Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mnuchin Hold Presser Announcing New Sanctions Against Iran – Video and Transcript…

Earlier today Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Secretary of Treasury Steven Mnuchin held a press conference in the White House to announce new sanctions against Iran. The secretaries also took questions from the press pool. [Video and Transcript Below]


[Transcript] – SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Good morning, everybody. Thank you for being here today. I’d just like to make a brief comment before we talk about Iran sanctions. I’m sure everybody saw that the DOW hit 29,000. The President’s economic plans are clearly working. We’re looking forward to the China signing, USMCA, and a very strong economy this year.

As previously announced by the President, we are announcing additional sanctions against the Iranian regime as a result of the attack on U.S. and allied troops.

First, the President is issuing an executive order authorizing the imposition of additional sanctions against any individual owning, operating, trading with, or assisting sectors of the Iranian economy, including construction, manufacturing, textiles, and mining. And let me be clear: These will be both primary and secondary sanctions. The EO also allows us to designate other sectors in the future as Secretary Pompeo and me think is appropriate.

Second, we are announcing 17 specific sanctions against Iran’s largest steel and iron manufacturers, three Seychelles-based entities, and a vessel involved in the transfer of products. As a result of these actions, we will cut off billions of dollars of support to the Iranian regime, and we will continue our enforcement of other entities.

Third, we are taking action against eight senior Iranian officials who advanced the regime’s destabilizing activity and were involved in Tuesday’s ballistic missile strike. Secretary Pompeo will comment more on this.

Today’s sanctions are part of our commitment to stop the Iranian regime’s global terrorist activities. The President has been very clear: We will continue to apply economic sanctions until Iran stops its terrorist activities and commit that it will never have nuclear weapons.

I’ll now turn it over to Secretary Pompeo.

SECRETARY POMPEO: Thank you, Steven. Good morning, everyone.

Today, President Trump is delivering on the pledge that he made the day after Iran attacked American forces in Iraq: There will be a series of new sanctions.

Secretary Mnuchin just mentioned eight senior Iranian officials that are responsible for the regime’s violence, both at home and abroad. We’re striking at the heart of the Islamic Republic’s inner security apparatus. These sanctions targets include the Secretary of the Supreme National Council and the Commander of the Basij Forces; that’s the regime’s brute squad, which has, in the last few months, killed approximately 1,500 Iranians who were simply demanding freedom.

Our action targets other senior leaders close to the Ayatollah. They’ve carried out his terrorist plots in destabilizing campaigns across the Middle East and around the world. They’ve employed soldiers across the region’s battlefields. They’ve trained militias in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere in the arts of domestic repression.

Today, they’re accountable for murder and mayhem. The goal of our campaign is to deny the regime the resources to conduct its destructive foreign policy. We want Iran to simply behave like a normal nation. We believe the sanctions that we impose today further that strategic objective.

Our campaign is composed of diplomatic, economic components that have deprived the regime of billions in revenue the regime has used to fuel death and destruction across the Middle East and all across the world.

Sadly, the previous administration had opened up revenue streams for Iran. But under our administration, oil revenues are down by 80 percent and Iran cannot access roughly 90 percent of its foreign currency reserves. And not even two weeks ago, President Rouhani of Iran admitted that our sanctions have cost Iran over $200 billion in lost foreign income and investment. As long as Iran’s outlaw ways continue, we will continue to impose sanctions.

Finally, I want to reiterate President Trump’s concern for Americans and dual national citizens detained inside of Iran. Iran knows these individuals have committed no crime. They know the charges against them are fake. And we will do all that we can to get each of them returned home safely to their families.

With that, we’ll take just a few questions.

Yes, ma’am.

Q Mr. Secretary, the administration said this strike was based on an imminent threat, but this morning you said we didn’t know precisely when and we didn’t know precisely where. That’s not the definition of “imminent.” The President has also suggested that there was some sort of attack being planned against an embassy, perhaps several embassies.

Can you clarify? Did you have specific information about an imminent threat, and did it have anything to do with our embassies?

SECRETARY POMPEO: We had specific information on an imminent threat, and those threats included attacks on U.S. embassies. Period. Full stop.

Q So you were mistaken when you said you didn’t know precisely when and you didn’t know precisely where?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Nope. Completely true. Those are completely consistent thoughts. I don’t know exactly which minute. We don’t know exactly which day it would’ve been executed. But it was very clear: Qasem Soleimani himself was plotting a broad, large-scale attack against American interests. And those attacks were imminent.

Q Against an embassy?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Against American facilities, including American embassies, military bases. American facilities throughout the region.

Q Mr. Secretary —


Q Mr. Secretary, in the initial hours after the missile attacks on Al-Asad, in Erbil, it was believed that Iran may have taken steps to avoid U.S. casualties. But then, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, Mark Milley, came out, the Secretary of Defense came out, other officials came out to say, “No, these missiles were intended to kill Americans.”

If it was Iran’s intent to kill Americans, does that not deserve some sort of response? I mean, if somebody takes a shot at you and they don’t hit you simply because you duck, does that mean that they weren’t trying to kill you?

SECRETARY POMPEO: So, look, I’ll defer to the Department of Defense on the details, but there’s no doubt in my judgment, as I observed the Iranian activity in the region that night, they had the full intention of carrying — killing U.S. forces, whether that was our military folks or diplomatic folks who were in the region. And I am confident that the response the President has taken is appropriate.

The President said we don’t want war; we want Iran to behave like a normal nation. The reason that the Secretary of Treasury and I are here this morning is to continue this campaign — our strategic effort to get Iran to behave in a way that doesn’t continue their 40-year-long effort to terrorize the world.

Q Mr. Secretary and Secretary Pompeo, do you believe that the Iranians shot down the Ukrainian International Airways [sic] plane? And if the Iranians shot that plane down, will there be consequences?

SECRETARY POMPEO: We do believe that it’s likely that that plane was shot down by an Iranian missile. We’re going to let the investigation play out before we make a final determination. It’s important that we get to the bottom of it.

I’ve been on the phone — I was on the phone with President Zelensky. Just before I came here, I was on the phone with my Canadian counterpart. They’re working to get their resources on the ground to conduct that thorough investigation. We’ll learn more about what happened to that aircraft. And when we get the results of that investigation, I am confident we and the world will take appropriate actions in response.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: And let me just —

Q Will you allow the NTSB to work with the Iranians?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Yeah, I was just going to comment on that. The Treasury will issue waivers for anybody, whether it’s Americans or others, that can help facilitate the investigation.

Q The last time that you both joined us in this room, it was back in September and you were announcing additional sanctions, including on the Quds Force. And, Secretary Mnuchin, at that point you said, “I think we’ve done more sanctions on Iran than anybody, and it’s absolutely working.”

Since then, we’ve seen an escalation in violence from Iran: shooting down the drone, attacking the embassy, a contractor who was killed, U.S. troops that were wounded. How are sanctions keeping the United States — economic sanctions keeping the United States and United States’ interests more secure?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: I think we have 100 percent confidence, and we are consistent in our view that the economic sanctions are working; that if we didn’t have these sanctions in place, literally Iran would have tens of billions of dollars. They would be using that for terrorist activities throughout the region and to enable them to do more bad things. And there’s no question, by cutting off the economics to the region, we are having an impact.

And as the President has said, the fact that the Obama administration turned over $150 billion to the regime, we think we wouldn’t be in this situation had that not been the case.

SECRETARY POMPEO: May I just add, it’s important to keep in mind what’s taking place in Iran today. This country has never been in the place that it is today. Big, challenging problems. Their budget — they’re going to fail by tens of billions of dollars of achieving their revenue for this year. They’ve got real challenges, and figuring out how to make difficult decisions: Do you underwrite Hezbollah? Do you pick Hamas? Do you underwrite the Shia militias in Iraq? Or do you allow your people to have the opportunity to live the life they want and grow your economy? Those are the difficult choices that the regime is facing.

And you can see the protests — protests that we expect will continue — that we’ll demand from the Iranian regime that they begin to treat the Iranian people in the way that they so richly deserve. And this administration will continue to support those efforts as well.


Q Thank you, Mr. Secretary. You mentioned secondary sanctions here. What is your message to our European allies who continue to do business with the Iranians? And then, specifically, if you can, will this impact the INSTEX barter mechanism, which was set up by a number of European countries to avoid U.S. sanctions and continue to do business without using the U.S. dollar?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Sure. Thank you. I think those are both very important questions.

So let me first comment on INSTEX. I don’t believe there’s been any INSTEX transactions. As we’ve made clear, we are working on a Swiss channel that we have approved for humanitarian transactions. We’ll continue to allow humanitarian transactions. We’ve warned INSTEX and others that they will most likely be subject to secondary sanctions, depending on how they use that. So that’s absolutely the case.

As it relates to the Europeans, both the Secretary and I have spoken to our counterparts in Europe several times over the last few days. We’ve emphasized the impact and the issue of — Iran has announced that they are no longer part of the JCPOA. And we’ve had very direct conversations with our counterparts about that.

Q Secretary Pompeo, what is your definition of “imminent”?

SECRETARY POMPEO: This was going to happen, and American lives were at risk. And we would have been culpably negligent. As the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said, we would have been culpably negligent had we not recommended to the President that he take this action at Qasem Soleimani. He made the right call, and America is safer as a result of that.

Q But then why has there been these — Secretary Pompeo, why have there been these shifting definitions —


Q Thank you. Thank you, sir.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Go — go ahead. We’re going to —

Q — shifting explanations of the intelligence?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: We’re going to try to do one question for everybody, just —

Q Were they trying to hit Iranian troops — was Iran trying to hit our troops or not?

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: — so that as many people can get questions. So I don’t mean to cut you off, but we’re trying to — go ahead.

Q I mean, let me defer to my colleague — but, sir, six months ago, Secretary Pompeo, the President said that U.S. intelligence agencies had been running amok. He spent most of the past three years he’s been in office denigrating and attacking the intelligence community and disputing findings, whether it’s on Russia or North Korea, or really any area that contradicts things that he has said publicly.

Why then should Americans suddenly believe your assertions that you had good intelligence on this when the head of the Executive Branch has been casting aspersions on the intelligence community for most of his time in office?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Look, I served as the CIA Director for the first year and a half of this administration. I watched the President rely on the work that the intelligence community did for the entire time I served as the head of the Central Intelligence Agency. I watched him rely on the capable men and women who are delivering exquisite information to the Executive Branch. I watched the President have confidence in that information.

We all challenge their work. We have to make sure we get it right. The intelligence community is not flawless. We — we get it wrong. In this case, the intelligence community got it fundamentally right. Even the reflections we’ve seen after the after-effect, after the strike that Qasem Soleimani took, has demonstrated that we were quite right. There was an imminent attack. There was active plotting. And we took an action that we thought was likely to create less risk for the American people, and I’m confident that we did that.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Go ahead, in the back. In the back.

Q Thank you. This question is for Secretary Pompeo. There are reports that the Iraqi Prime Minister has asked you to start negotiating some withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq immediately. Is that the case? Can you comment on that?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Yeah, he didn’t quite characterize the conversation correctly. But to the larger, more important point, we are happy to continue the conversation with the Iraqis about what the right structure is. Our mission set there is very clear: We’ve been there to perform a training mission to help the Iraqi security forces be successful and to continue the campaign against ISIS, the counter-Daesh campaign.

We’re going to continue that mission. But as the — as times change and we get to a place where we can deliver upon what I believe and the President believes is our right structure, with fewer resources dedicated to that mission, we will do so.

We also have today a NATO team that’s here at the State Department working to develop a plan, which will get burden-sharing right in the region, as well, so that we can continue the important missions to protect and defend and keep the American people safe while reducing our cost, our resources, and our burden, and the risk to our soldiers and sailors who are in the region.

Q Secretary Pompeo, if I can — here, today, at the podium, you said that the imminent threat was a threat to U.S. embassies. You didn’t know precisely when or where. Last night, the President said it was a threat to embassies, including to our Baghdad embassy.

Why can you say that here, and the President could say it at a rally in Toledo, but no one said it to lawmakers behind closed doors in a classified setting, as multiple senators have since said?


Q You said —


Q So the senators are lying when they say that (inaudible) imminent threat was a threat?

SECRETARY POMPEO: We told them about the imminent threat. All of the intelligence that we’ve briefed, that you’ve heard today, I assure you, in an unclassified setting, we provide in the classified setting as well.

Q To be clear, you told them that embassies were the — were to be targeted? That was the imminent threat?

SECRETARY POMPEO: I’m not going to talk about the details of what we shared in a classified setting. But make no mistake about it: Those leaders, those members of Congress who want to go access this same intelligence, can see that very same intelligence that will reflect what I described to you and what the President said last night, as well.

Q Is that threat now gone with Soleimani gone?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Threats are never gone. Uh, right? It’s always — a lot of danger in the world.

Q The next general will pick it up?

SECRETARY POMPEO: Always — always a lot of danger in the world, throughout the region. Nobody believed that a single mission, in any respect, took down the risk of terror — terror from al Qaeda, terror from ISIS, terror from al-Shabaab. No — no one believes that. The President doesn’t.

Look at the list though; look at the achievements in the administration. We took away the caliphate in its entirety. We took down Hamza bin Laden. We took down al-Baghdadi. We took down Qasem Soleimani. This is a list that has reduced the capacity for terrorists around the world to perform the functions that put American men and women and the homeland at risk. We’re very proud of what we accomplished. We’re going to stay the course.

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: Why don’t we take one more over there? Yes. Thank you.

Q I’m curious —

SECRETARY MNUCHIN: No, no. Next to you. Right there. Yes.

Q Me?


Q Thank you. Secretary Mnuchin, this is a question for you too about the China trade deal. So the Chinese side is going to be here next Wednesday to sign the phase one part of that deal. But China is also a big importer of Iranian oil and Iranian minerals, and that’s a big part of their economy as well. So how do you balance the two? And are you concerned about the Iran issue coming up in either the signing of the phase one deal or the negotiation for the phase two deal?

SECRTEARY MNUCHIN: Well, let me just comment: I had no idea you’d ask that question, but that’s a good last question to end on.

So let me first say that we are looking forward to the Chinese delegation coming next week. Phase one is very significant. It includes very significant components of changes to technology issues, intellectual property issues, and $50 billion of purchases for our farmers.

I would comment: I don’t agree with your comment that China is a big buyer of oil. The China state companies are not buying oil from Iran. And I would just say we are having conversations with China, as well with any other counterparty on sanctions evasion.

So thank you very much. Thank you, everybody.


This entry was posted in Big Government, Death Threats, Deep State, Dem Hypocrisy, Iran, Iraq, Islam, media bias, Military, President Trump, Press Secretary - Trump, Secretary of State, Secretary Pompeo, Terrorist Attacks, Uncategorized, US Treasury, USA. Bookmark the permalink.

84 Responses to Secretary Pompeo and Secretary Mnuchin Hold Presser Announcing New Sanctions Against Iran – Video and Transcript…

  1. TonyE says:

    The Fake News constantly amazes me, its a damn if you do, damn if you don’t about Trump. If he goes to war with Iran, then he’s a bully, if he does not go to war with Iran then he’s a wimp.

    And I like that bit where Pompeo just called some Senators flat out liars.

    Liked by 31 people

    • Pedro Morales says:

      Looking at you Mike Lee and Rand Paul.

      Liked by 15 people

      • swissik says:

        Mike Lee I can do without, never trusted nor liked him. Rand Paul however, a different kettle of fish. We need a few more Pauls in government to balance out the war mongering, irrational, crooked, unethical politicians on both sides of the isles.

        Liked by 3 people

    • Don McAro says:

      Ignore them… The only way President Trump could lose is starting a war and taking the economy…. thats the only way they know to get rid of him for good… and he aint bitting

      Liked by 4 people

      • Don McAro says:



        • Pedro Morales says:

          Contrast this to a Pelosi press conference where they never dare to challenge her or make her upset. The typical questions are “So how bad is Orange Man”? Also note how they NEVER shout a question at the Queen when she departs the podium. But I love it because the subconcious is very powerful. And people notice this stuff and internalize the media bias. The MSM bias is so strong that they actually defeat their intended goal. Most people who see this will walk away thinking
          “Okay, Trump is abrasive, mean, and he bullies other counties but he aint nutz. He whacked a few terrorists and they peed their pants. Economy is good and he is keeping us out of a war. Why is the MSM on his nut sack so bad? Didn’t Obama kill civilians with drones and give terrorists cash? How come the MSM bent over for Obama and not Trump?” This is typical water cooler talk that I hear in liberal Massachusetts, so Trump does break through all the chatter. Of course, CNN is now claiming Pelosi had a big victory holding back the articles by getting Bolton to possibly testify and the new “bombshell emails” that came out this week. I love hate watching CNN. Its amazing to watch people invoke the Mamet Principle dozens of times on a daily basis.

          Liked by 7 people

          • ann says:

            “The President is abrasive, mean, and he bullies other countries, but he ain’t nuts”
            Same here, Pedro, in Seattle,
            snooty exclusionist DNC & never Trumpers..

            Reality , a larger and authentically inclusive world view is beginning to to dawn on the more sane of this insulated demographic base .

            grudging, somewhat befuddled. Its kinda funny “ perhaps outsiders bring skills unfamiliar to stale career Politicos. Pro American Negotiators! Fair reciprocal trade deals! economics is foreign policy.!”

            Then follows . “But I just don’t like him!”

            Consider the milieu, and likely demographic profile

            socioeconomic & educational profiles.. salaried grads, snugly insulated from the flooded labour market of lower to middle class Americans, or crime ridden grim low rent apartments, the public hospitals packed w illegal migrants.

            Dems stunning lack of self awareness cracks me up. Years of inferring nonbelievers are grunting bigots, ‘Throwaways, homophobes, racists , deplorables.

            President speaks larger truths, in the vernacular, using the thought language common to many Americans .

            I’d argue he had to, to puncture through the monotonous mealy mouthed drone of insincere Uniparty platitudes

            Liked by 7 people

            • Yy4u says:

              Pedro and Ann
              What I am noticing in my blue state but red city is that only the bonafide idiots are still bashing Trump. One friend who voted for Hillary used the “but I dont like him” but will quietly vote for him. Another dislikes him still but loves what his 401K is doing. Thanks for reports from .iberal Mass and Liberal Seattle. Both are forever blue but every vote counta in the popular vote.

              Liked by 2 people

            • Dee says:

              He is working hard to educate the Americans who have no clue what is going on.

              Liked by 2 people

              • ann says:

                Yes, and with his inimitable verve and humor.

                He slaps the media every day, makes no bones about the hypocrisy. People love it,, after thirty years of unkept promises and condescending lectures about our supposed moral turpitude.

                Liked by 1 person

          • Dee says:

            Thank you for going where I fear to tread.


      • sturmudgeon says:



    • Which is why he hit on the perfect response. Take out terror leaders, no US or civilian casualties. And lets Iran have their fireworks display with no casualties.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Dutchman says:

      If one of the functions of the “forth estate” is to “speak truth to power”, and specifically QUESTION power, than I have ‘no problen’ with this ‘damned if you do/don’t approach,…or WOULDN’T, IF it was,applied EQUALLY.

      If they had treated Obama the same way, instead of getting tingly thighs whenever he smiled, and never,questioning his blatantly obvious lies,….if they,challenged Nanzi, asking her “Just what in the,HELL do you THINK you are doing?”
      Or, “WHY the ‘hurry up and wait”?
      It,was SO urgent that you had to forego any norms of justice, and then you sit on the,indictment, refusing to turn it over to the Senate. Isn’t this,just a raw, blatant political ploy?”

      So, for me its NOT their questioning, its,their ONE-SIDEDNESS that I object to.

      Liked by 3 people

    • LouisianaTeaRose says:

      It’s their schtick, everybody knows it, Trump is never right, nothing he does is positive for the country, I love you, the check’s in the mail, I promise I won’t…..

      Ok. I think they get the picture.

      And that’s why we win in November.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Reserved55 says:

    Yes, the Senators are imminently lying.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Pedro Morales says:

      A debate of War Powers is legit. But a transparent political resolution should have been shunned by Congress. Gaetz must have felt like a fool when he took a “principled position” and then Schiff went into a TDS rant on the floor. Yes Matt, you were a bozo to think this was the right time to make a legit point. That could have been done later. Not the right time.

      Liked by 17 people

  3. rcogburn says:

    “They’ve employed soldiers across the region’s battlefields. They’ve trained militias in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere in the arts of domestic repression.”

    Left to right:
    Iranian Airforce
    Hizbullah (Lebanon)
    Houthis (Yemen)
    Hashd al-Shaabi (Iraq)
    Hamas (Gaza)
    Liwa Fatemiyun. (Afgh)
    Liwa Zaynabiyun (Pakistan)

    Liked by 15 people

    • MelH says:

      I’m very impressed you could identify those flags. WOW! Hmmm, I wouldn’t even know where to look. Guess I gotta start catching up.

      Liked by 2 people

      • rcogburn says:

        I can’t! I found them listed and thought it belonged with the tweet about their proxies being outed. Iran no longer has plausible deniability for anything they do.

        Liked by 5 people

        • MelH says:

          Well thanks for posting them. I liked seeing how different they are from others I’ve seen, and I like your explanation for the strategy for him being surrounded by the flags.

          Liked by 2 people

    • RobInPA says:

      I would venture to guess that buraq hussein has all of those on display in his mangina cave, and stands before them daily proclaiming with great and exaggerated exuberance ‘Death to America!’, hoping to one day finish the job he started.

      Liked by 3 people

  4. Deborah Fehr says:

    The reporter in the front row drips of disdain, she looked like a total bitch. Just spitting her words out.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Reserved55 says:

      Q: What is your definition of imminent?
      Pompeo: Uhh, somtime in the last century?

      Answer stupid questions with equally stupid answers.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Gotterdammerung says:

        Adjective 1. About to happen

        I can know my pizza is going to arrive imminently without knowing if it will be in 5 minutes or 10 minutes. Man reporters are so dumb.

        Liked by 1 person

      • bruzedorange says:

        If the Washington press corps were polled, and asked to identify the state between “imminent” and “too late” … I think half would say, “Cocktails.”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Pedro Morales says:

      She was pissed that he hit it out of the park. “Yes it was imminent and yes it was on embassies”. She was hoping that he would get tripped up and say –
      MP- Well we identified several US facilities
      B1tch- So it wasnt embassies?
      MP- Well there were a number of facilities and trying to determine…
      B1tch- So the President is lying when he specifically says embassies
      MP- Well the President was saying…..
      B1tch- So why did he say embassies if this was other types of buildings
      MP- Well the President….

      CNN BREAKING NEWS—- Sources tell CNN that No American embassies were ever targeted by Terrorist Guy. IC officials tell CNN that Trump was briefed on potential targets but that no specific embassies were ever mention.

      Wolf Blitzer- Okay, lets cut in to our panel of 30 Never Trumpers and Scott Jennings for reaction about President Trump lying about embassy targets and whether additional impeachment articles will be presented for this.

      Liked by 5 people

    • Does anyone know who she is? Horrible person.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Jerry Hodge says:

    The Democrats and libertarians opposing the take-out of Soleimani for lack of actionable intelligence that he was planning an imminent attack is like opposing the police for arresting a known serial murderer because there is insufficient proof that the murderer was planning to murder again.

    Liked by 9 people

    • thedoc00 says:

      Correction, “… there was proof the murderer was planning to do it again but the definite date was not exactly known.”

      The idiotic questions concerning “imminent threat” are actually demanding to know the “exact date of the attack”. That is lunacy behind these types of questions.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Pedro Morales says:

        Their new plan will be to get a DOD leaker to claim that Trump, Esper, Pompeo, Milley, and Pence are exaggerating the threat and whether an embassy was targeted. They will claim Trump is lying and they will conduct a new investigation and try to call everyone on the national security team. Trump will be impeached again for lying to Congress, abuse of power, and obstruction for not allowing the national security to testify.

        Liked by 3 people

  6. Reporters ask the stupidest questions sometimes! He said it’s classified and they keep on pushing for him to answer the question……yeah like he’s going to tell fake news anything!

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Pale rider says:

    “shot down by an Iranian missile” wasn’t it a Russian built missile possibly launched by Iran?

    Liked by 1 person

  8. cdor1 says:

    The press is supposed to be adversarial, while still remaining respectful. I didn’t listen but read the transcript instead, and I think the questions were quite good. Pompeo’s answers were adequate. I believe he is constrained as to specifics and the reporter’s job is to eke out those specifics so it makes Pompeo appear awkward.
    The thing that our PC uniparty won’t allow to be said might be what actually happened. That is our intelligence got a bead on the S O B and took the opportunity to kill him. We didn’t need anything more than tens of hundreds of Americans for whose deaths or maiming he was responsible.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Ackman419 says:

      Agree. As much as I detest the MSM press, they did ask some good questions.
      Not all were good. Some were straight ridiculous.
      And I wish they would ask the right questions to the Dems, like they did today of SoS and SoT.
      The lack of GOOD questions asked when the press addresses Pelosi, Schumer, etc. is what really stands out these days. It’s as one sided as possible.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. They’re speaking “Gotcha!” to Power. It’s more like high school than, well, high school.

    For example, the question about Intel: “The President trashed our IC yet he believes them now?” President Trump rightfully savaged the Brennan/Comey Russia Coup, not all Intelligence. And it cuts both ways: Why won’t reporters/Democrats accept the word of 17 Intelligence Agencies?

    Liked by 1 person

  10. mikeyboo says:

    re: new sanctions on Iran: “Book ’em Dano!!!” (quote from Hawaii 5 O-some of you may be old enough to remember the TV show starring Jack Lord.)

    Liked by 1 person

  11. MitchRyderDetroitWheels says:

    Ben Rhodes knows the story…..

    Rhodes said, “The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old, and their only reporting experience consists of being around political campaigns… They literally know nothing.” Thus they will believe what he tells them. He also tells friendly non-governmental organizations and think tanks what he is telling the journalists. Those outlets produce “experts” whose expert opinion is just what Rhodes wants it to be. These ignorant young journalists thus have quotes that look like independent confirmation of the White House’s lies.

    Liked by 5 people

  12. redhotsnowman says:

    wow. so this is what real leadership looks like. it’s been so long i almost didn’t recognize it.

    Liked by 2 people

  13. These sphincters carrying press passes obviously are on the payroll of the DNC. I am surprised Secretaries Pompeo and Mnuchin were that civil and polite to them. I would have laughed in their faces and said “Next question?” to another so-called reporter.


    • Dutchman says:

      Like him or hate him, Rumsfeld knew how to handle the press. Showed them to be the idiots they are.

      Not defending him, but,I DO miss how he,used to effortlessly biotch slap the,press. Fun to watch!

      Liked by 6 people

  14. freepetta says:

    Squeeze Them!!! These terrorist regimes have to be destroyed!!

    Liked by 2 people

  15. scrap1ron says:

    Maximize sanctions and only ease up when Iran demonstrates prolonged compliance instead of incrementally applying economic pain.

    Liked by 1 person

  16. thedoc00 says:

    There is another interesting element to the sanctions described. Recall that last week joint Naval exercises involving China and Iran were announced as poke at the US by China.


  17. Dee Paul Deje says:

    Liked by 3 people

    • InAz says:

      Too bad Bongino did not bring up Solimani killing 1,500 Iranians who were peacefully protesting.

      Liked by 3 people

    • GB Bari says:

      I personally do not know a single person who has a positive opinion of Geraldo and thinks he is anything other than an old worn out Leftist.

      IMHO Fox still employs him because he once had a following and now it’s insignificant, but he refuses to retire.


  18. Tiffthis says:

    Where does China get oil from? I thought it was rain but mnuchin says no. That’s good news to me 👍🏼


  19. Again, the President has to “prove” Soleimani was an “imminent threat” to the same people who let the Iranians self-inspect their own nuclear compliance? Democrat, please.

    If Democrats don’t care about the Americans he just murdered last week, why would they care about Americans he planned to kill next week?

    Release the letters!: Mike @Doranimated
    Kerry would have us believe that the JCPOA contained rather than enabled Iran. In response to this ludicrous and reckless contention, I must become a whistleblower. I know for a fact that the Obama admin sent letters – plural – directly to Soleimani.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Robert Smith says:

      “…If Democrats don’t care about the Americans he just murdered last week, why would they care about Americans he planned to kill next week?…”

      That’s a great way to say it.

      Liked by 2 people

  20. Lucille says:

    Defense Updates

    Liked by 2 people

    • iwasthere says:

      The BUFF, just unreal how long it’s been in service. But at the video makes clear, she still pack’s a wallop. “Now it’s Miller Time.” Still can’t believe the AF has no SAC. The AF was SAC when I was in!


  21. Jim Comey is a weasel_Doug says:

    “Immenent” is when I unholster my weapon.
    “Too late” is after I’ve shot you in the face.

    Any more questions?

    Liked by 3 people

  22. rd says:

    These sanctions are more effective and long lasting than any airstrike or short bombing campaign could be.

    They will not solve the problems of Iran and North Korea alone, but they set the stage by weakening the hold of their dictatorships on the people. The people are already out in the streets protesting the Iranian Theocracy and their Qods Forces in Iran, Iraq, and Lebanon. We need to keep the pressure up from the outside.

    Liked by 2 people

  23. John Davis says:

    Interesting couple of days. The U.S. embassy gets attacked. Then Soliamani, (whatever his name is) plays catch with a hellfire missile. (Loses badly).
    Then WWIII draft erupts on social media.
    Then MMS is apoplectic that President Trump is going to start WWIII.
    The vodka queen submits a resolution to limit the President’s ability to start said WWIII.
    I kinda wonder what the CIA has been up to the last couple days.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Gigi the Old says:

      The hand writing on the wall.
      Thousands of years ago, there was seen a hand writing on the wall, and the same night the ruler Belshazzar and Babylon fell. See Daniel Chapter 5.
      A few days ago a mere 50 miles away from ancient Babylon, the world saw the severed hand of a monster second in command in a murderous regime.
      May this usher in the demise of another evil empire.


  24. Julia Adams says:

    If you ever wondered what kind of person the valedictorian at West Point is and ultimately becomes after graduation, look no further than SOS Mike Pompeo.


  25. iwasthere says:

    That “secondary sanction” is gunna hurt. And the “barter exchange” gunna hurt even more. Time for the people of Iran to chose a destiny. You have an American President and people with you.*

    *This time.


  26. visage13 says:

    I have never been so disgusted in my life. We killed a known TERRORIST designated by Pres Obama as such. Any person questioning this can just go straight to hell.


  27. zorg2 says:

    Trump had a chance to take out the mullahs and again backed out and backed down, as so often before with his threats.

    The Iranians will get around the sanctions, so the mullahs are back in business, The mayhem will continue.

    The Iranians paid no price at all for their missile launches which DID, in fact, target American personnel.
    And I’m sure they won’t pay a thing for the downed Ukrainian airplane either.

    The truth is, the West doesn’t have the guts to defend itself. The rationale being that we need to run out of the Middle East as quickly as possible, Devil take the hindmost.


  28. Rynn69 says:

    The “media”. Look at them – what a group of unimpressive people. Remember, they have to perform their dramatics for the camera since this opportunity has been Trumpbliterated with the advent of the chopper presser. They is mad.


  29. namberak says:

    “If it was Iran’s intent to kill Americans, does that not deserve some sort of response?” Sorry you didn’t get your war, idiot. What a jackass …


  30. Harlan says:

    Reporter: “But did you get iranian confirmation of their impending plans for an imminent attack on U.S. interests BEFORE you took out their revered, military leader that was kind to his mother?”


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s