Trump and Hegseth's Major Announcement Did Not Disappoint
What a Custodian Just Revealed Adds More Intrigue About the Brown University Shooting
FINALLY: The Trump DOJ Suing DC Over Its Obnoxious Gun Laws
This Man Was Filmed Stealing an ICE Vehicle – the Jury Just Issued...
Lawmakers Seek Inherent Contempt Charges Against Pam Bondi
US in Hot Pursuit of Another Venezuelan Oil Tanker
The Coldplay Kiss Cam Didn’t Ruin Her Life. Bad Choices Did
The Democrats' Human Rights Fallacy
Operation Relentless Justice Cracks Down on Violent Crime Against Children
JD Vance Has Two Words for Neo-Nazi Nick Fuentes
Minnesota AG Brags About Stopping Scammers As the State Reels From $9 Billion...
Trump Administration Terminates Offshore Wind Farms Over National Security Concerns
Guess Who Was Named ‘Antisemite of the Year’
Australian PM Apologizes to Jewish Community After Being Booed at Bondi Beach Vigil
Sarah Huckabee Sanders Defends Christ Ahead of Christmas
Tipsheet

State Department: Okay Fine, We Basically Paid a Ransom for Those Iranian Hostages

Remember the Obama administration's preposterous spin on Iran's release of four American hostages on the exact same day that an unmarked cargo plane loaded with US-arranged cash landed in Tehran? That money wasn't a ransom, they insisted, and how dare you suggest otherwise? There was no quid pro quo, we were imperiously informed, and any allegation to the contrary was right-wing conspiratorial garbage, fomented by domestic "crazies" who make "common cause" with Iran's anti-American zealots.  "No linkage." The biggest problem with this insulting tale -- setting aside all of the hilariously obvious circumstantial evidence -- was that the Iranians were openly boasting about the payment as a ransom, and US officials were telling reporters that the money was connected to the "prisoner release," even though the negotiations weren't at all related. Or something.  Soon after, we learned that DOJ officials had objected to the payment because of the obviously sketchy timing, worrying that Iran would view the transaction as a ransom-for-hostages situation, which would only incentivize more hostage taking.  Those concerns were overruled, Tehran did in fact view it as a ransom, and they've imprisoned more Americans since.  Smart power, and all that.  Next came this revelation, which we mentioned earlier:

Advertisement

And finally, the pitiful, ignominious  surrender:

That is, by definition, a ransom:

The State Department's top spokesman keeps repeating the talking point from his binder that the negotiation tracks were entirely separate. But that story is demolished by US officials' own words and actions. The Iranians linked them, and we complied. A ransom payment. It's quite simple. No, no, the White House's amateur propagandists on social media still retort. We've owed Iran that payment for decades. That money was rightfully theirs. Wrong. We owed that money to an Iranian government that no longer exists because it was violently overthrown by a radical Islamist revolution -- one of whose first major acts was the storming of America's embassy, followed by the outrageous detention of hundreds of US citizens for more than a year.  A regime that to this day is the top exporter and financier of international terrorism, according to this administration. A regime that continues to illegally test-fire banned long-range missiles, in violation of international law. The notion that we "owe" this cabal anything is almost as ludicrous and insulting as the initial lie itself, which has finally come crashing down under its own prodigiously stupid weight. The Obama administration paid a cash ransom for American hostages, and other Americans are already paying the price. Those are facts, the new response to which is blaming the media, much of which credulously repeated the original falsehood.  Pathetic:

Advertisement

I'll leave you with this same spokesman also arguing that (a) after an investigation into this incident, the State Department has been unable to determine who was responsible for the video edit, and (b) they can't determine whether said edit was intended to deceive. The assembled reporters were having none of it.  James Rosen's questions, appropriately enough, are especially damning.  What a farce:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement