Reply With Quote
boom
goodbye
boom
goodbye
So we'll never know who this person is.
Neat.
You already know who he worked for, why do you yearn for a name?
Can't wait to see how the diehards downplay this...
Why would I not want to know who he is?
yearn. What a drama queen you've become with every new conspiracy theory.
Are you saying the Dems giving Putin a sweetheart dea on US uraniuml is a crackpot conspiracy theory?Why would I not want to know who he is?
I haven't seen anything to indicate they got a below market deal -- and just judging from the price of uranium since the deal, the dude who really made out was the guy who sold to Uranium One in the first place.
You can answer this for me -- has any Republican said the deal should be revoked and the US should take back "control" of that uranium?
Already happening...look at the lack of replies.
You can answer this for me -- has any Republican said the deal should be revoked and the US should take back "control" of that uranium?
I think you guys overestimate how much interest, relevance and awareness exists for these kinds of stories outside of the Cernovich/Reddit/InfoWars bubble.
So Russia, who's the "bad guy" in the Left's narrative of election collusion, isn't an issue when it comes to the Obama Administration allowing a sweetheart deal in controlling a large sum of substance used for making nukes that links back to Clinton/Russia "friendliness" that, at the very least, is as plausible in collusion, as Trump/Russia collusion is, along with the Russian Dossier funding coming to light?
It's not plausible to think there's collusion going on with both Parties?
Not that I'm aware of. This isn't about the control of the Uranium, it's about the FBI keeping top law enforcement and lawmakers in the dark leading about the crimes committed leading up the deal.
I haven't seen anything to indicate they got a below market deal -- and just judging from the price of uranium since the deal, the dude who really made out was the guy who sold to Uranium One in the first place.
You can answer this for me -- has any Republican said the deal should be revoked and the US should take back "control" of that uranium?
Strange then that is being reported by CNN, WaPo, NYT, The Hill etc etc etc
So, collusion is good now?
The narrative is the deal wouldn't have gone through because muh uranium security. Doesn't look like anyone is actually concerned about muh uranium security after all.
Go figure.
None proved.
Your refusal to answer my question tells me all I need to know.
Hillary Clinton Gave 20 Percent of United States' Uranium to Russia in Exchange for Clinton Foundation Donations?
The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve
Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating the transaction for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can.
Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the
uranium was not — nor could it be — exported,
and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statementby the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
The timing of most of the donations does not match
Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.
Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer, the company’s chairman
Foundation admits disclosure mistakes
One fault investigations into the Clinton Foundation’s practices did find was that not all of the donations were properly disclosed
========
evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies
while the Uranium One deal was up for approval —
information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction
In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal.
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clint...m-russia-deal/
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-26-2017 at 11:55 AM.
Neither with Trump, but you're still against that collusion. So, collusion is good then?
LOLSnopes.
One good thing coming out of all of this for liberals is that they don't have to worry about Hillary Clinton running again.
LOL
Update
On 17 October 2017, The Hill reported obtaining evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies while the Uranium One deal was up for approval — information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction. The Hill also reported receiving do ents and eyewitness testimony “indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow,” although no specifics about who those Russian nuclear officials were or how the money was allegedly routed to the Clinton Foundation were given. In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal.
I'm fine with all of its being investigated. You aren't. You can't even answer questions about any of them.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
