State flips: OK to talk about cash payments to Iran now

In August, spokesman Mark Toner argued that those sorts of details couldn’t be revealed, or they might reveal some of the non-U.S. governments that helped transfer the money.

“[I]t touches on certain confidentiality, third parties and other parties who might have been involved in that transaction,” Toner said then. “I can only say that there are reasons for us withholding this information — I’m talking about the details of this information — to protect the confidentiality.”

But on Wednesday, after the Treasury Department acknowledged the entire sum was paid in cash, Toner agreed that his argument from just two weeks ago didn’t hold water.

“I think it was done out of an overabundance of caution with regard to the confidentiality of these financial transactions,” he said when asked why the Obama administration was suddenly free to talk about the transaction.

When asked later if talking about the cash payments in any way reveals the government was involved, he admitted, “It doesn’t, and I acknowledged as much that … part of this was done out of an overabundance of caution in that regard.”

Toner almost said the administration was now “coming clean” and admitting what it could have admitted earlier, but caught himself and instead said the government was just being more transparent.

“[P]oint of fact is, we’re coming cl… we’re trying to be as transparent as possible now,” he said.

He also seemed to indicate that leaks to the press played a role in changing the government’s mind about admitting how the payment was made.

“There was a closed session with Congress yesterday, it was a multi-agency briefing to provide a full accounting of the Hague tribunal settlement,” he said. “It was an effort to answer congressional questions around the settlement.”

“And as you saw, subsequently, this information or some of the information from this closed session did make its way out into the press,” he added.

But Toner refused to say that State was hiding the nature of the payment because it looked bad to hand over so much cash to Iran, which even the administration admits still sponsors terrorism abroad.

“I would not accept that,” he said.

He also said he doesn’t agree that hiding the nature of the cash payment initially was an error, even though late news of how the payment happened has prompted Republican legislation to block future cash payments.

“I wouldn’t call it a mistake,” he said. “This is important and delicate work that we do in terms of messaging, and also in terms of talking about the details of what are sensitive and diplomatic transactions.”

“And so, if we operate sometimes out of an over-abundance of caution, it’s for good reason,” he added.

The administration has been under fire for weeks for deciding to send Iran $400 million in cash as part of a $1.7 billion settlement for a deal for military equipment that was never completed. Iran paid for that equipment just before the Shah of Iran was overthrown in 1979, and the administration says the $1.7 billion would settle the entire claim.

Republicans said the $400 million payment essentially served as a ransom payment to ensure the release of four U.S. hostages in Iran. The State Department admitted the payment was held up at the last minute to ensure their release.

Until this week, the government had refused to explain how the remaining $1.3 billion was paid out. Once it was out that it was all paid in cash, Donald Trump warned that this step set a “dangerous” precedent,” and Republican lawmakers agreed.

In late August, the department was asked if 13 January payments of almost $100 million from the government’s “judgment fund” was a sign that the U.S. wired the payment to Iran somehow. But spokesman Mark Toner said he didn’t know, and refused to say more.

“I don’t know, and we’ve said we’re not going to talk about this,” he said.