Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: KMG365
Uh, yes.

Why else would it have needed to be in non-US-dollar cash?

It should have been a simple $400m ACH. Why wasn't it?

Obviously, because it violates US law in some fashion Zero's Regime feels compelled to hide.

Zero's survival as President is a matter of two thirds of the Senate. Would it have been possible to muster two thirds of the Senate over whatever law he would have been violating by using an ACH?

No? (Duh!) So, why did he bother?

6 posted on 08/05/2016 12:10:38 AM PDT by cynwoody
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: cynwoody
-- Why else would it have needed to be in non-US-dollar cash? --

Why cash at all! The type of currency used shows that the law is stupid, it has no effect but to cause people (who want to follow the law) to do a currency exchange. The point of the law is to curtail payment of tribute or ransom, not to cabin the types of curency that are permissible when paying tribute or ransom.

And to the category of "ransom" or "settlement of a debt," the administration would have you leap to a conclusion that a payment can't be both. If release of the prisoners was contingent on the payment, then the payment was ransom.

11 posted on 08/05/2016 3:59:33 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson