Sorry, I can't watch Hannity.

Obama is just not willing or capable of keeping his nose out of things, even though he has been out of office for a decade. He is incapable of showing the same grace that was afforded to him by his predecessor, George W. Bush.

Perhaps because he is now just a character in the movie and must draw attention to his crimes for the masses to finally see.

Before everyone starts celebrating the “not taxpayer money” argument, remember that Obama’s Iran deal was defended the same way.

Obama was accused for years of “giving Iran money,” but a major part of that money was Iranian assets that had been frozen, not ordinary U.S. taxpayer money.

Critics didn’t accept that defense then. They argued that ownership wasn’t the point. The point was that Iran benefited.

So if Trump’s deal involves sanctions relief, possible frozen asset access, or Gulf funded reconstruction money, the obvious question is consistency.

Why was it treason when Obama allowed Iran to benefit economically, but a brilliant deal when Trump allows Iran to benefit economically?

Maybe this deal has better terms. Maybe Gulf states prefer it. Maybe the enforcement is stronger. Fine. Then argue those facts.

But “not taxpayer money” by itself was not considered a valid defense when Obama used it, so it probably won’t hold up as a defense now either.

Please just keep that in mind if you're using this in arguments with liberals and normies, because they 100% will point to the parallels.

Also, I'm not sure why we're supposed to be so concerned if the gulf states love these deals or not. Is that really our main priority, if these foreign states/countries like these deals more than the ones they got from Obama? Why do they like them better? Because they get more money? Just seems odd that we're using this as some sort of measuring stick.