TRUMP Thread

Bliss said:
Listen to what you keep parroting to defend paying Iran, Loki - that the United States owed .$1.3 billion dollars - to Iran. It makes absolutely no sense.
Do you actually believe that because we didn't deliver military equipment valued at $400 million in 1979, it unequivocally turned into $1.3 billion dollars, because of interest?

Nevermind that in the interim since 1979, we were sending Iran Millions upon Millions upon Millions in Foreign Aid every year.

Suddenly, Obama's State department wants to pay Iran, and comes up with an accrued amount, but won't divulge how they came to that figure.

Their official excuse for the amount is, "well, Iran was going to charge us a high interest rate... so we believe this is a good deal for the American taxpayer"
Really?

Consider also, the United States had filed counter-suits against Iran for millions of dollars for their violations, but somehow the state department didn't pursue those countersuits against Iran and wouldn't explain why.
And there's more to it, ie: their lack of offsetting.

At the end of the day, Loki, no we did not owe Iran 1.3 billion dollars.

https://nypost.com/2016/09/08/no-we-didnt-owe-iran-that-1-7-billion-ransom-payment/
Click to expand...


Here is what you are leaving out Bliss, "Iran had set up a $400 million trust fund for such purchases, which was frozen along with diplomatic relations in 1979. In settling the claim, which had been tied up at the Hague Tribunal since 1981, the U.S. is returning the money in the fund along with "a roughly $1.3 billion compromise on the interest, this claim had occurred in "fits and starts for three decades," and that the settlement, "reduced a significant risk of liability."
This was ALREADY being litigated, as a lawyer, I can tell you there is good reason we almost always tell clients to settle vs. going to trial/verdict, you limit your risk and avoid what could be a VERY bad outcome. So it was not so much about the "interest" it was more about limiting risk.
 
Loki said:
Here is what you are leaving out Bliss, "Iran had set up a $400 million trust fund for such purchases, which was frozen along with diplomatic relations in 1979. In settling the claim, which had been tied up at the Hague Tribunal since 1981, the U.S. is returning the money in the fund along with "a roughly $1.3 billion compromise on the interest, this claim had occurred in "fits and starts for three decades," and that the settlement, "reduced a significant risk of liability."
This was ALREADY being litigated, as a lawyer, I can tell you there is good reason we almost always tell clients to settle vs. going to trial/verdict, you limit your risk and avoid what could be a VERY bad outcome. So it was not so much about the "interest" it was more about limiting risk.
Click to expand...
Limiting what risk, Loki?
We had several countersuits. Countersuits that would offset the amount or vastly reduce it. What about them limiting risk? Why do we shoulder the complete burden.

This wasn't some private lawsuit with private lawyers, this was a case of where Govt lawyers under the behest of our State Department and Obama unilaterally decided on a number, and essentially told no one.
That was our tax dollars they gave away - any lawyer worth their degree would be transparent in how they arrived at such an exorbitant amount AND would allow us taxpayers knowledge of it. So far they haven't divulged crap, even when questioned.

Incidentally, did they need Congress's approval to give Iran all that money, l'm not sure, l will have to look into it.
 
Bliss said:
Limiting what risk, Loki?
We had several countersuits. Countersuits that would offset the amount or vastly reduce it. What about them limiting risk? Why do we shoulder the complete burden.

This wasn't some private lawsuit with private lawyers, this was a case of where Govt lawyers under the behest of our State Department and Obama unilaterally decided on a number, and essentially told no one.
That was our tax dollars they gave away - any lawyer worth their degree would be transparent in how they arrived at such an exorbitant amount AND would allow us taxpayers knowledge of it. So far they haven't divulged crap, even when questioned.

Incidentally, did they need Congress's approval to give Iran all that money, l'm not sure, l will have to look into it.
Click to expand...

If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-bribed-iran-400-million-to-release-u-s-prisoners/

The money came from a little-known fund administered by the Treasury Department for settling litigation claims. The so-called Judgment Fund is taxpayer money Congress has permanently approved in the event it's needed, allowing the president to bypass direct congressional approval to make a settlement. So it was legal and within his discretion.

This process, as you might guess, was very, very slow. By the time Obama’s second term in office began, the tribunal still had not come to a ruling on the issue of the $400 million. Sometime afterward, the Associated Press’s Matt Lee and Bradley Klapper report, the US government apparently concluded that it was going to lose the case — and lose big: Iran was seeking $10 billion in today’s dollars.

The US would pay Iran $1.7 billion, which amounts to about $300 million in interest on top of the originally frozen assets (accounting for inflation). $300 million interest for almost 50 years of holding their $ is a GREAT DEAL for the US.

Great article below by Vox, lays it all out very clearly, NO SCANDAL.
https://www.vox.com/2016/9/7/12830688/us-iran-cash-payment-ransom
 
Loki said:
If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/obama-bribed-iran-400-million-to-release-u-s-prisoners/

The money came from a little-known fund administered by the Treasury Department for settling litigation claims. The so-called Judgment Fund is taxpayer money Congress has permanently approved in the event it's needed, allowing the president to bypass direct congressional approval to make a settlement. So it was legal and within his discretion.

This process, as you might guess, was very, very slow. By the time Obama’s second term in office began, the tribunal still had not come to a ruling on the issue of the $400 million. Sometime afterward, the Associated Press’s Matt Lee and Bradley Klapper report, the US government apparently concluded that it was going to lose the case — and lose big: Iran was seeking $10 billion in today’s dollars.

The US would pay Iran $1.7 billion, which amounts to about $300 million in interest on top of the originally frozen assets (accounting for inflation). $300 million interest for almost 50 years of holding their $ is a GREAT DEAL for the US.

Great article below by Vox, lays it all out very clearly, NO SCANDAL.
https://www.vox.com/2016/9/7/12830688/us-iran-cash-payment-ransom
Click to expand...
Based on your copy and paste and reading the remainder of the article, am l to understand that in 1981, a Tribunal was set up consisting of
three US-appointed judges, three Iranian-appointed judges, and three neutral judges to hear the case and issue a binding ruling....
....and that up until Obama's second term they still had not come to a decision.....?

Yet, suddenly, Obama's legal team decided that they were going to lose the case, so let's just give them this settlement money? All at the same time they were brokering a nuclear deal with Iran and to lift the sanctions?

Again l ask, what about the U.S's counter suits? What happened to them in the negotiations?
Any good Govt lawyer would sit at that bargaining table with Iran and negotiate that we have countersuits to present to the Panel that could easily equal the amount you're seeking, so how about we just offset each other - we will lift the sanctions worth $58 billion, you return our hostages and abide by the nuclear deal and we leave it at that.
 
Bliss said:
Based on your copy and paste and reading the remainder of the article, am l to understand that in 1981, a Tribunal was set up consisting of
three US-appointed judges, three Iranian-appointed judges, and three neutral judges to hear the case and issue a binding ruling....
....and that up until Obama's second term they still had not come to a decision.....?

Yet, suddenly, Obama's legal team decided that they were going to lose the case, so let's just give them this settlement money? All at the same time they were brokering a nuclear deal with Iran and to lift the sanctions?

Again l ask, what about the U.S's counter suits? What happened to them in the negotiations?
Any good Govt lawyer would sit at that bargaining table with Iran and negotiate that we have countersuits to present to the Panel that could easily equal the amount you're seeking, so how about we just offset each other - we will lift the sanctions worth $58 billion, you return our hostages and abide by the nuclear deal and we leave it at that.
Click to expand...

Bliss as you have heard me say many times here, there are never any guarantees with the law and it can be excruciatingly complex and slow to resolve (especially international law). YES, that is why a court set up in 1981, STILL had not come to a conclusion on this issue. As a non-lawyer this might be a surprise to you, but the minute details of dealing with international law/changing regimes and adminstrations/ and political posturing, make this timeline very plausible. As you see below, they have been busy in that time however, finalizing over 3900 other cases in that time, so your claim that the handful of countersuits should have been enough to force Iran to the bargaining table and forgo their $ is just not realistic or viable, and this could have dragged on for who knows how many more years.

Lastly...

Kirby insists the the arms deal settlement and the nuclear deal had nothing to do with one another.
“As we’ve made clear, the negotiations over the settlement of an outstanding claim…were completely separate from the discussions about returning our American citizens home,” State Department spokesman John Kirby told the Journal. “Not only were the two negotiations separate, they were conducted by different teams on each side, including, in the case of The Hague claims, by technical experts involved in these negotiations for many years.” http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/08/03...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer



(The Iran-United States Claims Tribunal was established on 19 January 1981 by the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America to resolve certain claims by nationals of one State Party against the other State Party and certain claims between the State Parties. To date, the Tribunal has finalized over 3,900 cases. http://www.iusct.net/)
 
Bliss said:
North Korea begins returning remains of missing US troops from Korean War, Trump says

President Trump and North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un agreed Tuesday to return the remains of U.S. military personnel who were missing in action during the Korean War.

Story:
https://americanmilitarynews.com/20...dium=facebook&utm_campaign=alt&utm_source=dvf
Click to expand...

Speaking of which, Trump said this regarding Korean War soldier remains:

“One of the things that, really, I’m happy, is that the soldiers that died in Korea, their remains are going to be coming back home,” Trump told Baier. “And we have thousands of people that have asked for that. Thousands and thousands of people. So many people asked for that, when I was on the campaign. I’d say, ‘Wait a minute, I don’t have any relationship.’ But they said, ‘When you can, President, we’d love our son to be brought back home,’ you know, the remains.”
Click to expand...

The only problem with this is that hostilities stopped 65 years ago, So the parents of Korean War MIA soldiers would be 100+ years old. Does anybody really believe thousands of 100-year-old people asked Trump for the remains of their dead sons?
 
Now for the latest installment of the long-running series.......If Obama Said It People Would've Lost Their Shit!

Trump said this regarding Kim Jong-un:
“He’s the head of a country. And I mean, he is the strong head, Don’t let anyone think anything different. He speaks and his people sit up at attention. I want my people to do the same.”
Click to expand...
He wants his people to be forced to pay attention to him under penalty of death?

Asked for clarification later he said he was being sarcastic................Ok sure.

Even if it was a joke, just imagine the weeks of coverage this would get on Fox News if Obama said it.

 
Thump said:
Now for the latest installment of the long-running series.......If Obama Said It People Would've Lost Their Shit!

Trump said this regarding Kim Jong-un: He wants his people to be forced to pay attention to him under penalty of death?

Asked for clarification later he said he was being sarcastic................Ok sure.

Even if it was a joke, just imagine the weeks of coverage this would get on Fox News if Obama said it.

Click to expand...
If it's one thing Trump has removed, it's most libs sense of humor. o_O You have become insufferable.
 
Bliss said:
If it's one thing Trump has removed, it's most libs sense of humor. o_O You have become insufferable.
Click to expand...
I'm not a liberal. I'm a centrist, and of course I still have my sense of humor, because I find it hilarious when people prove my point by defending something Trump said that they would have crucified Obama for saying.
 
Thump said:
I'm not a liberal. I'm a centrist, and of course I still have my sense of humor, because I find it hilarious when people prove my point by defending something Trump said that they would have crucified Obama for saying.
Click to expand...
OMFG Thump, defending? :rolleyes:
No, we see it for what it was, A JOKE!
Just like when he quipped "take our picture make us look handsome and slim."

Seriously Thump, you are proving your hate because you refuse to see it as a joke.
I mean, Obama was NOTORIOUS for his many quips and jokes and no, Fox News.did NOT cry and make headlines that he was being serious. Not to mention, The Left were gaga and thought he was simply hysterical!

If that joke comment bothers you so much, l could imagine your reactions to Obama's, lmao!

"There's an extra spring in my step tonight. I don't know about you guys, but I am so relieved that the whole birther thing is over. I mean, ISIL, North Korea, poverty, climate change, none of those things weighed on my mind like the validity of my birth certificate."
OMG, Obama doesn't care about poverty NK wars etc!!! - Thump

''If I had to name my greatest strength, I guess it would be my humility. Greatest weakness, it's possible that I'm a little too awesome.''
OMG! Obama thinks he's above everyone else!! What a narcissist, self-centered ego-maniac!!
-Thump

''I don't want to be invited to the family hunting party.''
—Barack Obama, and Dick Cheney, who is his eighth cousin.
OMG. He is saying if he hunts with Dick he's going to be executed!!!
-Thump

These days, I look in the mirror and I have to admit, I'm not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be.''
OMG, Obama is a muslim terrrarisst who wants to strap expl0sives!!! -Thump

FYI, he's also joked about being homosexual lovers with Biden, he's called Hillary a drunk-texter, he implied Michelle was money-hungry and that she wouldn't blow him.
All jokes, mate. It's just jokes. Calm down and worry about your party's platform and who you have to beat Trump.
 
Bliss said:
OMFG Thump, defending? :rolleyes:
No, we see it for what it was, A JOKE!
Just like when he quipped "take our picture make us look handsome and slim."

Seriously Thump, you are proving your hate because you refuse to see it as a joke.
I mean, Obama was NOTORIOUS for his many quips and jokes and no, Fox News.did NOT cry and make headlines that he was being serious. Not to mention, The Left were gaga and thought he was simply hysterical!

If that joke comment bothers you so much, l could imagine your reactions to Obama's, lmao!

"There's an extra spring in my step tonight. I don't know about you guys, but I am so relieved that the whole birther thing is over. I mean, ISIL, North Korea, poverty, climate change, none of those things weighed on my mind like the validity of my birth certificate."
OMG, Obama doesn't care about poverty NK wars etc!!! - Thump

''If I had to name my greatest strength, I guess it would be my humility. Greatest weakness, it's possible that I'm a little too awesome.''
OMG! Obama thinks he's above everyone else!! What a narcissist, self-centered ego-maniac!!
-Thump

''I don't want to be invited to the family hunting party.''
—Barack Obama, and Dick Cheney, who is his eighth cousin.
OMG. He is saying if he hunts with Dick he's going to be executed!!!
-Thump

These days, I look in the mirror and I have to admit, I'm not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be.''
OMG, Obama is a muslim terrrarisst who wants to strap expl0sives!!! -Thump

FYI, he's also joked about being homosexual lovers with Biden, he's called Hillary a drunk-texter, he implied Michelle was money-hungry and that she wouldn't blow him.
All jokes, mate. It's just jokes. Calm down and worry about your party's platform and who you have to beat Trump.
Click to expand...

Cool story, I couldn't care less about Trump's joke (or was it?) My point was that if Obama had said it Fox News and their ilk would have lost their fucking minds.

34447133.jpg
 
Thump said:
Cool story, I couldn't care less about Trump's joke (or was it?) My point was that if Obama had said it Fox News and their ilk would have lost their fucking minds.

34447133.jpg
Click to expand...
No. No they wouldn't have. Anyone would see it was a joke, including Fox.

Your "or was it" is the real point you're making. You believed he was serious. LOL. Thump, do you need a hug?
 
Bliss said:
No. No they wouldn't have. Anyone would see it was a joke, including Fox.

Your "or was it" is the real point you're making. You believed he was serious. LOL. Thump, do you need a hug?
Click to expand...

Nope, I'm trolling you, and yes I do need a hug.
 
Bliss said:
OMFG Thump, defending? :rolleyes:
No, we see it for what it was, A JOKE!
Just like when he quipped "take our picture make us look handsome and slim."

Seriously Thump, you are proving your hate because you refuse to see it as a joke.
I mean, Obama was NOTORIOUS for his many quips and jokes and no, Fox News.did NOT cry and make headlines that he was being serious. Not to mention, The Left were gaga and thought he was simply hysterical!

If that joke comment bothers you so much, l could imagine your reactions to Obama's, lmao!

"There's an extra spring in my step tonight. I don't know about you guys, but I am so relieved that the whole birther thing is over. I mean, ISIL, North Korea, poverty, climate change, none of those things weighed on my mind like the validity of my birth certificate."
OMG, Obama doesn't care about poverty NK wars etc!!! - Thump

''If I had to name my greatest strength, I guess it would be my humility. Greatest weakness, it's possible that I'm a little too awesome.''
OMG! Obama thinks he's above everyone else!! What a narcissist, self-centered ego-maniac!!
-Thump

''I don't want to be invited to the family hunting party.''
—Barack Obama, and Dick Cheney, who is his eighth cousin.
OMG. He is saying if he hunts with Dick he's going to be executed!!!
-Thump

These days, I look in the mirror and I have to admit, I'm not the strapping young Muslim socialist that I used to be.''
OMG, Obama is a muslim terrrarisst who wants to strap expl0sives!!! -Thump

FYI, he's also joked about being homosexual lovers with Biden, he's called Hillary a drunk-texter, he implied Michelle was money-hungry and that she wouldn't blow him.
All jokes, mate. It's just jokes. Calm down and worry about your party's platform and who you have to beat Trump.
Click to expand...

The fact remains that Trump seems to always have something complimentary to say about dictators and autocrats.

Was Trump only joking when he said we should consider executing drug dealers like Filipino strongman Duterte??

Or was there something humorous when Trump defended Putin's murder of journalists by replying we kill people too??

Every time Trump has been given the opportunity to draw a stark contrast between himself, American values, our democracy and rule of law, Trump oddly chooses to say instead something positive about a dictator.

Trump has dictator envy. Stop insulting people's intelligence like it was just a joke.

Why do you think this fool is still trying to schedule a full scale military parade down Pennsylvania Avenue??

Listening to Trump compliment Kim on how strong he was and what a great job he did ruling NK at such a young age was disgusting.
 
andreboba said:
The fact remains that Trump seems to always have something complimentary to say about dictators and autocrats.

Was Trump only joking when he said we should consider executing drug dealers like Filipino strongman Duterte??

Or was there something humorous when Trump defended Putin's murder of journalists by replying we kill people too??

Every time Trump has been given the opportunity to draw a stark contrast between himself, American values, our democracy and rule of law, Trump oddly chooses to say instead something positive about a dictator.

Trump has dictator envy. Stop insulting people's intelligence like it was just a joke.

Why do you think this fool is still trying to schedule a full scale military parade down Pennsylvania Avenue??

Listening to Trump compliment Kim on how strong he was and what a great job he did ruling NK at such a young age was disgusting.
Click to expand...
Lol, you're one of the biggest sore losers l've ever encountered. :eek:

Don't make me pull out the flattery Obama has said when meeting tyrants on his Asian tour.
He even had nice, polite things to say about Trump when they met during the changing of the Guard.

Do you want him to butter Kim up, or not. It's Nukes or flattery. Your choice. o_O
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom