese-ali-fayad-released-extradition-us/27532663.html
Now if you actually click on the link you’ll see in the very next paragraph that the Czech govt denies it was an exchange deal but it was an exchange deal. Remember, not indicting a bank and not extraditing Fayad are the “smoking guns” of the “story” and they are officially BS. And don’t forget, the DEA press release proves “ripped apart” and “derailed” are lies.