I’d be interested in learning more about how the Iran deal, where the Obama administration literally gave pallets of cash to terrorists, was in the nation’s interest and not bribery by this newly revised definition.
Good point.
Also, the Schiff standard seems to be that Congress sets foreign policy in the area of aid, and the President (if he's Trump) can't intervene or improvise. Did Congress authorize Obama to send pallets of cash in the night to Iran? Wouldn't a check have done just as well? (Answer: No, because bank transfers can be tracked. Cash can purchase terror, or be kicked back in various ways.)
The rationale for the Iran deal was different. The Obama administration stated the cash given to Iran was the release of assets frozen by the US after the Shah was deposed.
Obama was “technically” returning Iran’s money back to them. Truth be known, it was done in cash in multiple currencies so there was no electronic signature to the funds. The old 1 for you, 2 for me scheme.
Had the Obama administration used conventional means,ie: wire transfers, there would have been an electronic record of money in and money out. This way no one knows where the money went after it was delivered to Iran.
I’m sure not all the money went to Iran. I would bet some of it made its way to some private accounts controlled by US politicians.