Here's a perfect example of why so many factchecks are nothing but op-ed columns. "But this was always Iran’s money" is not only misleading, it does nothing to undermine Trump's claim, as I explain here:
nationalreview.com/corner/yes-oba…
nationalreview.com/corner/yes-oba…
Obama had no obligation to settle with Iran (using the logic of factcheckers Iran still owes *us* money). Anyway here is the link to the Wapo piece: washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/…
Also: using the factcheckers' logic, Iran owes us $817 million for a counterclaim at The Hague, and over $1 billion to U.S. victims of Iranian-sponsored terrorism.
Not to mention, The Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act, signed by Clinton in 2000, stipulates that Iran’s money could not be unfrozen until all those cases were paid. Obama ignored that law.
... the subrogated claims were dealt with by being completely ignored.
And by ignoring those claims Obama undermined any legal claims terrorism against Iran -- in the US there have been 16 cases with compensatory damages = $400 million and punitive damages = $3.5 billion.
Every president since Jimmy Carter somehow managed not to hand this money over, but factcheckers are framing O's capitulation as a fulfillment of some obligation to make Iran whole. The funds were in dispute. We owed them nothing. fin.
