[Hulka]

Thanks. But I need actual specific violations of code/law before I can find a wedge to dig deeper.

The arms sale process was done in accordance with FAR/AECA, the nation was on the approved list, the SME/MDE items were approved for export to that country, congressional notification done, etc. . .now, when a FMS deal is done there are third-party transfer limitations and that is where it is likely Hitlery did wrong, but need proof of that. The country can't do a third-party transfer without US approval, did they have it? Were FAR/AECA caveats for third-party transfers adhered to? FMS is hugely complex and difficult and not easily circumvented, especially on the US side. That is why I think it is a third-party transfer issue but need to know.

[Liz]

SOURCE: http://www.state.gov/t/pm/rsat/c14027.htm

CONGRESSIONAL NOTIFICATION OF TRANSFERS
Third party transfers are subject to requirements for Congressional notification under AECA, §3(d) (reference (c)), using guidelines similar to those for AECA, §36(b) (reference (c)) notifications (see Chapter 5, section C5.6).

A 30-day prior Congressional notification is required for third-party transfer requests that involve defense articles and services with original acquisition values that fall in one of the following categories: Major Defense Equipment (MDE) with an acquisition value equal to or greater than $14,000,000 for non-North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) recipients and $25,000,000 if the recipient is a member of NATO, Australia, Israel, Japan, New Zealand or Republic of Korea; or any other defense article or related training or defense service with an acquisition value of $50,000,000 or more for non-NATO recipients and $100,000,000 or more for NATO, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand recipients. Approval is granted after the 30-day (including weekends) period has expired if no objections are raised.