The Smoking Gun: Trump, The Least Charitable Billionaire

$400 Million Cash Payment to Iran Fuels Latest Campaign Dispute

By MICHAEL D. SHEAR AUG. 3, 2016
WASHINGTON — A cash payment of $400 million delivered to Iran in January became part of the presidential campaign on Wednesday, as Donald J. Trump seized on the money transfer as a sign of what he called the administration’s failed foreign policy — prompting a forceful White House rejection.
Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said the payment to Iran was part of the resolution of a longstanding financial dispute between the two nations, and was delivered in cash on pallets because the two nations do not have a banking relationship.
Mr. Earnest also denounced the assertions from some Republicans that the $400 million in foreign currency delivered to Iran was a ransom for four Americans released at the time. He compared the statements from Republicans to those of conservatives in Iran who oppose the nuclear agreement.
The existence of the payment was disclosed in January, and Mr. Earnest dismissed a Wall Street Journal report on Wednesday about the details of the cash payment as a “six-month-old news story” that is being pushed by opponents of the president’s nuclear deal with Iran.
“It’s an indication of just how badly opponents of the Iran deal are struggling to justify their opposition to a successful deal,” Mr. Earnest said.
The report about the cash payments — $400 million in euros, Swiss francs and other currencies flown to Tehran on a cargo plane — quickly sparked condemnation from opponents of Mr. Obama’s Iran negotiations, especially among Republicans.
Mr. Trump, the Republican nominee for president, posted Wednesday on Twitter that the payments amount to a scandal for Mr. Obama and for Hillary Clinton, the former secretary of state and the Democratic nominee for president.
“Our incompetent Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, was the one who started talks to give 400 million dollars, in cash, to Iran. Scandal!” Mr. Trump wrote.
Senator Marco Rubio of Florida, who has long been critical of the Iran nuclear deal, argued that the cash sent to Iran amounted to a ransom payment to get the detained Americans home.
Photo


Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, talking to the media during a daily briefing at the White House on Wednesday. Credit Manuel Balce Ceneta/Associated Press
“Obama administration sent plane load of cash to #Iran as ransom as part of deal on hostages. Just unreal,” Mr. Rubio wrote on Twitter.
Senator Ted Cruz of Texas said in a statement that the cash payment shows that the Iran nuclear deal “is nothing but a series of bribes and secret agreements that will do nothing to prevent Iran from reaching nuclear capability, yet will provide funding for their sponsorship of terrorism and encourage them to detain more of our citizens.”
Mr. Earnest angrily denounced those allegations as “a false claim that this is somehow a ransom payment” and repeatedly said: “Let me be clear, the United States does not pay ransom for hostages.”
He accused people like Mr. Rubio and Mr. Trump of seizing on the new details about the cash transfer to continue trying to undermine the nuclear agreement.
“They are once again in a position of making the same argument as hard-liners in Iran in an attempt to undermine the nuclear agreement,” Mr. Earnest said.
The dispute over the payment to Iran centers on a series of deals that emerged from negotiations between American diplomats and Iranian officials that culminated in announcements in January.
At the time, the United States announced a deal with Iran to limit its nuclear program, but it also announced separate agreements to release four Americans held in Iran, and a third agreement to resolve a longstanding claim by Iran over money held in United States banks.
The financial dispute involved money that Iran had sent to the United States in 1979 to purchase weapons. Those weapons were not delivered after the shah of Iran was overthrown, and the money was never returned to Iran, which had demanded in The Hague that they were owed the money, plus interest charges.
Mr. Obama has long argued — and Mr. Earnest repeated on Wednesday — that the agreements were separate, though they were part of an effort by the United States to capitalize on improving relations between the two nations.
On Wednesday, Mr. Earnest said that the news reports noting that the payments were made in cash did not bolster claims by critics that they amounted to a ransom payment.
“I understand the interest in details that make a more colorful story,” Mr. Earnest said. But he added: “Critics of the deal have lost this argument.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/04/w...nt-to-iran-fuels-latest-campaign-dispute.html

Trump sons nailing pussy

That is a fullblown lie, maybe even a Buma Stemra thing

There is no comparison between Donald Trump and Hubbard. Trump has a much better watch. Fabulous!

Words I have none.

Pretty good summary of the clown car of crazy that is the GOP right now:


There are sensible people in the Republican Party. But obviously they have been shuddered into silence. Surely others remember John McCain before the bad people saddled him with Miss Alaska, right?

To get the sensible Republicans back on top we have to make it clear that the nonsense that is Trump was a huge mistake. We have to vote for Hillary, even though that is not our favorite, to get the Scientologists and the like out of power.

BTW did you catch the Miscavige style montage of stupid stats at the Republican convention? Maybe I can find it...

Found the stats montage. It was something Trump tweeted and you get a look at it near the end of this video. Also note the entire Republican Party has been drinking somebody's, "what is true for you is true."

A military Purple Heart recipient wants to help The Donald fulfill his dreams. He started a gofundme page to send Trump to war to fulfill his dreams.
So far they have 3600$.
https://www.gofundme.com/PH4Trump
"As with seemingly everything else in his life, Mr. Trump got one handed to him instead of earning it. That being said, as a Purple Heart recipient who earned one the old-fashioned way by returning from Afghanistan one leg lighter, I fully endorse his desire to earn one and would happily oblige his interest in doing so, by being one of the first to chip in to fly him to the conflict zone of his choosing. After all, you're never too old to follow your
dreams."
Most contributions are $10.00. Ah the grassroots support!

Who are the theocrats you oppose?

As for "science deniers" anyone who uses that phrase is doing politics, not science. They are interested in insulting, demonizing, marginalizing. They are denying science with such a phrase.

You 'expect them to play fair"? Are we living in the same world? That is a remarkably naive thing to say, TI. We are talking about politics, where no one plays fair. To think otherwise is to believe in Tinker Bell and the Tooth fairy.

And I love the way you phrase it. "Chatting'. A conspiracy to deny Sanders his shot is called a 'chat' by you.
Damn, you are good at using the language to obfuscate

Have you read the Lucifer Effect? It explains a good bit about 'expectable' (sic) behavior, and how to get it, or how to keep it at bay. It has to do with how the institutions are set up. If they are set up to bring out the worst in people, they will bring out the worst. If they are set up to bring out the good in people, they will tend to do that. So when you tell me this sort of behavior is 'expectable' then I tell you that's because the institution that produces this behavior is sick and in need of morals.

The DNC conspiracy against Sanders pretty much destroys the notion that we have democracy, more like an oligarchy, or dare I say it, a theocracy. Only those who believe are accepted.

I'd say Clinton is one of the best at denying facts in evidence. Did you see where she said the FBI said she was truthful?
Clinton's relationship with the truth is secondary to her pursuit of power.

I have never ever watched him. A waste of time.

But, as I've been saying, it shows just how deep the contempt our major political parties have for the people they supposedly lead, that they offer HRC and Trump as our choices.

Is that the same EPA that just destroyed a river? That EPA?

We did have her as Senator and SecState, which is one of the reasons we know just how totally useless she is. The reset button, as an example. Or her lies about Benghazi, or about her emails and the server.

No dox, but if Russia, China and other countries didn't hack her, they'd be failing in their jobs. I don't believe they are that incompetent.

You were saying people picked Trump because they are unhappy and want change. I was saying the Republican line up boiled down to Trump and Ted Cruz, a theocrat who denies global warming and who thinks gays are not equal to others. Maybe a lot of people, like me and Jesus, do not want Jesus guiding our government.

Tell me the phrase you want me to use for people who deny the weight of current scientific evidence on some matter.

You are being overly argumentative and insulting. I expect people not to rape other people but that still happens. That does not mean I am naive.

The perfect is the enemy of the good enough. We don't need perfect people in politics.

Well you should watch him if you want to understand what is going on.

The Clintons live under a microscope. So if really damning dox existed we would have them by now.

"I did not have sex with that Putin."

Gaps in Melania Trump's immigration story raise questions | POLITICO

A racy photo shoot is prompting fresh scrutiny of the would-be first lady's early visits to the United States.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/melania-trump-immigration-statement-226674

Melania Trump statement on immigration status dodges key points | POLITICO

Hours after POLITICO published a report on gaps in Melania Trump’s account of her immigration to the United States, she issued a statement on Twitter on Thursday that sailed around the central questions raised by the story.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/melania-trump-immigration-statement-226674

I'm thinking Trump will soon be dropping out of the race due to mouth cancer. Meanwhile there is an opportunity for a non insane Republican senator who doesn't have a lot of dumb stuff on her record, preferably female. Going over the list... Kelly Ayotte?

Trump Exposes Trump



PlainSight

In his own words, Donald Trump reveals his hypocrisy about Iraq, immigration, health care, abortion, Libya, Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and more.

Here's what happens if Trump decides to quit

Excerpt:

...if Trump pulled the plug on his candidacy, it's a sure bet there would be a rush to make House Speaker Paul Ryan the new GOP nominee for five reasons:

1. He would attract all the donor money that Trump can't.
2. He's done this before as Mitt Romney's vice-presidential running mate.
3. He has a clear agenda – his "Better Way" — already in place.
4. He is young, articulate, honest, telegenic, and untainted by scandal.
5. Most important, he could actually win.

http://www.businessinsider.com/heres-what-happens-if-trump-decides-to-quit-2016-8

I think Assange just wants to see the world burn. This shit is really old:

https://www.memresearch.org/grabbe/lafarge.htm

Ah, I understand.

I consider the current Democratic Party to be as much a belief system as any religion.

The basic term to use for people who disagree with you is "person." Anything else is simply your prejudices made manifest.

And of course 'the current scientific evidence" is mostly your belief is global warming. Science be damned, I'm a gonna believe, seems to be the mantra. Consensus is also not science, I might add. A consensus in science is completely meaningless. It gives no information at all about the science itself. And knowing that everyone agrees is interesting politically, but still meaningless for the science.

Which reminds me, there's a great new set of pictures showing chemical bonds being made
http://www.foresight.org/nanodot/?p=7129

That may have been a discussion in a different thread.

I am thinking that if you expect a politician to play fair, you are being naive. Politicians do not become politicians to help you and me, they become politicians to impose their will on others. They may have the best of intentions, but their purpose is to impose their will on others.

We don't need anyone in politics. That's my point.

I don't need to watch him to know what he's been up to. there are news papers and the net. I have never watched either Clinton, Obama, Bush, Romney or any other politician in the last 30 years speak, since I consider it a waste of my valuable time to listen people lie to me.

That's your assumption. I don't share it.

If Putin is as clever as you seem to think, then sitting on the remaining emails, and waiting for HRC to become president would be the smart move on his part. He would have one hell of a way to keep her in check.

That does worry me.

ANOTHER MYSTERIOUS DEATH=> Activist and Sanders Supporter Who Served Papers to DNC on Fraud Case Found Dead

Jim Hoft Aug 4th, 2016 10:26 pm 805 Comments
On July 3, 2016, Shawn Lucas and filmmaker Ricardo Villaba served the DNC Services Corp. and Chairperson Debbie Wasserman Schultz at DNC’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., in the fraud class action suit against the Democrat Party on behalf of Bernie Sanders supporters.
Shawn Lucas was thrilled about serving the papers to the DNC before Independence Day.


** This was before Wikileaks released documents proving the DNC was working against the Sanders campaign during the 2016 primary.

Shawn Lucas was found dead this week.

According to Snopes Lucas was found dead on his bathroom floor.

We contacted Lucas’ employer on 4 August 2016 to ask whether there was any truth to the rumor. According to an individual with whom we spoke at that company, Shawn Lucas died on 2 August 2016. The audibly and understandably shaken employee stated that interest in the circumstances of Lucas’ death had prompted a number of phone calls and other queries, but the company had not yet ascertained any details about Lucas’ cause of death and were unable to confirm anything more than the fact he had passed away.
An unconfirmed report holds that Lucas was found lying on the bathroom floor by his girlfriend when she returned home on the evening of 2 August 2016. Paramedics responding to her 911 call found no signs of life.

This follows the death of 27 year-old Democratic staffer Seth Conrad Rich who was murdered in Washington DC on July 8. The killer or killers appear to have taken nothing from their victim, leaving behind his wallet, watch and phone.
Shortly after the killing, Redditors and social media users were pursuing a “lead” saying that Rich was en route to the FBI the morning of his murder, apparently intending to speak to special agents about an “ongoing court case” possibly involving the Clinton family.

And on June 22, 2016, former UN official John Ashe “accidentally” crushed his own throat and died a week before he was scheduled to testify against the Clintons and Democrat Party.

John Ashes died before his court appearance.
He crushed his throat… while exercising.
It’s all probably just a strange coincidence, right?
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/201...ud-case-found-dead-1-week-serving-dnc-papers/

John Ashe Murder Conspiracy

Former U.N. Diplomat John Ashe did die in a June 2016 accident, but his trial was not set to begin five days later, and he wasn't testifying against Hillary Clinton.

WHAT'S TRUE: Former UN Official John Ashe died in June 2016 at his Dobbs Ferry home. His death was initially misreported as a heart attack rather than an accident, and he was about to begin pre-trial meetings related to corruption charges at the time he died.

WHAT'S FALSE: Ashe's corruption trial wasn't set to begin just days after his death, and he wasn't going to testify against Hillary Clinton.

More here:
http://www.snopes.com/un-official-j...re-he-was-to-testify-against-hillary-clinton/

http://observer.com/2016/08/yes-american-spies-really-think-trump-is-putins-guy/
Not so secretly

Donald Trump’s website won’t let you cancel recurring donations

Excerpt:

On Thursday, Mic confirmed that, no, there is no button to undo your recurring payment to the Trump campaign. You can’t delete the recurring payment. You can’t even delete your credit card information (you can update it, but it has to be with a different valid card number). So you just keep paying Trump’s campaign, we suppose, until the end of time.

Federal Election Commission spokesperson Christian Hilland told Mic that there’s nothing illegal about this per se, that is until a person’s automatic payments put her over the maximum contribution limit of $2,700.

Clinton’s campaign has a “remove card” option on its site for recurring payments, Mic reports. Trump's campaign did not return multiple requests for comment to the site.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slat...won_t_let_you_cancel_recurring_donations.html

I was saying Ted Cruz was a theocrat. Now you say the democrats have a belief system, implying the democrats are also theocrats.

This type of response is called "tu quoque." Like if I say, "Republican thing bad." You say, "Democrat thing bad." But this way of responding is a derail. What you are supposed to say is, "Republican thing bad," or "Republican thing is okay" or something like that.

But I wasn't talking about people who disagree with me. I was talking about people who deny well established scientific facts. Facts do exist. Because if they did not then blodorshish yatmarf go dospeltal.

You are such a hypocritical faggot full of bullshit, wasting the time of anyone you suck into your never-ending masturbatory circular conversation of nothingness. Fuck you. A lot of former Democrats are leaving the party, btw.

"Climate change" is a scam.

Thank for the lesson. You don't want a theocracy, I don't want one, so we agree. But I see the Democrats as something similar. It was a friendly warning "Here be Theocrats". I was pointing out that a belief system is where you find it. It doesn't have to be called a religion to function as one.

Sorry if I offended you.

There's those pesky facts again, slippery little devils that seem to tell you one thing, and tell me another. What a messy world we live in.

Which well established scientific facts? That CO2 is a greenhouse gas? Or that the science is never settled, or that a consensus is a meaningless concept in science? Those are all well established facts to consider.

I've known that CO2 is a greenhouse gas since a science class years ago. But after that, we really don't know a lot, and the 'consensus' in climate science was manufactured out of whole cloth.

You are the arbiter of people who deny established scientific facts? I did not know this. Silly me. Is this an appointed position? Can I apply?

Sarcasm aside, there really is no reason to call people names because of their opinions, even wrong ones. Otherwise, well, you'd have to call everyone names, since none of us escape our human capacity to fool ourselves.

Wow.

Well the Koch's also have ties to Russia going way back. And I notice that the anti-government memes they spread serve people like Putin who want the US to be weakened. If the Koch's are useful idiots for the Kremlin, that would explain why the GOP overlooked Trump's ties to Russia. Another explanation might be mass retardation. Otherwise, I got nothing.

I am not offended by tu quoque derails. I point them out just so we can have a productive conversation.

Not me alone. Anyone who knows what science says on some matter can tell when someone is wrong. Just like anyone who understands math can say when someone has done a calculation wrong.

If people deny what science says, they are deniers of what science says.