Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Learn to read, i***t. Oh, I’m sorry.......I meant to say you fcuking i***t.

FIRST, IT was framed the WAY YOU PROGRESSIVES FRAME SO MANY OF YOUR FAUX STORIES.

SECOND, Lannie Davis DID SAY only drug dealers and mobsters deal in cash.

THIRD, yes, Obama went around U.S. law with the cash.....That’s the fcuking point you moron.

I assure you I understand International finance better than you. Howeve, I acknowledge that’s a bar set at ground level at best given your level as an imbecile.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Don’t ever expect baz the spaz to read and comprehend. As the little f*****t progressive he is, he is too busy trying to Brownshirt the rest of us!

To acknowledge I never said the money (by the way..... SOME of it was frozen assets, and by law we didn’t owe them squat) wasn’t originally the Iranians would have spoiled his little f*****t attack. Of course, since the US courts ruled that money belonged to US victims of Iranian terrorism, it really didn’t belong to the Iranians any longer.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

You really are a moron. The law was clearly violated AND the washing occurred by t***sferring it to Euros.

Your ignorance is magnificent!

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Uh.....it did include interest.

EyeSawYou

It really depends on what he meant by "washed", how can you possibly interpret that as a lie when you don't know what was meant by his use of that word?

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Cite the statute that says a currency t***sfer is against the law. Converting USD to Euro is not washing. You have no freaking idea what you are talking about.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Because what happened was not washing. Look up some basic currency management terms.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

I think they have probably said things that are true before, but I would imagine that they were quick to retract them.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

Nice answer. What was the question?

mwalsh Loc: Houston

The purpose of "washing" money is to give currency gained from illegal activities a new and legitimate source. Nobody tried to hide the source of the cash sent to Iran. It was Iranian cash being returned to Iranians. There was zero need to wash the currency.

A foreign exchange t***saction, converting one currency to another currency, in no way constitutes "washing." A foreign exchange t***saction may be used as part of a washing operation, but is not in of itself any kind of washing.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

If currency exchange were money laundering, every Corporate CFO in America would be in jail. And one would be arrested at every at every currency exchange in every airport in America.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Well, i***t........

We had sanctions against Iran which at issue exclude Iran from the U.S. financial system by, among other things, prohibiting Americans and financial institutions from engaging in currency t***sactions that involve Iran’s government.

What did Obama do? Obama arranged to ship the mullahs piles of cash, worth $400 million and converted into foreign denominations, reportedly in an unmarked cargo plane.

By the way, the Iranians have bragged that the astonishing cash payment was a ransom — and Obama spent a lot of effort telling us that we can trust the Iranians!

Get it? Are you following the bouncing ball? Its quacking, waddling, it’s got feathers!

There’s more......This from Obama’s Treasury Department on January 16, 2016, the “Implementation Day” of the JCPOA.......Treasury published guidance regarding Iran states that, in general, “the clearing of U.S. dollar- or other currency-denominated t***sactions through the U.S. financial system or involving a U.S. person remain prohibited[.]”

OOPS!!!!! Awkward!

But wait....There’s more!

It was not just U.S. dollar t***sactions that are prohibited; foreign currency is also barred. Obama’s cash payment, of course, involved both. Hmmmmm?

Is there a law to prevent this????

Federal law Section 560.204, which states:
The exportation, reexportation, sale, or supply, directly or indirectly, from the United States, or by a United States person, wherever located, of any goods, technology, or services to Iran or the Government of Iran is prohibited. [Emphasis added.]. This regulation goes on to stress that this prohibition may not be circumvented by exporting things of value “to a person in a third country” when one has “knowledge or reason to know that” such things are “intended specifically for supply, t***sshipment, or reexportation, directly or indirectly, to Iran or the Government of Iran.”

Uh oh.......looking bad, yes?

Let’s summarize: Obama had our financial system issue U.S. assets that were then converted to foreign currencies for delivery to Iran. Both steps flouted the regulations, which prohibit the clearing of currency of any kind if Iran is even minimally involved in the deal; here, Iran is the beneficiary of the deal.


Oh....by the way, the surreptitious turning of U.S. cash into Euros would be a definition of washing.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Sorry, Walsh, but the laundering of money is NOTALWAYS ILLEGAL. In fact, any method used to hide the origin, source, or use of cash is a form of washing.

As an example, a political group can create local groups to accept money from, say, a D.C based donor, legally funnel that cash into a local group (say, the NEA affiliate in a suburb of Chicago), and that NEA affiliate can funnel it legally to an even more local PAC which backs a candidate for, say, the school board. All legal, but is defined as laundering.

Cykdelic Loc: Now outside of Chiraq & Santa Fe, NM

Wrong. Take into account the breaking of las, the unmarked plane, the exchange of dollars for euros and Swiss francs...............really, dude, try and think.

Bazbo Loc: Lisboa, Portugal

Maybe you should actually read the statute before you rely on it in a post, especially when you need to stoop to juvenile name calling to support your obviously erroneous position.

To wit: the section you cite addresses selling stuff to Iran, not returning the Iranian money we kept when they bought armaments from us and we did not deliver the goods. No sale, no violation of of the law that you are s**tting yourself over. The actual sale was 35 years prior, before this section was enacted and we were still friends with the Shah.

And you are still wrong about your definition of currency washing. The source of the funds was never a secret. The funds were not part of an illegal enterprise made to look like it came from legitimate and legal sources. Please cite any authoritative source on international finance that defines washing the way you do.

To summarize--you are in no position to call anyone an i***t and any subject, but especially financial regulations and import/export laws.