The State Department finally acknowledged Thursday that it delayed releasing a $400 million cash payment to Iran until it was assured that a plane carrying three American prisoners had left Iran. Again, U.S. officials admitted that they did not allow the Iranians to take control of the money until a plane carrying the erstwhile hostages departed the capital city of Tehran.
Yet those same Obama administration officials flatly denied that they paid ransom in order to obtain the release of the American prisoners. In an incredibly delicate- yet amazingly bold- verbal dance, State Department spokesman John Kirby said negotiators had “deliberately leveraged” Iran’s desire to procure its cash from a decades-old arms deal in order to make certain that the authorities there would not renege on their promise to free the three Americans. (The three were- coincidentally- flown out of Iran on the very same day that the nuclear agreement between Iran, the United States, and five other world powers was implemented). Knowing that the mainstream mass media is completely in the tank for the Democratic Party, Kirby baldly insisted that there was no quid pro quo of money for prisoners. (Gee, I wonder if a similar argument would’ve worked for Oliver North and the Reagan administration in an attempt to defuse a budding Iran-contra scandal?).
So, did the U.S. pay ransom? No! It simply “deliberately leveraged” Iran’s desire for the money.
Surely this qualifies for the Euphemism Hall of Fame alongside other great obfuscations, fabrications and misdirections, such as:
Terrorist attack? No. Man caused violence. Islamist radical? Nope. Insurgent. Incest? Of course not, perish the thought. Genetic attraction syndrome!
Got drunk and raped a girl? Nah. A simple matter of beverage-induced non-consensual physical communication!
A king’s ransom? Nothing more than a large, “deliberately leveraged” benign payment from one party to another.
“Run along. There’s nothing to see here!” said the king.
In fact, there is no here… here to see.