More Obama lies during the Iran deal
Obama really, really, really wanted that deal, and he was more than willing to lie to Congress to further it:
The Obama administration secretly sought to give Iran access ”” albeit briefly ”” to the U.S. financial system by sidestepping sanctions kept in place after the 2015 nuclear deal, despite repeatedly telling Congress and the public it had no plans to do so…
Shortly after the nuclear deal was sealed in July 2015, then-Treasury Secretary Jack Lew testified that even with the sanctions relief, Iran “will continue to be denied access to the world’s largest financial and commercial market.” A month later, one of Lew’s top deputies, Adam Szubin, testified that despite the nuclear deal “Iran will be denied access to the world’s most important market and unable to deal in the world’s most important currency.”
But US banks refused to go along:
The report by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations revealed that under President Barack Obama, the Treasury Department issued a license in February 2016, never previously disclosed, that would have allowed Iran to convert $5.7 billion it held at a bank in Oman from Omani rials into euros by exchanging them first into U.S. dollars. If the Omani bank had allowed the exchange without such a license, it would have violated sanctions that bar Iran from transactions that touch the U.S. financial system.
The effort was unsuccessful because American banks ”” themselves afraid of running afoul of U.S. sanctions ”” declined to participate. The Obama administration approached two U.S. banks to facilitate the conversion, the report said, but both refused, citing the reputational risk of doing business with or for Iran.
Here’s the excuse:
Former Obama administration officials declined to comment for the record.
However, they said the decision to grant the license had been made in line with the spirt of the deal, which included allowing Iran to regain access to foreign reserves that had been off-limits because of the sanctions. They said public comments made by the Obama administration at the time were intended to dispel incorrect reports about nonexistent proposals that would have gone much farther by letting Iran actually buy or sell things in dollars.
In other words, “we only lied a little bitty bit.”
And this news is unlikely to perturb any Democrat, or to surprise any Republican. What wasn’t Obama willing to do to secure the Iran deal?
Reminds me of “Fast and Furious.” The gun sellers knew the DOJ/ATF was asking them to do illegal stuff, and so most refused unless they received a signed letter of permission from the DOJ/ATF.
I think the real question is:
What wasn’t Obama willing to do to undermine the best interest of the USA?
But maybe that’s just me…
“Iran deal”
Once again (ad nauseum): It was not a deal.
In no way, shape or form was it a deal.
What “it” was was a capitulation disguised as a deal.
(Reports have been proliferating that apparently no one, on either side, even signed it….)
Once again (ad nauseum), it was a way to cunningly disguise an alliance made between the Obama administration and the mullahs.
It was a deception from the get go: a subterfuge to make this absurd (and criminal) alliance more “palatable”, more believable, to the American—and global—public.
Ah yes, a deal—hard-fought! painstakingly and toughly negotiated!!—to achieve “peace” in the tormented Middle East, etc. etc., ad nauseum: all utterly consistent with Obama’s MO of portraying destruction as “altruism”, devastation as “improvement”, catastrophe as “social improvement”, revolution as progress; so that anyone who had misgivings, anyone who expressed doubts, anyone who took a stand against the said “deal” (the said deception, the said alliance) could be—and was—castigated mightily as a war monger and an enemy of peace!!—that’s right, Bibi; and all supporters of the Zionist Entity (of which Obama was such a “good friend”)—and for that matter, all who support the USA.
Yes, castigated. Ridiculed. Defamed. Slandered. Drawn and quartered…in the public square and throughout the mainstream media (for whom deception—or rather “progressive”, Democratic deception—is the elixir of life).
And who wishes to be labeled a war monger (aside from those people of principle and truth)?
Likewise, who wishes to be labeled a racist (which was/is the other useful weapon exploited to the hilt by that administration of liars, knaves and scoundrels, and by the MSM that carried their water.
And when it is all proven that nothing that emerged from that benighted administration was true, that everything (or most everything) was a carefully constructed and nurtured pack of lies…what then?
Well, judging from the shameless doubling down that we’ve witnessed throughout the length of that administration, and beyond (by the same scoundrels), one can be certain that Trump and those who support him—and those who, though they might not have preferred Trump, oppose systematic criminal government—will be accused of trying to trample the Constitution (heh!) and destroy the country for their own personal gain.
For their own pernicious benefit.
This is where we’re at right now.
Justice has been suborned; and it will be very difficult to fix it—especially against a stalwart, compromised and shameless media.
This is the Soviet technique so effectively adopted and manipulated by those who refuse to accept the result of the 2016 election.
Regarding the Iran “deal”, systematic, incessant deception. For those who like lists:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/10bKiQyVD7iRJjI9MNL1EfiLtQSWo-wRr/view
Just like ObamaCare–gosh, how ’bout that!!. (Thanking Jonathan Gruber for his refreshing candor…:
https://tinyurl.com/yboq8l2n )
Here’s someone else who likes lists:
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/readersrespond/bs-ed-gruber-letter-20141123-story.html
(Wonder what he’d think of “SpyGate”?….)
When do we find out how much Barack, Val and Ben got paid?
“got paid”
Excellent question! (As they say, “follow the money”…)
Except that in Obama’s case (and Jarett’s and Rhodes’s, and I’d add Kerry’s, as well), I really don’t think they were in it for the money.
These extreme Left ideologues masquerading as center-left Democrats were in it for “pure” reasons and “pure” reasons alone: Revolution.
IOW they didn’t care about the money (or maybe they were already getting it from other secret sources so they didn’t have to risk receiving any blatant—and traceable—kickbacks from the mullahs).
These ultra-ideologues were in it for the sheer power, and the monumental task they set for themselves: they were going to “transform” (that is, tear down) America and entirely remake it in the image they so firmly believed had to occur.
This was to be nothing less than a second American revolution hollowing out as many American institutions as possible, governmental, military, social—and of course educational.
Having achieved the pinnacle of power, there was nothing to stop them.
Checks and balances, be damned.
They had something far more powerful at their disposal: the media.
And after eight years of Obama’s tireless, relentless, energetic depredations, Hillary Clinton was going to be elected president—a dead cert— thus enabling the new, progressive Democrats to continue the Gramscian/Obaman, William T. Sherman-like march through American institutions of government (and the military), shredding as much as possible along the way.
(For America’s sake, of course. And the world’s. Especially, the world’s.)
Pure ideology. Pure adrenalin. Pure revolutionary power.
Pure socialist utopia.
An awesome responsibility of supra-historic proportions lay on their collective shoulders….
Only thus can one begin to understand the absolute horror they felt at Hillary’s loss; and their frantic, hysterical need to reverse that loss as quickly and as absolutely as possible.
So how much did they get paid?
No
What had to be hidden at all costs was not their (pecuniary) corruption. Nor was it bodies in the attic or basement.
It was their sheer criminality. It was their corrupt souls.
Of course, this was never going to be an issue since Hillary had the election in the bag.
Until she didn’t.
Obama lies? Hey, no problem.
Here are a few more non-scandals:
1. DNC scandal (AKA Debbie in Dade):
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2018/06/06/democrats-it-scandal-set-to-explode-with-possible-plea-deal.html
2. McCabe want to play, “Let’s Make a Deal”:
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/06/05/mccabe-asks-for-immunity-in-congressional-hearing-over-fbi-handling-clinton-email-probe.html
3. Comey D-Day (again)
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/doj-watchdog-finds-comey-defied-authority-fbi-director/story?id=55670834
In spite of all the circus-like atmospherics (and distractions), one must try hard to keep one’s eye on the ball:
https://twitter.com/LeeSmithDC
If public awareness of Spygate causes any of the excrement they let fly land on its perpetrators, I hope it will lead to light being shed on their other activities. I would really like to see what they were hiding. Name the subject and the question of qui bono needs to be answered.
e.g. ignoring the Green Revolution in Iran, supporting term-limit denying wanna be dictator Manuel Zelaya over the electorate of Honduras, the con job that was the beginning of Obamacare, initiating the government takeover of all control over student loans, Fast and Furious gunwalking scandal, controlling the census from the White House instead of the Commerce Department, financially shaky Solyndra getting a loan and promptly doing a disappearing act with $535 million tax dollars…
And that is just 2009. The other years, not to mention the activities of the Clintons, are buried somewhere in that iceberg. Regarding the perennial “fool or knave” question, there is always some lefty justification for these horrendous policies revolving around helping the poor or saving the environment, but money and/or power never fails to gravitate to the self-styled humanitarians.
“I think the real question is:
What wasn’t Obama willing to do to undermine the best interest of the USA?
But maybe that’s just me…” John Guilfoyle
No it’s not just you. Obama was and still is committed to doing all he can to abolish America. His turn of phrase; “fundamental transformation” is simply a euphemism for “formally put an end to” i.e. abolishing…
In service of that goal, Obama was and is willing to do whatever he can get away with…
John Guilfoyle Says:
June 6th, 2018 at 3:51 pm
I think the real question is:
What wasn’t Obama willing to do to undermine the best interest of the USA?
But maybe that’s just me…
Cornhead Says:
June 6th, 2018 at 5:53 pm
When do we find out how much Barack, Val and Ben got paid?
* * *
I keep asking myself: if Obama actually was an Iranian agent, what would he have done differently?
Answer: not much.
(Trump & Russia do not even come close to the level of collusion the MSM and DNC and even GOP allowed between Iran and Obama’s administration. Or Pakistan & DWS.)