Lives matter, Christian, father, husband, retired. God, Family, Country, in that order. MAGA.
Colorado, USA
Joined August 2008
- Tweets25.6K
- Following3.7K
- Followers2.3K
- Likes16.7K
Taps the sign
xitter.cf/i/grok/share/c2hhcmQtM…
Try again, dummy.
xitter.cf/i/grok/share/c2hhcmQtM…
Calling it “their money” doesn’t settle the argument; it dodges the real issue. The question wasn’t simply who owned the money, but whether returning it under those circumstances served American interests. When you’re dealing with a regime with a documented history of supporting terrorism and attacks that have killed Americans, you don’t get to declare a policy wise simply because the money technically belonged to them. Ownership is a legal question. Whether handing over billions was strategically prudent is a national security question. Confusing the two isn’t a defense of the policy; it’s an excuse to avoid evaluating it.
Calling it “their money” doesn’t settle the argument; it dodges the real issue. The question wasn’t simply who owned the money, but whether returning it under those circumstances served American interests. When you’re dealing with a regime with a documented history of supporting terrorism and attacks that have killed Americans, you don’t get to declare a policy wise simply because the money technically belonged to them. Ownership is a legal question. Whether handing over billions was strategically prudent is a national security question. Confusing the two isn’t a defense of the policy; it’s an excuse to avoid evaluating it.
Psst. $1.7 billion is billions of dollars, which is exactly what I originally said, dummy.
xitter.cf/OpenThreads/status/211…
I have been making the prediction months and months ago.
xitter.cf/OpenThreads/status/202…
For the dummies out there, it's apples.
Is it 1.7 apple or 1.7 apples?
1.7 apples is correct.
Use the plural when the number is greater than 1.
1 apple
1.7 apples
2 apples
Exception: When the number is exactly 1, use the singular: 1 apple.
OpenThreads retweeted
Top rope
OpenThreads retweeted
Calling it “their money” doesn’t settle the argument; it dodges the real issue. The question wasn’t simply who owned the money, but whether returning it under those circumstances served American interests. When you’re dealing with a regime with a documented history of supporting terrorism and attacks that have killed Americans, you don’t get to declare a policy wise simply because the money technically belonged to them. Ownership is a legal question. Whether handing over billions was strategically prudent is a national security question. Confusing the two isn’t a defense of the policy; it’s an excuse to avoid evaluating it.
Calling it “their money” doesn’t settle the argument; it dodges the real issue. The question wasn’t simply who owned the money, but whether returning it under those circumstances served American interests. When you’re dealing with a regime with a documented history of supporting terrorism and attacks that have killed Americans, you don’t get to declare a policy wise simply because the money technically belonged to them. Ownership is a legal question. Whether handing over billions was strategically prudent is a national security question. Confusing the two isn’t a defense of the policy; it’s an excuse to avoid evaluating it.
It happened, dummy.
xitter.cf/i/grok/share/c2hhcmQtM…
That's what Obama did when he gave Iran billions in cash, much of it delivered on pallets in the dead of night.
OpenThreads retweeted
Oh look that thing that never happens is happening again
