Political Cartoons & Memes

[PorkChopSandwiches]

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[Hikari Kisugi]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sc...i-150-billion/

This again.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[Muddy]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sc...i-150-billion/

This again.

Snopes is biased.. I would not bet the farm on what they post. Just like in reporting its easy to tell stories from a certain perspective and to not tell it all.

[RBP]

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/sc...i-150-billion/

This again.

Except what IS true, that Snopes conveniently fails to mention, is the $1.7 Billion in physical cash that Obama gave them (in exchange for hostages no less) was taxpayer dollars.

[RBP]

Snopes is biased.. I would not bet the farm on what they post. Just like in reporting its easy to tell stories from a certain perspective and to not tell it all.

The larger sum was unfrozen assets, not taxpayer dollars.

The 1979 MoU stipulated that the unexpended funds would be placed in an interest-bearing account. As it turns out, these funds were not based in such an account—no U.S. administration implemented that requirement. The reasons for this are not clear. Former Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Eric Edelman, who testified on this issue before the Senate, noted that the United States “does not let [FMS accounts] accrue interest.”

The interest was paid from the Judgment Fund, which pays “court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government.” For a payment to be made by the Judgment Fund, Treasury must receive confirmation from the Attorney General that the settlement is in the United States’ best interests. According to Mary McCord, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General, National Security Division at the Department of Justice, “[a]ssessment of a settlement payment from the Judgment Fund includes consideration of the exposure that the United States faces from the claim proposed for settlement, … likelihood of an adverse ruling against the United States, the likely size of such an award, the background of the litigation, the tribunal, relevant legal arguments, relevant facts and governing legal doctrines.”

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/marka...t-the-details/

[Muddy]

I had heard of the ridiculous interest and had that in mind when I posted but did not mention it without a source.

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[Teh One Who Knocks]

[brah pitt]

[PorkChopSandwiches]

So when will BuzzFeed be sued for slander

[Teh One Who Knocks]