More Iran Deal Deception - A Deal at all Costs

#5
#5
distrovol said:
This will be thoroughly reported upon this evening on the nightly news, I'm sure.
Click to expand...

came out 2 days ago - do a Google search for news and you won't find much (I know you were being sarcastic).

This is a BFD but very little attention is given to it.

I have been unable to find anything in the NYTimes or Wash Po.
 
Last edited:
#6
#6
volinbham said:
came out 2 days ago - do a Google search for news and you won't find much (I know you were being sarcastic).

This is a BFD but very little attention is given to it.
Click to expand...

Oh, I agree. There should be congressional hearings on this matter, IMO. I'm a little surprised Politico ran it, but they do some real journalism from time to time.

I wonder if Trump will tweet a link to the article :whistling:
 
#8
#8
this is the same story I posted the other day. I'd like to hear what the defense is from all of the supporters of his great Iran plan
 
#13
#13
I actually heard some months ago through my online circles that there was also an Obama business interest potentially conflicting this deal, but I can't remember the specifics. I just remember thinking how very Trump-esque at the time.

So we have a former president who aided the Iranian military to make a deal with them, and a current (fake) president who's daughter used his business to launder money to the Iranian military through Baku.

Sounds like we got an awful lot of draining of the swamp to do.
 
#16
#16
Let's consider the headline: "Obama's hidden Iran deal giveaway"

The graphic prominently features Iranian sheik, Obama, Kerry, and a nuclear symbol, plus some missiles.

The summary under the headline is: "By dropping charges against major arms targets, the administration infuriated Justice Department officials — and undermined its own counterproliferation task forces."

Yeah, you can tell right up front that this is going to be chock full of just fact and objective commentary.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#17
#17
On the bright side, since the last and current administrations are evidently in bed with the Iranian military, the likeliness of us going to war with Iran anytime soon is significantly decreased.

I guess that's a good thing, as long as they don't plan on invading Iraq or the Persian Gulf States.
 
#18
#18
lawgator1 said:
Let's consider the headline: "Obama's hidden Iran deal giveaway"

The graphic prominently features Iranian sheik, Obama, Kerry, and a nuclear symbol, plus some missiles.

The summary under the headline is: "By dropping charges against major arms targets, the administration infuriated Justice Department officials — and undermined its own counterproliferation task forces."

Yeah, you can tell right up front that this is going to be chock full of just fact and objective commentary.
Click to expand...

so let me get this straight, the article is false because you don't like the placement of the images and the headline. Sure thing

:crazy::crazy::crazy::crazy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
lawgator1 said:
Let's consider the headline: "Obama's hidden Iran deal giveaway"

The graphic prominently features Iranian sheik, Obama, Kerry, and a nuclear symbol, plus some missiles.

The summary under the headline is: "By dropping charges against major arms targets, the administration infuriated Justice Department officials — and undermined its own counterproliferation task forces."

Yeah, you can tell right up front that this is going to be chock full of just fact and objective commentary.
Click to expand...

Well, if the guy's article is accurate, and I see no reason to think it isn't, it sounds pretty much like a "hidden giveaway" to me.
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
You got it, that is clearly all I said, and I said it just like that.
Click to expand...

for the record, there is absolutely nothing misleading about the title but if that gives you comfort in refusing to believe the rest of the article, then so be it
 
#23
#23
volprof said:
Well, if the guy's article is accurate, and I see no reason to think it isn't, it sounds pretty much like a "hidden giveaway" to me.
Click to expand...

theFallGuy said:
for the record, there is absolutely nothing misleading about the title but if that gives you comfort in refusing to believe the rest of the article, then so be it
Click to expand...


It all depends on how you characterize the real threat posed by these seven traded folks. This article seems to cherry pick some bureaucratic nomenclature and make them sound like they were gearing up to hijack some more planes.

But this is a game the right seems to want to avoid when it comes to the Russian connections to Trump and his people, downplaying characterizations of the connections as Russian spies, and making it seem like they were just routine ambassador adjuncts.

I'm honestly tired of it from both sides. Give me fact or shut up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#24
#24
lawgator1 said:
It all depends on how you characterize the real threat posed by these seven traded folks. This article seems to cherry pick some bureaucratic nomenclature and make them sound like they were gearing up to hijack some more planes.

But this is a game the right seems to want to avoid when it comes to the Russian connections to Trump and his people, downplaying characterizations of the connections as Russian spies, and making it seem like they were just routine ambassador adjuncts.

I'm honestly tired of it from both sides. Give me fact or shut up.
Click to expand...

did you miss the point where at least one of the guys was acquiring technology Iran is lacking for the nuke program, it was something to do with the centrifuges.
 
#25
#25
lawgator1 said:
It all depends on how you characterize the real threat posed by these seven traded folks. This article seems to cherry pick some bureaucratic nomenclature and make them sound like they were gearing up to hijack some more planes.

But this is a game the right seems to want to avoid when it comes to the Russian connections to Trump and his people, downplaying characterizations of the connections as Russian spies, and making it seem like they were just routine ambassador adjuncts.

I'm honestly tired of it from both sides. Give me fact or shut up.
Click to expand...

it's full of facts - you just don't like the facts and I highly doubt you even read the entire article.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top