All that money that the Obama administration sent in cash to the nation the State Department has for decades labeled the number one state sponsor of terrorism in the world is not without those attempting to explain why it was the right thing to do. ABC News’ chief political analyst Matthew Dowd has a defense of the Obama administration to present:
I am wondering how many folks are aware that the money the US sent Iran as part of nuclear deal was actually Iran’s assets to begin with. It was their own money we returned. It wasn’t tax payer money.
— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd) January 1, 2018
Is that so? Not everybody remembers is that straight-forward:
1 Ransom to Iran was taxpayer money. Original acct had been cleaned out years before.
2 Per American courts, it wasn't Iran's money but belonged to American victims of Iran terrorism.
There's no debate on this. You're just wrong. https://t.co/WKuA26X85T
— Omri Ceren (@omriceren) January 3, 2018
Assets we froze after they _raided our embassy, took American diplomatic staff hostage in violation of just about every International law and treaty, paraded them before cameras and beat them_. Think of the seized assets as a criminal fine. https://t.co/ovVEvDubvQ
— Jim Geraghty (@jimgeraghty) January 2, 2018
And they used it to fund terror groups instead of putting it where the administration said they would. It's weird that's not what's upsetting you in all this. https://t.co/c61VV8WQQN
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) January 2, 2018
Brush up on Bank Markazi v. Peterson. The funds legally belonged to Iran's terrorism victims and their families. https://t.co/cAd9RGaZh4
— Phil Kerpen (@kerpen) January 2, 2018
"Look, I know that serial killer murdered 37 people. But he was owed Social Security money that was his to begin with! So we had to pay it to him! Screw the families of his victims! Don't you people understand? Jeez!"
— Yes, Nick $earcy! (@yesnicksearcy) January 3, 2018