Before anyone starts using "but it's not taxpayer money" as a defense, remember that Obama got hammered for years over his Iran deal even though critics were repeatedly told the money involved waa from Iranian assets that had been frozen rather than a direct giveaway of taxpayer funds.
The response from critics wasn't "oh, okay then."
The response was that ownership wasn't the point. The point was that Iran benefited.
So if that's the standard, be prepared for liberals to make the exact same argument here.
They're going to ask why indirect benefit was enough to condemn Obama, but suddenly indirect benefit doesn't matter when Trump is involved.
You don't have to agree with that argument, but you should at least expect it, because it's the first inconsistency they're going to point to.
Before anyone starts using "but it's not taxpayer money" as a defense, remember that Obama got hammered for years over his Iran deal even though critics were repeatedly told the money involved waa from Iranian assets that had been frozen rather than a direct giveaway of taxpayer funds.
The response from critics wasn't "oh, okay then."
The response was that ownership wasn't the point. The point was that Iran benefited.
So if that's the standard, be prepared for liberals to make the exact same argument here.
They're going to ask why indirect benefit was enough to condemn Obama, but suddenly indirect benefit doesn't matter when Trump is involved.
You don't have to agree with that argument, but you should at least expect it, because it's the first inconsistency they're going to point to.
Correct, and now it's 300 Billion instead of 1.5 Billion.