User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Have Democrats forgotten President Obama's quid pro quo trade with Iran?

  1. #1
    Points: 36,290, Level: 46
    Level completed: 56%, Points required for next Level: 660
    Overall activity: 43.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    FindersKeepers's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    156668
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    12,181
    Points
    36,290
    Level
    46
    Thanks Given
    5,487
    Thanked 9,301x in 5,750 Posts
    Mentioned
    147 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Have Democrats forgotten President Obama's quid pro quo trade with Iran?

    How is something wrong for Trump but not wrong for Obama?

    Is quid pro quo okay?
    Is it not okay?

    Or, is it only dependent on the party you represent? If quid pro quo is an impeachable offense, why wasn't Obama impeached?


    The quid pro quo debates fluttering around Washington may sound familiar. The Wall Street Journal headline Aug. 3, 2016: “U.S. Sent Cash to Iran as Americans Were Freed” followed by the sub headline, “Obama administration insists there was no quid pro quo, but critics charge payment amounted to ransom.”


    The lead sentence of that article: “The Obama administration secretly organized an airlift of $400 million worth of cash to Iran that coincided with the January release of four Americans detained in Tehran, according to U.S. and European officials and congressional staff briefed on the operation afterward.”


    President Obama’s action in January 2016 seems just a bit more concrete than President Trump’s conversation with Ukrainian President Zelensky. In Obama’s case, something was exchanged regardless of whether it was quid pro quo. In Trump’s case the only thing exchanged were words in a telephone conversation.
    https://www.clarionledger.com/story/...an/4155306002/
    “I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.”
    ~Leonardo da Vinci

  2. #2

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 41,280, Level: 49
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    Social25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Agent Zero's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    19468
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    7,233
    Points
    41,280
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    2,309
    Thanked 1,633x in 1,297 Posts
    Mentioned
    315 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    For like the thousandth time on this forum, that wasn't quid pro quo.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/ob...llion-in-cash/

    Quick Take

    A viral meme distorts the facts about the Iran nuclear agreement. The deal, approved by six countries and the European Union, gave Iran access to its own frozen assets.

    Full Story

    As a candidate during the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump criticized the international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons’ program — formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — that had been adopted the year before. He suggested that the U.S. had returned $150 billion to Iran as part of the deal.
    That’s not true. We’ve written about this issue before. PolitiFact and the Washington Post have, too.
    But Trump has repeated the claim as recently as December, when he tweeted: “The Democrats and President Obama gave Iran 150 Billion Dollars and got nothing, but they can’t give 5 Billion Dollars for National Security and a Wall?”
    Trump’s bogus claim now has been repeated in a meme that references the president’s declaration of a national emergency to redirect federal funds for a proposed wall on the southern border.
    The meme, which has been shared 149,000 times on Facebook, mentions the recent lawsuit brought against the Trump administration by 16 states to block the national emergency. The meme says: “So, when Obama bypassed the Congress while giving Iran 150 billion in cash, how many States had sued him?”
    First of all, former President Barack Obama didn’t give “150 billion in cash” to Iran.
    The nuclear agreement included China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union, so Obama didn’t carry out any part of it on his own. The deal did lift some sanctions, which lifted a freeze on Iran’s assets that were held largely in foreign, not U.S., banks. And, to be clear, the money that was unfrozen belonged to Iran. It had only been made inaccessible by sanctions aimed at crippling the country’s nuclear program.
    Secondly, $150 billion is a high-end estimate of the total that was freed up after some sanctions were lifted. U.S. Treasury Department estimates put the number at about $50 billion in “usable liquid assets,” according to 2015 testimony from Adam Szubin, acting under secretary of treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence.
    The part that the meme gets right, though, is that the deal didn’t get congressional approval. The Obama administration had maintained that the agreement wasn’t a treaty, which would have required approval by the Senate. Republicans did try to block the deal, but they weren’t able to get enough support to pass the legislation in the Senate.
    However, the U.S. is now no longer part of the deal. Trump pulled out in May 2018.
    How crazy alt righties got pwnd by a conervative web site:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlins.../#3b7ecb78e9b5
    il·lib·er·al
    i(l)ˈlib(ə)rəladjective1.opposed to liberal principles; restricting freedom of thought or behavior
    "illiberal and anti-democratic policies
    • synonyms: intolerant, narrow-minded, unenlightened, conservative, reactionary;


  3. The Following User Says Thank You to Agent Zero For This Useful Post:

    BenjaminO (11-21-2019)

  4. #3
    Original Ranter
    Points: 203,684, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.5%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdriveTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    MMC's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    45806
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    51,543
    Points
    203,684
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    19,991
    Thanked 14,801x in 11,263 Posts
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Zero View Post
    For like the thousandth time on this forum, that wasn't quid pro quo.

    https://www.factcheck.org/2019/03/ob...llion-in-cash/

    Quick Take

    A viral meme distorts the facts about the Iran nuclear agreement. The deal, approved by six countries and the European Union, gave Iran access to its own frozen assets.

    Full Story

    As a candidate during the 2016 campaign, President Donald Trump criticized the international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear weapons’ program — formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action — that had been adopted the year before. He suggested that the U.S. had returned $150 billion to Iran as part of the deal.
    That’s not true. We’ve written about this issue before. PolitiFact and the Washington Post have, too.
    But Trump has repeated the claim as recently as December, when he tweeted: “The Democrats and President Obama gave Iran 150 Billion Dollars and got nothing, but they can’t give 5 Billion Dollars for National Security and a Wall?”
    Trump’s bogus claim now has been repeated in a meme that references the president’s declaration of a national emergency to redirect federal funds for a proposed wall on the southern border.
    The meme, which has been shared 149,000 times on Facebook, mentions the recent lawsuit brought against the Trump administration by 16 states to block the national emergency. The meme says: “So, when Obama bypassed the Congress while giving Iran 150 billion in cash, how many States had sued him?”
    First of all, former President Barack Obama didn’t give “150 billion in cash” to Iran.
    The nuclear agreement included China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States and the European Union, so Obama didn’t carry out any part of it on his own. The deal did lift some sanctions, which lifted a freeze on Iran’s assets that were held largely in foreign, not U.S., banks. And, to be clear, the money that was unfrozen belonged to Iran. It had only been made inaccessible by sanctions aimed at crippling the country’s nuclear program.
    Secondly, $150 billion is a high-end estimate of the total that was freed up after some sanctions were lifted. U.S. Treasury Department estimates put the number at about $50 billion in “usable liquid assets,” according to 2015 testimony from Adam Szubin, acting under secretary of treasury for terrorism and financial intelligence.
    The part that the meme gets right, though, is that the deal didn’t get congressional approval. The Obama administration had maintained that the agreement wasn’t a treaty, which would have required approval by the Senate. Republicans did try to block the deal, but they weren’t able to get enough support to pass the legislation in the Senate.
    However, the U.S. is now no longer part of the deal. Trump pulled out in May 2018.
    LMAO typical leftist trying to deny BO the Peeps Quid Quo Pro. Oh and those 6 Countries didn't know about BO the Peeps sending of the cash in the middle of the night.


    Obama also committed the ultimate quid pro quo when he delivered millions of dollars to the terror regime Iran, in cash, on pallets, in the middle of the night (like Pablo Escobar) that just so happened to coincide with the release of American prisoners being held hostage.


    There were actually so many quid pro quos that went on during the Obama era that people stopped questioning it, and that makes it all the more despicable when Democrats scream about made-up quid pro quos of the Trump administration. Their behavior now compared to their lack of care when Obama really did do it shows they don’t really take quid prod quo deals very seriously unless, of course, it’s a Republican president against whom they can use it......snip~


    https://davidharrisjr.com/rich/where...pro-quo-deals/
    Don't only Practice your Art, but force your way into its Secrets, For it and Knowledge can Raise men to the Divine!!!!! Ludwig Van Beethoven ~

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to MMC For This Useful Post:

    FindersKeepers (11-21-2019)

  6. #4

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 41,280, Level: 49
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    Social25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Agent Zero's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    19468
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    7,233
    Points
    41,280
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    2,309
    Thanked 1,633x in 1,297 Posts
    Mentioned
    315 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    LMAO typical leftist trying to deny BO the Peeps Quid Quo Pro. Oh and those 6 Countries didn't know about BO the Peeps sending of the cash in the middle of the night.


    Obama also committed the ultimate quid pro quo when he delivered millions of dollars to the terror regime Iran, in cash, on pallets, in the middle of the night (like Pablo Escobar) that just so happened to coincide with the release of American prisoners being held hostage.


    There were actually so many quid pro quos that went on during the Obama era that people stopped questioning it, and that makes it all the more despicable when Democrats scream about made-up quid pro quos of the Trump administration. Their behavior now compared to their lack of care when Obama really did do it shows they don’t really take quid prod quo deals very seriously unless, of course, it’s a Republican president against whom they can use it......snip~


    https://davidharrisjr.com/rich/where...pro-quo-deals/
    Umm the Factcheck piece was about the Iran cash.
    How crazy alt righties got pwnd by a conervative web site:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlins.../#3b7ecb78e9b5
    il·lib·er·al
    i(l)ˈlib(ə)rəladjective1.opposed to liberal principles; restricting freedom of thought or behavior
    "illiberal and anti-democratic policies
    • synonyms: intolerant, narrow-minded, unenlightened, conservative, reactionary;


  7. #5
    Points: 41,182, Level: 49
    Level completed: 61%, Points required for next Level: 668
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Cletus's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    181184
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Posts
    18,155
    Points
    41,182
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    16
    Thanked 12,869x in 8,012 Posts
    Mentioned
    191 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Zero View Post
    Umm the Factcheck piece was about the Iran cash.
    The article was wrong.
    "All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void." Marbury Vs. Madison, 5 US (2 Cranch) 137, 174, 176, (1803). "Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule making or legislation which would abrogate them." Miranda Vs. Arizona, 384 US 436 p. 491.

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Cletus For This Useful Post:

    FindersKeepers (11-21-2019)

  9. #6
    Points: 216,292, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranOverdrive
    Tahuyaman's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    268910
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    95,756
    Points
    216,292
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    10,999
    Thanked 37,893x in 28,334 Posts
    Mentioned
    455 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by FindersKeepers View Post
    How is something wrong for Trump but not wrong for Obama?

    Is quid pro quo okay?
    Is it not okay?

    Or, is it only dependent on the party you represent? If quid pro quo is an impeachable offense, why wasn't Obama impeached?




    https://www.clarionledger.com/story/...an/4155306002/
    That was different.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Tahuyaman For This Useful Post:

    FindersKeepers (11-21-2019)

  11. #7
    Original Ranter
    Points: 203,684, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.5%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdriveTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    MMC's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    45806
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    51,543
    Points
    203,684
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    19,991
    Thanked 14,801x in 11,263 Posts
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Zero View Post
    Umm the Factcheck piece was about the Iran cash.
    But didn't mention anything about the Hostages.
    Don't only Practice your Art, but force your way into its Secrets, For it and Knowledge can Raise men to the Divine!!!!! Ludwig Van Beethoven ~

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to MMC For This Useful Post:

    FindersKeepers (11-21-2019)

  13. #8

    tPF Moderator
    Points: 41,280, Level: 49
    Level completed: 67%, Points required for next Level: 570
    Overall activity: 90.0%
    Achievements:
    Social25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Agent Zero's Avatar tPF Moderator
    Karma
    19468
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    7,233
    Points
    41,280
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    2,309
    Thanked 1,633x in 1,297 Posts
    Mentioned
    315 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    But didn't mention anything about the Hostages.
    Sorry. I posted the wrong fact check. You guys have so many conspiracies it's hard to keep up.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ob...u-s-prisoners/

    In January 2016, the Obama administration successfully negotiated the release of four Americans who had been imprisoned in Iran in exchange for the release of seven Iranians who had been imprisoned in the United States.(A fifth American prisoner was released separately.) At around the same time, the U.S. airlifted the equivalent of USD $400 million in various currencies to Tehran, sparking conspiracy theories about the timing:
    House
    Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) was among those who seized on the timing and cloak-and-dagger delivery method, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, saying it proved suspicions that the Obama administration had tried to hide a payment for the four Americans, including Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. GOP candidate Donald Trump called it an example of the administration’s foreign policy failures.
    “Obama administration sent plane load of cash to #Iran as ransom as part of deal on hostages. Just unreal,” tweeted Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a long-standing critic of the Iran talks.
    As with other issues that would normally fall by the wayside in a normal daily news cycle, the payout to Iran became prime fodder for yet another election-year debate:
    StBack in late 1979, after Iranian revolutionaries took 52 Americans hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran and froze Iranian assets in America. Among those frozen assets was a $400 million delivery of fighter jets from the U.S. that Iran’s previous government had already paid for.
    Although the American hostages were finally released a year later, issues such as the frozen Iranian assets (including that $400 million) were not settled at that time. Instead, an international court based in the Hague, the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal was established to deal with such legal claims. The tribunal process dragged on for years and years without a ruling on the $400 million being issued, and finally, when arbitration process was apparently about to wind up (quite possibly not in American’s favor), the U.S. agreed to pay Iran back the $400 million principal along with $1.3 billion in interest. If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking.
    It is true the U.S. agreed to the settlement at the same time it was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran and for the return of four U.S. citizens who had been detained by Iran. However, the negotiations over these these issues were conducted by completely separate teams in order to avoid any overlap or suggestions of connections between them.
    As Vox noted, charges that the U.S. had paid “ransom” to Iran for the release of hostages didn’t even make logical sense:
    The payment, which sounds really shady out of context, was actually the end of a boring, decades-old international legal case totally unrelated to the hot-button nuclear and prisoner issues.
    [T]here was no direct evidence to back up [the ransom] theory. The speculation about timing was just that — speculation.
    Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange were not the same negotiators involved in the weapons deal settlement. Therefore, they couldn’t make demands of the US team negotiating the weapons deal settlement, which means they couldn’t negotiate a quid pro quo of money for hostage release, the definition of a ransom.
    Moreover, the basic logic of it didn’t make any sense. Iran was going to get that money back no matter what through the arbitration process — probably more, if the Obama administration was right. Why would [Iran] release potentially valuable hostages in exchange for money it would have gotten otherwise? Iran would have to be the world’s dumbest hostage taker.
    Even though the Obama administration openly announced the settlement in January 2016, it wasn’t until several months later that claims the U.S. had offered a “ransom payment” began to circulate due to spin from some Iranian officials. But Vox also noted that spin wasn’t too credible:ate Department spokesman John Kirby joined Bill Hemmer on “America’s Newsroom” to defend a $400 million cash transfer to Iran during the release of four Iranian-held U.S. hostages.
    Kirby said the money had been frozen in a trust fund in the U.S. for decades and it was “their money.”
    He asserted that the fact that the transaction occurred during the release of the detained Americans was “coincidental.” Hemmer pressed Kirby, saying that it appears that this cash transfer was kept secret and was effectively a “ransom.”
    “It looks bad,” Hemmer said.
    However, the $400 million dollar transfer was actually an openly announced one, paid in settlement of a nearly 40-year dispute between Iran and the United States — a settlement that likely saved the United States several billion dollars.


    How crazy alt righties got pwnd by a conervative web site:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/berlins.../#3b7ecb78e9b5
    il·lib·er·al
    i(l)ˈlib(ə)rəladjective1.opposed to liberal principles; restricting freedom of thought or behavior
    "illiberal and anti-democratic policies
    • synonyms: intolerant, narrow-minded, unenlightened, conservative, reactionary;


  14. #9
    Points: 216,292, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 89.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsVeteranOverdrive
    Tahuyaman's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    268910
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Bremerton, Washington
    Posts
    95,756
    Points
    216,292
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    10,999
    Thanked 37,893x in 28,334 Posts
    Mentioned
    455 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Obama was divine. He was perfect. He’s above criticism.

  15. #10
    Original Ranter
    Points: 203,684, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 99.5%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdriveTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    MMC's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    45806
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    51,543
    Points
    203,684
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    19,991
    Thanked 14,801x in 11,263 Posts
    Mentioned
    108 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Agent Zero View Post
    Sorry. I posted the wrong fact check. You guys have so many conspiracies it's hard to keep up.

    https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ob...u-s-prisoners/

    In January 2016, the Obama administration successfully negotiated the release of four Americans who had been imprisoned in Iran in exchange for the release of seven Iranians who had been imprisoned in the United States.(A fifth American prisoner was released separately.) At around the same time, the U.S. airlifted the equivalent of USD $400 million in various currencies to Tehran, sparking conspiracy theories about the timing:
    House
    Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) was among those who seized on the timing and cloak-and-dagger delivery method, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, saying it proved suspicions that the Obama administration had tried to hide a payment for the four Americans, including Washington Post reporter Jason Rezaian. GOP candidate Donald Trump called it an example of the administration’s foreign policy failures.
    “Obama administration sent plane load of cash to #Iran as ransom as part of deal on hostages. Just unreal,” tweeted Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), a long-standing critic of the Iran talks.
    As with other issues that would normally fall by the wayside in a normal daily news cycle, the payout to Iran became prime fodder for yet another election-year debate:
    StBack in late 1979, after Iranian revolutionaries took 52 Americans hostage at the US Embassy in Tehran, the United States severed diplomatic relations with Iran and froze Iranian assets in America. Among those frozen assets was a $400 million delivery of fighter jets from the U.S. that Iran’s previous government had already paid for.
    Although the American hostages were finally released a year later, issues such as the frozen Iranian assets (including that $400 million) were not settled at that time. Instead, an international court based in the Hague, the Iran–United States Claims Tribunal was established to deal with such legal claims. The tribunal process dragged on for years and years without a ruling on the $400 million being issued, and finally, when arbitration process was apparently about to wind up (quite possibly not in American’s favor), the U.S. agreed to pay Iran back the $400 million principal along with $1.3 billion in interest. If the issue had gone to the tribunal for a decision, as was expected, the U.S. could have been on the hook for the full $10 billion in compensation Iran was seeking.
    It is true the U.S. agreed to the settlement at the same time it was negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran and for the return of four U.S. citizens who had been detained by Iran. However, the negotiations over these these issues were conducted by completely separate teams in order to avoid any overlap or suggestions of connections between them.
    As Vox noted, charges that the U.S. had paid “ransom” to Iran for the release of hostages didn’t even make logical sense:
    The payment, which sounds really shady out of context, was actually the end of a boring, decades-old international legal case totally unrelated to the hot-button nuclear and prisoner issues.
    [T]here was no direct evidence to back up [the ransom] theory. The speculation about timing was just that — speculation.
    Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange were not the same negotiators involved in the weapons deal settlement. Therefore, they couldn’t make demands of the US team negotiating the weapons deal settlement, which means they couldn’t negotiate a quid pro quo of money for hostage release, the definition of a ransom.
    Moreover, the basic logic of it didn’t make any sense. Iran was going to get that money back no matter what through the arbitration process — probably more, if the Obama administration was right. Why would [Iran] release potentially valuable hostages in exchange for money it would have gotten otherwise? Iran would have to be the world’s dumbest hostage taker.
    Even though the Obama administration openly announced the settlement in January 2016, it wasn’t until several months later that claims the U.S. had offered a “ransom payment” began to circulate due to spin from some Iranian officials. But Vox also noted that spin wasn’t too credible:ate Department spokesman John Kirby joined Bill Hemmer on “America’s Newsroom” to defend a $400 million cash transfer to Iran during the release of four Iranian-held U.S. hostages.
    Kirby said the money had been frozen in a trust fund in the U.S. for decades and it was “their money.”
    He asserted that the fact that the transaction occurred during the release of the detained Americans was “coincidental.” Hemmer pressed Kirby, saying that it appears that this cash transfer was kept secret and was effectively a “ransom.”
    “It looks bad,” Hemmer said.
    However, the $400 million dollar transfer was actually an openly announced one, paid in settlement of a nearly 40-year dispute between Iran and the United States — a settlement that likely saved the United States several billion dollars.


    Evidently Snopes just like leftists just don't understand what Quid Pro Quo is.


    In January 2016, the Obama administration successfully negotiated the release of four Americans who had been imprisoned in Iran in exchange for the release of seven Iranians who had been imprisoned in the United States.....snip~




    Quid Pro Quo Meaning and Usage | Grammarly Blog

    https://www.grammarly.com/blog/quid-pro-quo
    Quid pro quo is a Latin phrase that literally means “something for something,” or “this for that.” We use the phrase to signify an exchange of goods, services, favors, or any other kind of value. When we’re talking about multiple exchanges, we can say quid pro quos . Originally,...



    Let Snopes know.....ALL exchanges are quid pro quo. This way they cant just deny facts.
    Don't only Practice your Art, but force your way into its Secrets, For it and Knowledge can Raise men to the Divine!!!!! Ludwig Van Beethoven ~

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Single Sign On provided by vBSSO