The Obama administration has finally admitted that all of the $1.7 billion it paid to the Iranian regime at the conclusion of the Iran deal — ostensibly to settle old disputes about a Shah-era arms deal, but in reality as ransom for four American captives — was delivered in cold, hard cash to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which is closely linked to terrorist organizations throughout the Middle East and beyond.
And both Hillary Clinton and her running mate continue to applaud the Iran deal.
There is no evidence the deal is actually working. Iran has repeatedly violated the UN Security Council’s version of the deal, which includes restrictions on ballistic missile tests. Last week, it emerged that the Obama administration and other powers agreed to “secret” exemptions for Iran from the terms of the agreement, hoping that it would eventually comply. And now Iran is moving Russian S-300 missiles to defend key nuclear sites like Fordow — which it should have no reason to protect.
Clinton has actually taken credit for helping to facilitate the early negotiations with Iranwhen she was Secretary of State — at a time when the regime was near collapse, surrounded by U.S. troops to the east and west and beset by an internal democratic uprising. Her vice presidential pick, Sen. Tim Kaine (I-VT), not only backed the Iran deal but also boycotted Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech against it last March. Neither has criticized the delivery of hard currency to the Iranian regime.
If, as Clinton’s friends in the media protest, the $1.7 billion cash ransom (“leverage” is the term Obama prefers) is a separate side deal, then Clinton should have no problem attacking it. The money provides the perfect opportunity for a Clintonesque “triangulation” — supporting the Iran deal with the very best of intentions, while opposing cash likely destined for Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and sleeper cells worldwide. But she is committed to Obama’s appeasement strategy, ransom included.
Clinton is fond of referencing the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, which took place when she was a newly-elected U.S. Senator from New York. In the aftermath of the attacks, Americans wondered how they could have been planned without the knowledge of U.S. intelligence — and how they were funded.
It would have been unthinkable, after 9/11, for any American politician to back sending $1.7 billion to Iran’s military. Yet Clinton does. That alone disqualifies her as commander-in-chief.