Obama Administration Secretly Helped Iran Skirt Financial Sanctions

[bcking 3,157]

39 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

It doesn't?  It seems that Iran needed access to the US banks even if only for one time to convert their money.  However, I believe the bigger issue is the previous administration lying to congress.  I guess that is OK for some.

As I said, if someone opened their door and walked me to their toilet to use it once, and then walked me out, I wouldn't go around claiming I had access to their house. I was allowed to use their toilet once. 

 

I think it also depends on the timing of statements made to Congress. As I said in the beginning Iran never actually used the one time license since the US banks that we're approached said no. So in the end Obama didn't even walk them to the toilet. He offered, but it didn't work out.

[bcking 3,157]

“Senior U.S. government officials repeatedly testified to Congress that Iranian access to the U.S. financial system was not on the table or part of any deal,” congressional investigators wrote in the report.

 

I'd say that was still true. It wasn't part of the deal, and there was no intention to give them access. That were going to guide their money through a US bank in order to convert Rials into Euros...Iran wasn't itself going to have access. The money was in Oman at the time (I think) so really it would have been working with the Omani bank to move the money.

[Dashinka 23,243]

10 minutes ago, bcking said:

As I said, if someone opened their door and walked me to their toilet to use it once, and then walked me out, I wouldn't go around claiming I had access to their house. I was allowed to use their toilet once. 

 

I think it also depends on the timing of statements made to Congress. As I said in the beginning Iran never actually used the one time license since the US banks that we're approached said no. So in the end Obama didn't even walk them to the toilet. He offered, but it didn't work out.

Access is access regardless if it is single or multi-entry.  You can compare this to the various visas one might need to travel internationally, if you get a single entry visa and enter a country only once, do you have access to that country during your trip?  Sure, you may not have repeated access with a single entry visa, but one did have access despite how some may spin it.  I believe the question is why did Obama even offer it in the first place?

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Bill & Katya said:

Access is access regardless if it is single or multi-entry.  You can compare this to the various visas one might need to travel internationally, if you get a single entry visa and enter a country only once, do you have access to that country during your trip?  Sure, you may not have repeated access with a single entry visa, but one did have access despite how some may spin it.  I believe the question is why did Obama even offer it in the first place?

It wasn't even access for Iran though. It was access for their money, which was in a different country and they weren't even allowed to use at the time.

 

Iran itself was offered no way into the Us financial system. We were going to move through money through a bank. Whoop de Doo.

 

My initial assessment stands - a lot of hoopla over nothing.

[Dashinka 23,243]

Just now, bcking said:

It wasn't even access for Iran though. It was access for their money, which was in a different country and they weren't even allowed to use at the time.

 

Iran itself was offered no way into the Us financial system. We were going to move through money through a bank. Whoop de Doo.

 

My initial assessment stands - a lot of hoopla over nothing.

Of course.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

2 hours ago, bcking said:

It wasn't even access for Iran though. It was access for their money, which was in a different country and they weren't even allowed to use at the time.

 

Iran itself was offered no way into the Us financial system. We were going to move through money through a bank. Whoop de Doo.

 

My initial assessment stands - a lot of hoopla over nothing.

ding ding ding... and who helped them around that 

[bcking 3,157]

2 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

ding ding ding... and who helped them around that 

Who helped them use their money? Of course we did. That wasn't a secret and it certainly wasn't "newsworthy" as of yesterday. That was a very public part of the deal. They agreed to the restrictions on their program in exchange for a number of things. One of which was getting access to funds that were previously kept from them. It's even in the freakin wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action#Sanctions).

 

"Following the issuance of a IAEA report verifying implementation by Iran of the nuclear-related measures, the UN sanctions against Iran and some EU sanctions will terminate and some will be suspended. Once sanctions are lifted, Iran will recover approximately$100 billion of its assets (U.S. Treasury Department estimate) frozen in overseas banks.^[98]"

 

The "news" aspect that came out yesterday is the claim that by offering a one time license to transfer money that was held in Oman as Rials into US dollars through a US bank, and then subsequently into Euros we were somehow giving Iran 'access to the US financial system'. I call that hogwash. The money was frozen in Oman, so Iran wouldn't have even been the ones transferring the money. They didn't have access to the money. They wouldn't have had any access to the financial system themselves. Their money would have just passed through a US bank on it's way to Euros. Now why it couldn't just go from Rials to Euros (which I believe is what ended up happening anyway) I don't know, but I certainly don't care if they had passed through as US dollars on their own. The result was the same regardless. We were unfreezing their assets. You can dislike that, but that certainly isn't new information. That was known as soon as the agreement was made.

[bcking 3,157]

And to be clear once again - Both the National Review and the apnews article (both linked in the OP) have INCREDIBLY misleading/incorrect titles.

 

Apnews - "Secret Obama-era permit let Iran convert funds to dollars" - It never actually happened. It was GOING to let them convert it, but they never did. Even if it HAD happened, it was going to let them convert the funds into euros. There was no way they were going to keep it as dollars.

 

National Review - "Obama administration secretly helped Iran skirt Financial Sanctions" - Again not true. At worst it was OFFERED, but again it never actually happened. But even that is assuming that allowing the funds to move through a US bank would be "giving Iran access to the US financial system" which is just not true. The funds would pass through, that doesn't mean Iran would have any control over anything. They didn't even control the money in Oman, so it wouldn't have really gotten back into their "hands" until after the transfer was through. Oman was really the one being given access to transfer the money since they were the ones in control of the funds initially.

[Dashinka 23,243]

49 minutes ago, bcking said:

And to be clear once again - Both the National Review and the apnews article (both linked in the OP) have INCREDIBLY misleading/incorrect titles.

 

Apnews - "Secret Obama-era permit let Iran convert funds to dollars" - It never actually happened. It was GOING to let them convert it, but they never did. Even if it HAD happened, it was going to let them convert the funds into euros. There was no way they were going to keep it as dollars.

 

National Review - "Obama administration secretly helped Iran skirt Financial Sanctions" - Again not true. At worst it was OFFERED, but again it never actually happened. But even that is assuming that allowing the funds to move through a US bank would be "giving Iran access to the US financial system" which is just not true. The funds would pass through, that doesn't mean Iran would have any control over anything. They didn't even control the money in Oman, so it wouldn't have really gotten back into their "hands" until after the transfer was through. Oman was really the one being given access to transfer the money since they were the ones in control of the funds initially.

The permit or license was never issued?  Did congress or the American people know about it?  It all seems accurate to me.  Now that the banks refused Obama, that is immaterial to the headlines.  

[Dashinka 23,243]

56 minutes ago, bcking said:

Who helped them use their money? Of course we did. That wasn't a secret and it certainly wasn't "newsworthy" as of yesterday. That was a very public part of the deal. They agreed to the restrictions on their program in exchange for a number of things. One of which was getting access to funds that were previously kept from them. It's even in the freakin wikipedia page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action#Sanctions).

 

"Following the issuance of a IAEA report verifying implementation by Iran of the nuclear-related measures, the UN sanctions against Iran and some EU sanctions will terminate and some will be suspended. Once sanctions are lifted, Iran will recover approximately$100 billion of its assets (U.S. Treasury Department estimate) frozen in overseas banks.^[98]"

 

The "news" aspect that came out yesterday is the claim that by offering a one time license to transfer money that was held in Oman as Rials into US dollars through a US bank, and then subsequently into Euros we were somehow giving Iran 'access to the US financial system'. I call that hogwash. The money was frozen in Oman, so Iran wouldn't have even been the ones transferring the money. They didn't have access to the money. They wouldn't have had any access to the financial system themselves. Their money would have just passed through a US bank on it's way to Euros. Now why it couldn't just go from Rials to Euros (which I believe is what ended up happening anyway) I don't know, but I certainly don't care if they had passed through as US dollars on their own. The result was the same regardless. We were unfreezing their assets. You can dislike that, but that certainly isn't new information. That was known as soon as the agreement was made.

Sure, take your funds in the currency they are currently being held in.  Where was the agreement that they had to be in US Dollars or Euros?  Obama went the extra mile for them to attempt to cement his legacy. 

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

The permit or license was never issued?  Did congress or the American people know about it?  It all seems accurate to me.  Now that the banks refused Obama, that is immaterial to the headlines.  

The title implies it actually happened, which it didn't.

 

It should have read:

 

"Secret Obama era permit would have let Oman convert Iranian funds into US dollars prior to conversion into Euros to allow Iran government access to funds".

 

Why it needed to be Euros I don't know, and why they couldn't just convert it to Euros directly in the first place (they ended up doing just that) I also have no idea. I don't really care about either point.

 

The reality is all the license would have done was let money get moved. Iran would have had no access to our financial systems. The money wouldn't have even stayed as US dollars. Was it bad to not make it public? Perhaps but I'm sure every administration does things that aren't public. I don't believe they were misleading when they said Iran wouldn't have access to our financial systems, however. Even if they went through with the plan Iran wouldn't have had access to anything. Oman was handling their money, then a US bank would let it pass through on it's way to Euros. Still not a big deal.

 

If you have issues with us relaxing the sanctions in the first place, that's fine. But that isn't news. That was spelled out in the agreement.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

Sure, take your funds in the currency they are currently being held in.  Where was the agreement that they had to be in US Dollars or Euros?  Obama went the extra mile for them to attempt to cement his legacy. 

He went an extra mile to seal a deal that by every objective measure was successful in the goals it set out to achieve. Why they wanted it in Euros I don't really care. If that sweetened the deal and encouraged them to sign then fine. No skin off our backs.

 

I wish Trump luck with coming up with anything better than that deal without directly supporting regime change. Also good luck getting anything better AND approved by Congress with respect to North Korea. Ideally 2/3 of Congress, because you know it just has to be an official treaty otherwise it's no good.

[Dashinka 23,243]

3 hours ago, bcking said:

And to be clear once again - Both the National Review and the apnews article (both linked in the OP) have INCREDIBLY misleading/incorrect titles.

 

Apnews - "Secret Obama-era permit let Iran convert funds to dollars" - It never actually happened. It was GOING to let them convert it, but they never did. Even if it HAD happened, it was going to let them convert the funds into euros. There was no way they were going to keep it as dollars.

 

National Review - "Obama administration secretly helped Iran skirt Financial Sanctions" - Again not true. At worst it was OFFERED, but again it never actually happened. But even that is assuming that allowing the funds to move through a US bank would be "giving Iran access to the US financial system" which is just not true. The funds would pass through, that doesn't mean Iran would have any control over anything. They didn't even control the money in Oman, so it wouldn't have really gotten back into their "hands" until after the transfer was through. Oman was really the one being given access to transfer the money since they were the ones in control of the funds initially.

 

1 hour ago, bcking said:

He went an extra mile to seal a deal that by every objective measure was successful in the goals it set out to achieve. Why they wanted it in Euros I don't really care. If that sweetened the deal and encouraged them to sign then fine. No skin off our backs.

 

I wish Trump luck with coming up with anything better than that deal without directly supporting regime change. Also good luck getting anything better AND approved by Congress with respect to North Korea. Ideally 2/3 of Congress, because you know it just has to be an official treaty otherwise it's no good.

You are arguing semantics.  The secret Obama-era permit did let Iran convert funds to dollars, the license was very specific and the sentence does not imply anything more than there was a secret license issued.  You are reading much too much into that one.  As to the other headline, that is a little misleading, but I believe it is still semantics because the Obama administration did help Iran in secret whether it was through a US bank (I think they all laughed at the license), or through organizing this through a European bank.

 

My assessment stands.

[Boiler 43,434]

Remember Obama gets  a pass.

 

From pretty much anything

 

Because.

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Bill & Katya said:

 

You are arguing semantics.  The secret Obama-era permit did let Iran convert funds to dollars, the license was very specific and the sentence does not imply anything more than there was a secret license issued.  You are reading much too much into that one.  As to the other headline, that is a little misleading, but I believe it is still semantics because the Obama administration did help Iran in secret whether it was through a US bank (I think they all laughed at the license), or through organizing this through a European bank.

 

My assessment stands.

 

It was very public that Iran was getting access to their money. I think it is fairly assumed that they would want it in a currency other than Rials (or at least have the ability to move it into another currency if they did). Whether that was through a US bank as an intermediary or not, doesn't really matter to do. Moving money through a bank to convert it to Euro's does not constitute giving Iran "access to our financial systems". There is no evidence they would have had access to anything. They likely wouldn't have even had access to that money until it was moved into Euros. 

 

But at this point we are going back and forth. We can agree to disagree

Edited June 7, 2018 by bcking