The Obama Administration has some questions to answer about the $400 million cash payment to Iran on the same day it released four American prisoners and formally implemented the nuclear deal.

How the President justifies this apparent violation of our long-standing policy not to pay ransom to secure the release of hostages is at the top of the list. The Obama Administration contends that this is not a ransom payment, but the Iranians do not view this the same way our President does.

To Iran, this is clearly a quid pro quo. As the Wall Street Journal reported, Iranian defense officials publically called the cash “a ransom payment.” And despite the vehement denials from U.S. officials that same Wall Street Journal report says, “U.S. officials also acknowledge that Iranian negotiators on the prisoner exchange said they wanted the cash to show they had gained something tangible.”

That “something tangible” will likely end up in the hands of Hezbollah and other terrorist organizations funded by Iran. It will almost certainly be used to fund Iran’s efforts to support the Assad regime’s desperate attempts to maintain power in Syria prolonging, and likely escalating, an already bloody conflict that has allowed the Islamic State to flourish in the region.

Iran’s “tangible” prize will also be used to develop and acquire ballistic missiles and other weapon systems that it is now free to pursue as a result of the Obama Administration’s poorly negotiated Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The regime in Tehran has been eagerly showing the world how it is quickly rebuilding its weapon arsenal now that it is free of nuclear-related sanctions. This payout will only intensify the regime’s stockpiling of weapons that it previously had been banned from acquiring.

This is why you never give the world’s leading sponsor of terror, and a regime that routinely threatens us and our allies, a ransom payment. Just as the nuclear agreement has emboldened Iran to rebuild its arsenal, this ransom payment will simply embolden the regime to hold more Americans hostage. It has clearly proven to be a profitable scheme for the Iranians.

I’ve had a number of constituents call and write to ask how Congress could allow this to happen. The truth is we were once again cut out by this Administration, which time and time again has gone around Congress to enact its agenda, especially when it comes to the President’s deal with Iran. The Obama Administration carried this out on its own. Now it must be accountable for those actions.

I am proud to honor our veterans. At a ceremony at the Arkansas State Capitol I presented their families with the medals their loved ones earned for their service and sacrifice to our country. John Hays served in WWII. He was a radioman and aerial gunner during operations in the vicinity of Iwo Jima, Okinawa, the Marshall Islands and the Philippines. Arthur Haviland served in WWII in several major battles and campaigns including the invasion of Sicily and the Rome-Arno Campaign. He continued his service in the Minnesota Army National Guard. He retired with more than 38 years of service in uniform. William Ballew served in Korea and Vietnam. He sustained serious injuries in 1969 as a result of hostile action while on duty in Vietnam. Through faith, his strong will and with the support and sacrifice of his loving family, he lived for 33 more years. He earned the Distinguished Service Medal as well as many other awards and medals. 

I joined Jonathan Reeves at Jonesboro’s KASU during the station’s morning show today to discuss recent events, including last week’s officer-related shootings and the ambush on law enforcement in Dallas. We also discussed the FBI's decision not to charge Hillary Clinton in relation to her reckless handling of classified emails while serving as Secretary of State and more. If you missed it, you can listen to the interview in its entirety on KASU's website. 

In separate statements made just days apart last week, President Obama and CIA Director Brennan both touted progress in the U.S.-led campaign against the Islamic State (ISIS). They pointed to the terror organization’s loss of territory, key leadership and finances.

Their assessments of the group’s capabilities, however, was quite different.

“ISIL is on defense.” - President Obama on the Islamic State (6/14/16)
“ISIL remains a formidable adversary.” - CIA Director John Brennan on the Islamic State (6/16/16)

The disconnect between these two statements is quite striking. While both can be true at the same time, one outlook is unmistakably more positive than the other. The context of President Obama and Director Brennan’s statements were quite different. Clearly the President wants to present the situation in a much better light than our intelligence community sees it.

In a similar vein to the President’s pre-Paris attack declaration that ISIS has been “contained”, he has once again attempted to paint a rosier picture than reality offers.

The truth is the Obama Administration’s lack of a real strategy to combat ISIS allowed the group to continue to add recruits, claim territory and spread its warped ideology. Any territory that has been reclaimed by coalition efforts in the ISIS’s self-proclaimed caliphate, has been countered by massive growth in Libya, the co-opting of groups in places like Egypt and an expansion into Asian and East African nations.

The President’s lack of a strategy has not only failed us with ISIS. The Taliban holds more territory in Afghanistan now than at any time since 2001. Equally as troubling is the fact that the Taliban now appears to be taking a page from the ISIS playbook and ratcheting up the brutality of its atrocities.

We can defeat ISIS. We can make our homeland safer. In order to do so, the President has to bring forth plans based on reality. He must listen to the strategy our military leadership proposes to defeat ISIS abroad. He must engage our intelligence community, which has a much more grim view of ISIS’s capabilities than he does, to ensure that we can prevent attacks at home. And he absolutely must be honest with the American people about the nature of the enemy we face. 

These efforts cannot succeed, however, if the President does not understand the gravity of the situation. ISIS remains a dire threat and must be treated that way.