I am a “baby boomer”, whom did not grow up with all the Social Media, which many current people have grown up with. I don’t really like going on Facebook, where I run into many negative posts blasting Hillary, for one reason or another.
When I began texting, I don’t use “textease”, since I don’t know what the short versions actually mean. I write my texts out, trying to make complete sentences to hopefully get my point across, but some people still take my texts the wrong way, because they don’t hear my voice, in an actual phone call. It is not easy to portray your feelings, in a text.
Since I text very little I was not aware that all caps was bad. I have heard it means you are shouting. I only meant it for emphasis. I also was not claiming the AP news story, which came out, on my MSN homepage, was true, or that I agreed with it, because I don’t. I fully trust President Obama to do the right thing, something the Rethugs would never do.
My main point was the Rethugs claim they are watching out for their constituents by making sure the Obama Administration isn’t wasting Tax Payer Dollars! How do they do that? By wasting millions and billions of Tax Payer Dollars and all the money they wasted with the government shutdowns, which directly affected actual people, who vote for them.
The Rethugs could save a whole hell of a lot of money, by cutting back on all these investigations, which they not only do once, but numerous times, coming up with the same results! Maybe they could spend a lot more time, doing what they were elected to do, passing legislation to help people and keep up the infrastructure. Of course, it is more important to try to drag down Hillary’s positive rating, which will automatically make their nominee, Drumpf, look good. Nothing they could do would make him look good, in any way.
I have MSN, as my homepage and like getting a feeling for what is going on in the world and the United States. I realize so many media outlets cater to the right wing and promote a lot of propaganda, trying to hurt Hillary’s numbers and make her look bad.
I don’t understand how the media can spread lies about her, the Democrats and especially President Obama. I know you can’t believe anything from Faux News, especially their “talking heads”, like Sean Hannity, whom publicizes and tries to make a lie into the truth, to convince people not to vote, for Hillary.
If they don’t want people to vote for Hillary, how in the hell can they promote Donald Trump, when he runs off at the mouth and has no plan for getting things done, if he becomes president. Can they honestly look at him and think he would make a better President than Hillary? Of course the voters, whom watch Faux News and other right wing shows believe everything they are spoon fed by Faux News and the Rethugs.
How can the Rethugs, whom endorsed Drumpf, still keep their endorsement of him, instead of withdrawing it? It is especially scary that so many Rethugs are endorsing him, but at least there are many others, whom refuse to endorse him and are now coming out and declaring they will not vote for Donald Trump and are going to vote for Hillary!
The Rethugs act like they have their constituent.s best interests in mind, making sure the Democrats don’t spend tax money on certain things, such as their belief, right now, that the 400 million, which was given to Iran was actually ransom, for the return of the American Hostages. The Rethugs are actually mulling over if they should begin another one of their investigations, to make sure the Obama Administration, isn’t using tax money, when they gave the $400 million to Iran.
They want their constituents to believe they have their best interests in mind, when they begin these investigations, but spend millions and maybe billions of Tax Payer money, to come up with nothing. They aren’t satisfied with doing it once but how many times is it for “Benghazi”? 8 and they still came up with nothing! Now it’s E-Mailghazi”! Not sure how many times with that, but it has been several times and they came up with nothing! That don’t stop them though, they keep investigating, because they are certain they will find something, if they look hard enough.
Do they realize how much Tax Payer money they are spending, not to mention how much time, they are wasting, which should be spent passing laws to help their constituents, not looking for ways to take things away from them.
The “cash for hostages theory” had been debunked, when it was explained by the Obama Administration they had been working on returning money to Iran, which had been frozen, when students took over the Embassy, in Iran and took 52 hostages, which were held for 444 days, before being released. It all centered around the November 1979 hostage crisis, when the Carter Administration allowed the Shah of Iran, to come to the United States for cancer treatment. The United States had put an embargo on oil, from Iran and had also frozen some of Iran’s cash assets in the United States, after the Iranian Hostage Crisis, in November 1979, when 52 American Diplomats and citizens were taken as hostages. They were held for 444 days, before they were released.
Below is the information, which Vox.com released the day after the Associated Press story, which had made it sound like the money was ransom, for the current hostages. In reality it was a settlement between the United States and Iran, as a result of the hostage crisis, in November 1979, when Iranian assets had been frozen and which the United States had agreed to return to them.
In November 1979, a group loyal to the revolutionary regime took 52 Americans hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran. In response, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran and froze Iranian assets in America.
Crucially, the United States halted a delivery of fighter jets that Iran’s pre-revolution government had already paid $400 million for. Normally the US would have returned the money if it wasn’t going to deliver the planes, since countries don’t just break formal agreements like that. But the US government had already frozen Iranian assets in the United States as punishment for the hostage-taking — and that included the $400 million.
The hostage crisis was eventually resolved in 1981, at a conference in Algiers. But the Algiers Accords didn’t resolve every outstanding issue — including the legal status of the $400 million.
Instead, the accord set up an international court, based in the Hague, to deal with any legal claims that the governments of Iran and the United States had against each other, or that individual citizens of the two countries had against the other country.
This court, called the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal, functioned as a kind of binding arbitration. To deal with cases, the involved parties could either negotiate a settlement out of court or take it to a panel made up of three US-appointed judges, three Iranian-appointed judges, and three neutral judges. The panel would then hear the case and issue a binding ruling.
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 AP’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.
"US officials had expected a ruling on the Iranian claim from the tribunal any time, and feared a ruling that would have made the interest payments much higher," Lee and Klapper write.
So the Obama administration decided to settle out of court, opening up negotiations with Iran on the terms of the settlement. It did this at the same time it was negotiating the nuclear deal and the return of four US citizens who had been detained by Iran more recently.
However, the people working on the nuclear deal and the prisoner release were different from the team working on the court case around the weapons money — some of the latter group had been involved with the claims tribunal for years.
By January 2016, the countries had struck a deal — 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).
This settlement was announced the same day in January as Iran received its first round of sanctions relief from the Iran deal.