He thinks the Iranian sent us this "tape" ...wait for it... to embarrass us. Not sure why we'd need them?https://twitter.com/cnnpolitics/status/761302187695898626 …
Their argument is they settled for billions less than an eventual The Hague ruling. One can dispute likelihood but+
-
-
..far cry from "they paid ransom" since this wasn't US money to begin with; and Le Hague and US courts different.
-
^La Hague, The Hague, etc.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Government is bound by US court ruling, unless it is definitely -not "eventually"(!)- overruled by binding intern. court
-
Sure, but here the govt chose to make a concession it saw as very very likely, in return for something valuable.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Are you also a fan of preemptive strikes, to prevent "eventually" bigger own losses of an "eventually" attacking enemy?
-
I am not in favor of the government breaking the law in any circumstances. Luckily, that isn't what happened here.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

