11 May 18
http://thehill.com/policy/international/386894-schumer-to-trump-hostages-arent-bargaining-chips
Apparently Chucky Cheese got upset over Trump getting hostages released from NK. I reckon this is why Obama did not get hostages released with Iran after he gave them all that money.
Makes sense.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @whodeyObama? Iranian hostages? I hope you realize the Iranian hostages happened in 1979 and it was the election of Reagan that got those hostages released because they knew we would come in guns blazing if they hadn't done that.
http://thehill.com/policy/international/386894-schumer-to-trump-hostages-arent-bargaining-chips
Apparently Chucky Cheese got upset over Trump getting hostages released from NK. I reckon this is why Obama did not get hostages released with Iran after he gave them all that money.
Makes sense.
Originally posted by @whodeyA) Schumer didn't get upset;
http://thehill.com/policy/international/386894-schumer-to-trump-hostages-arent-bargaining-chips
Apparently Chucky Cheese got upset over Trump getting hostages released from NK. I reckon this is why Obama did not get hostages released with Iran after he gave them all that money.
Makes sense.
B) As has been explained to you many times on this board, the only money Iran got in the deal was its own which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded (in fact, it's highly likely they would have gotten more);
C) US prisoners were released at the same time as the Iran deal; in fact, Trump just complained about it. https://nypost.com/2018/05/10/trump-unlike-obama-we-didnt-pay-for-release-of-us-prisoners/
11 May 18
Originally posted by @no1marauderOh, that's right. Obama sent all that money to Iran and then all of a sudden they released the hostages, although Obama swore the money had nothing to do with the hostage release.
A) Schumer didn't get upset;
B) As has been explained to you many times on this board, the only money Iran got in the deal was its own which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded (in fact, it's highly likely they would have gotten more);
C) US prisoners were released at the same time as the Iran deal; in fact, Trum ...[text shortened]... t it. https://nypost.com/2018/05/10/trump-unlike-obama-we-didnt-pay-for-release-of-us-prisoners/
Why was Chucky Schumer not upset with that transaction? In fact, what money did Trump give NK? What, if anything, did Trump give NK to have the hostages released?
Originally posted by @no1marauder" which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded"
A) Schumer didn't get upset;
B) As has been explained to you many times on this board, the only money Iran got in the deal was its own which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded (in fact, it's highly likely they would have gotten more);
C) US prisoners were released at the same time as the Iran deal; in fact, Trum ...[text shortened]... t it. https://nypost.com/2018/05/10/trump-unlike-obama-we-didnt-pay-for-release-of-us-prisoners/
why the rush under the cover of darkness then?
you don't even believe your own lies.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleHuh? The Iran Agreement was "under cover of darkness"?
" which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded"
why the rush under the cover of darkness then?
you don't even believe your own lies.
Even someone as terminally stupid as you should be able to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework
I don't see any "lies" in my post.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleNow, now, I'm sure all that money going to Iran had nothing to do with Iran all of a sudden wanting to release those hostages.
" which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded"
why the rush under the cover of darkness then?
you don't even believe your own lies.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @no1marauderSo why was Schumer not upset over that transaction, or is this just more partisan hypocritical derangement?
Huh? The Iran Agreement was "under cover of darkness"?
Even someone as terminally stupid as you should be able to read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_nuclear_deal_framework
I don't see any "lies" in my post.
11 May 18
While the release of the prisoners is definitely a positive development, one might question the degree of ass-kissing of Kim that Trump engaged in:
Mr. Trump thanked Mr. Kim for releasing Americans that North Korea had effectively kidnapped. Mr. Kim, he said, “really was excellent to these three incredible people.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/10/world/asia/trump-north-korea-singapore.html
IF they were unjustifiably imprisoned for years as the US claims, that's hardly what most would consider being "excellent" to them.
For whodey from the same article:
Previous administrations, including President Barack Obama’s, secured the release of imprisoned Americans from North Korea without promising a summit meeting or improved diplomatic relations.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @whodeyHow many times do we have to go through this? You know that a Court was going to award that money (and possibly quite a bit more) to Iran. If the US got concessions for paying money it was going to have to anyway, so what?
Now, now, I'm sure all that money going to Iran had nothing to do with Iran all of a sudden wanting to release those hostages.
Originally posted by @whodeyYou are saying Schumer was "upset". That usually means the thing claimed is false (as it is here).
So why was Schumer not upset over that transaction, or is this just more partisan hypocritical derangement?
Schumer was saying the US government should be careful about publicly linking the release of prisoners to other matters as dimwit Donald did because it might encourage hostage taking. That seems like common sense. It's probably true, however, that Chuck wouldn't have said the same thing if a Democrat was President under the same circumstances. IF a Democrat was, I'm sure we'd get a far harsher rejection from right wingers if that President said a foreign dictator had been "excellent" to US citizens supposedly imprisoned on false charges.
Originally posted by @no1marauderTrump promised better relations?
While the release of the prisoners is definitely a positive development, one might question the degree of ass-kissing of Kim that Trump engaged in:
Mr. Trump thanked Mr. Kim for releasing Americans that North Korea had effectively kidnapped. Mr. Kim, he said, “really was excellent to these three incredible people.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/ ...[text shortened]... Americans from North Korea without promising a summit meeting or improved diplomatic relations.
Where exactly did he say that?
And why is this release bad when under Obama it was good?
Is meeting with NK bad?
11 May 18
Originally posted by @whodeyIs there an "or" between the words "summit meeting" and "improved relations"? Are you familiar with what that means in the English language?
Trump promised better relations?
Where exactly did he say that?
And why is this release bad when under Obama it was good?
Is meeting with NK bad?
The release was "good" and no one has said any differently.
I'm fine with the meeting.
11 May 18
Originally posted by @mott-the-hoopleBut you sure believe yours.
" which it was going to get anyway as soon as legal proceedings were concluded"
why the rush under the cover of darkness then?
you don't even believe your own lies.