http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...testify-before
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DNBd5gYX0AADUog.jpg
Printable View
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Can't wait to see how the diehards downplay this...
Why would I not want to know who he is?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
:lol 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?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
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?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
I think you guys overestimate how much interest, relevance and awareness exists for these kinds of stories outside of the Cernovich/Reddit/InfoWars bubble.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
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 etcQuote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
So, collusion is good now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
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.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Go figure.
None proved.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
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/
Neither with Trump, but you're still against that collusion. So, collusion is good then?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
LOL :lmao Snopes.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
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 The pain the Snopes author must have felt having to add this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
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 documents 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.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
They're just protecting our 1st amendment rights with the 2nd amendment, amirite dmcQuote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
pain? from what?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
what Snopes facts can you refute?
No shit. Snopes went from verifying urban legends to being the expert on world events/politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
Why painful? They seem to be doing the right thing and updating findings with new information. Somehow that's to be mocked or frowned upon?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
:lol Not going back and forth with you = insinuation of partisans bias.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Just pointing out your hypocrisy. Not answering questions good now -- to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Not so much as collusion is for you.
Explain the collusion here -- oh, that's right. You won't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
:lol
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
I'm not doing your homework for you. You seem smart enough to know about what you're denying.
You're not going to explain it because you can't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
I understand why you don't even want to try.
Certainly plausible, in fact probable, that collusion and bribery happen with both parties. Just my observation that the alt-right web seems indignant that this story isn't somehow making the Trump/Russia story disappear. It's another example of what I said before... any story with "Clinton" or "Obama" and "Russia" in the headline gets pulled up front by the fringe right as if it has anything to do with (or replaces) the current Russia narrative. The allegations of Trump/Russia collusion are about (likely) our susceptibility to foreign influence on our news and elections and (unlikely long shot) the legitimacy of an election. The stakes are higher with that story.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chucho
Investigate away. I have no preconceived opinion about the legitimacy of this story or potential wrongdoing. Just don't get your stories mixed up.
I never said it wasn't a story. Just not one that probably merits more than a :cry lack of replies :cryQuote:
Originally Posted by TSA
The new standard is retract nothing, double down, maintain your fringe paranoid audience for them sweet sweet clicks.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
They haven't changed the OP to unproven and it still reads false. Adding a footnote is a step in the right direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
It's still false. Feel free to prove it.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
"it still reads false."
:lol what a partisan piece of shit you are.
The informant :cry what's his name :cry hasn't even testified how can you claim it's false?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
:lol No one actually gives a shit about muh uranium security.
Because there is zero evidence this deal would have been scuttled had some other element of unproven crimes been revealed. That's all anonymous is going to talk about.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Not one person is now saying the US needs to take muh uranium back from Russian "control" -- why is that, TSA?
You think that deal would have gone through if the FBI hadn't hidden the crimes that were uncovered? LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Since it was a money laundering/kickback scheme done through trucking companies, I'm not sure how that affects muh uranium once you take the guy out.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Your contention is there were more actual crimes. If they were a security risk to muh uranium then why are they not a security risk to muh uranium now?
:lmao ar15.comQuote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Looks like the FBI is totally covering everything up -- just like they did in Vegas, right?
Jeffrey Toobin: ‘This Whole Uranium One Thing Comes From Fox News’
CNN’s Jeffrey Toobin came out swinging at Fox News as the foremost and original propagator of the re-heated scandal saying,
“Remember,
this whole ‘Uranium’ thing comes from Fox News.
I mean,
this is a closed investigation
that came up in Peter Schweizer’s book “Clinton Cash” in 2015, and
it was discredited then…”
Camerota then clarified by interjecting “It’s from 2010, by the way. That’s when things first started happening.”
Toobin then went deep, saying:https://www.mediaite.com/tv/jeffrey-...from-fox-news/
The book came out in 2015.
Exactly, The book came out in 2015.
It was one of the accusations—it has been discredited.
Two years later, Fox News and Republicans in Congress and Republicans in the White House start raising it simply as a way to wave Russia back at the Democrats.
There’s nothing new, no new information here.
You have the president of the United States, apparently, according to CNN reporting intervening with the justice Department saying get us more witnesses on this.
This is precisely why in the post-Nixon era,
there were rules in place to get the White House out of criminal investigations.
They are not supposed to be involved in making those sorts of decisions.
This White House is changing the rules.
"changing the rules?" Repugs don't give a FUCK about rules, laws, regulations, protocol, conventions. Proof? racist political hack Sessions is the US AG
TSA can you explain how this boom is bigger than this older boom?Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
For Repugs, it's ALL HILLARY, ALL THE TIME
‘No you brought her up!’ Krazy Anne Conway melts down when CNN asks why she keeps talking about Hillary
https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/...NN-800x430.jpg
Conway then insisted that reaching out to Assange was completely unnecessary anyway because
Hillary Clinton ran such a bad campaign that the Trump campaign didn’t need WikiLeaks’ assistance to beat her.
Unprompted, Conway suddenly grew defensive about the fact that
she had once again brought up Hillary Clinton as a way to deflect from alleged wrongdoing committed by associates of the Trump campaign.
“People are now writing about our discussion, and earlier in your broadcast, two commentators mentioned, ‘Oh, we just like to talk about Hillary,'” Conway said.
“You’re still talking about Hillary! I’ll make you a deal — I’ll never say a word [about Hillary] again.” :lol :lol
Camerota agreed to Conway’s deal and tried to move on from talking about Clinton.
However, Conway interrupted her to once again talk about Hillary Clinton. :lol
“She was the loser, so you have to keep talking about her,” Conway said.
Camerota pointed out that Conway was still talking about Clinton despite her offer to stop doing so. :lol
“No, you brought her up!” Conway snapped. :lol
https://www.rawstory.com/2017/10/no-...e+Raw+Story%29
KAC is typical piece of shit the Mercers got into Trash's mafia when Mercers financed Trash.
Hillary Clinton’s “real Russia scandal”: The vast right-wing conspiracy will never die
Right-wing media’s latest concoction: Stir a few old stories into the cauldron of Hillary hate. It just might work
House Intelligence :lol Committee chair Rep. Devin Nunes, :lol R-Calif., came before the cameras to announce a new investigation into a 2010 sale of uranium to Russia,
Rep. Trey Gowdy :lol of the House Oversight Committee also announced a new investigation into the Clinton email probe --
yes, that would be an investigation of an investigation
Republicans have been desperate to figure out a way to discredit special counsel Robert Mueller
and at the same time muddy the waters with some parallel scandal implicating Hillary Clinton. They understand perfectly well that pursuing her is something of a compulsive neurosis among the political media. They seem to have decided that
their best bet is to throw several different Russia-related threads out at the same time to try to overwhelm the system.
a dozen flaws in this argument but the most important is the one set forth by Robert Litt, former general counsel to the office of the director of national intelligence under the Obama administration:
The dossier itself played absolutely no role in the coordinated intelligence assessment that Russia interfered in our election.
That assessment, which was released in unclassified form in January but which contained much more detail in the classified version that has been briefed to Congress, was based entirely on other sources and analysis.
Other than that, they have an airtight case. :lol
As for Gowdy's snipe hunt into the Justice Department's handling of Clinton's emails, well, what can you say? It's an obsession.
There is no evidence that Clinton took a particular interest in the uranium sale or that it was an unusual transaction in any way.
Nonetheless, Fox News, led by Sean Hannity, has pushed this story hard,
based on a repackaging of the old story by a right wing journalist named John Solomon in the Hill alleging that “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.”
the underlying conspiracy theory that Hillary Clinton personally pushed the uranium deal through is still nonsense.
But the
Fox talking heads have found a way to imply that
the FBI and the Justice Department have been covering up for Clinton and Obama,
which once again leads to Comey, Mueller and even Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein,
who oversees the Mueller investigation.
https://www.salon.com/2017/10/27/hil...ill-never-die/
Never BOOM'd the OPQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
Testimony from the FBI informant should clear everything up don't worry.Quote:
Originally Posted by boutons_deux
:lol "spin away libs"Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Just like all the other testimonies you relentlessly pimped then conveniently forgot all about, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
I meant this thread was never BOOM'd dummyQuote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
What important and damning testimony did we get from the clinton employee who got immunity that libs had to spin away?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
If the answer is none (it is) do you understand why your credibility here regarding upcoming BOOM testimony is weak?
The FBI let the FBI informant out of his NDA so he can tell everyone how the FBI was guilty of the biggest coverup evah!
Why do you keep saying I said this upcoming testimony is BOOM? Not once have I said that in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
OK fine. The word boom upsets you.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
What important testimony are we going to get here? What important testimony did we get from the person getting immunity in the clinton thing?
I love the word BOOM, I just never used it to describe this testimony despite you pulling it out of your ass three times. The lawyer for the FBI informant claims he has on the record quid pro quo regarding the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's speaking fees tied to the Uranium One deal.Quote:
Originally Posted by spurraider21
For your second question I'd have to re-read the testimony from over a year ago as it's not fresh in my memory.
A legal expert on the CFIUS process told The Hill that the new revelation that the FBI knew that a Rosatom official was engaged in illegality on U.S. soil before the sale was approved could very well have affected the decision if that evidence had been made public in real time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...ope-memos-show
Uranium One deal led to some exports to Europe, memos show
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...ope-memos-show
The NRC never issued an export license to the Russian firm, a fact so engrained in the narrative of the Uranium One controversy that it showed up in The Washington Post’s official fact-checker site this week. “We have noted repeatedly that extracted uranium could not be exported by Russia without a license, which Rosatom does not have,” the Post reported on Monday, linking to the 2011 Barrasso letter.
Yet NRC memos reviewed by The Hill show that it did approve the shipment of yellowcake uranium — the raw material used to make nuclear fuel and weapons — from the Russian-owned mines in the United States to Canada in 2012 through a third party. Later, the Obama administration approved some of that uranium going all the way to Europe, government documents show.
NRC officials said they could not disclose the total amount of uranium that Uranium One exported because the information is proprietary.
Oh, they would have taken it into consideration?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Wow.
Philo with no real argument, just crazy direction shifting comments.
Pot, kettle, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by DMC
NATION United States National Security
Current DOE official once consulted for Russian nuclear companies
By Sara A. Carter
1
1
2 Hours Ago
Cheryl Moss Herman, an official with the United States Department of Energy, produced a detailed report in 2010 for a Russian nuclear company when she was a private energy and environmental consultant.
The document Moss Herman wrote as a consultant in 2010 was for TENAM/Tenex, according to the consulting memorandum she provided to the Russian subsidiary and obtained by Circa. TENAM is a fully-owned U.S. subsidiary of Tenex, which is 100 percent owned by the Russian state controlled nuclear company Rosatom, according to public documentation.
Titled “Policy/Legislative Issues Affecting the Business Climate in the U.S. for TENAM/Tenex,” the memorandum discussed the Department of Energy’s uranium regulations. She is now employed at the DOE’s Office Nuclear Energy develops sustainable fuel cycles.
Richard Painter, former Chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, told Circa that although no laws were broken regarding Moss Herman’s work as a consultant for the Russians prior to her work with the U.S. government there is a strong ethical argument that consultants who have worked for foreign entities “could pose a significant problem when dealing with national security interests.”
Painter said background security checks on incoming U.S. government employees aren’t thorough enough, adding it’s “a very lax system, there’s lots of room for mistakes. There’s no rules to stop a consultant from working with the Russians to then come work in the government.”
“We live in a different world now with concentrated wealth in Russia, Saudi Arabia and China,” Painter said. “When you’re dealing with uranium, it’s a national security interest.”
The document Moss Herman wrote as a consultant, “Policy/Legislative Issues Attesting the Business Climate in the U.S. for TENAM/Tenex,” discussed the Department of Energy’s uranium regulations. She is now employed at the DOE’s Office of Uranium Management and Policy which assures supplies of fuel for nuclear power plants, which TENAM provides.
The executive to whom she provided the report, former Tenam president Vadim Mikerin was separately under a clandestine investigation by the FBI for corruption and money laundering, including extortion against American energy companies, and ultimately pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit money laundering.
In 2010, when Moss Herman submitted her memorandum to TENEX and Tenam Corp., the Obama administration was in its final days of reviewing the proposal from Russian state-controlled nuclear giant Rosatom to acquire Uranium One, a Canadian firm, which controlled roughly twenty percent of American uranium mining interests.
https://www.circa.com/story/2017/11/...lear-companies
Three House Republicans try to oust Mueller over laughable uranium deal conspiracy theory
On the very week that Special Counsel Robert Mueller's probe started producing evidence of problematic Russian contacts by the Trump campaign,
three House Republicans suddenly want to kneecap Mueller. Who could have guessed it? The Washington Post writes:
Three conservative House Republicans are expected to file a resolution Friday
calling on special counsel Robert S. Mueller III to recuse himself from his probe of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, accusing him of conflicts of interest.
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), who wrote the resolution, accuses Mueller of having a conflict of interest because he was serving as FBI chief
when the Obama administration approved a deal allowing a Russian company to purchase a Canada-based mining group with uranium operations in the United States, according to a draft obtained by The Washington Post.
Now keep this in mind:
While there is zero evidence that Hillary Clinton was involved in any improper dealings on the Uranium One sale referenced above,
there's less than zero evidence that Mueller had anything at all do with it
because his agency wasn't even on the multi-agency governing committee that approved the sale.
https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1712314
Over a three week span, Fox spent 12 hours on a psuedoscandal
Trump propagandist Sean Hannity led the way with almost three and a half hours of Uranium One coverage
the Uranium One story is a bogus conspiracy theory, a sloppy mishmash of shoddy reporting, fabrications, and motivated reasoning whose central premise -- that Clinton played a role in the deal -- has been debunked.
The president and his allies in Congress and in the conservative press -- particularly at Fox News -- have created a phony scandal to divert attention away from Trump’s Russia ties, focus criticism instead on their longtime foe Clinton, and justify calls to remove Mueller from his post.
Conservative author and Breitbart.com writer Peter Schweizer and his boss Steve Bannon launched the Uranium One tale in Schweizer’s 2015 book, Clinton Cash.
Schweizer alleged that Hillary Clinton played a "central role" in approving the Russian atomic nuclear agency’s purchase of the mining company.
He suggested that Clinton did so because Russians and people linked to the deal had given money to the Clinton Foundation and to Bill Clinton.
A panoply of conservative media figures pushed Schweizer’s allegation; Trump himself parroted it on the campaign trail.
But the conspiracy theory fell apart when examined by reporters, not least because there was no evidence Hillary Clinton had actually intervened.
?The story re-emerged thanks to John Solomon, the executive vice president of The Hill, whose reporting is frequently cited by Trump’s media allies because it feeds their paranoia about a “deep state” conspiracy targeting the president.
These claims quickly collapsed under scrutiny, with Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler noting that the “fatal flaw in this allegation is Hillary Clinton, by all accounts, did not participate in any discussions regarding the Uranium One sale.”
https://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/...-one-bar-3.png
https://www.salon.com/2017/11/12/fox-spent-12-hours-on-a-psuedoscandal-over-a-three-week-span_partner/
“I have worked with the Justice Department undercover for several years, and documentation relating to Uranium One and political influence does exist and I have it,” Campbell said. He declined to give details of those documents.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1DG1SB
Sure he does....
ICYMI.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
https://www.yahoo.com/news/doubts-su...203614558.html
An FBI informant gathered extensive evidence during his six years undercover about a Russian plot to corner the American uranium market, ranging from corruption inside a U.S. nuclear transport company to Obama administration approvals that let Moscow buy and sell more atomic fuels, according to more than 5,000 pages of documents from the counterintelligence investigation.
The memos, reviewed by The Hill, conflict with statements made by Justice Department officials in recent days that informant William Campbell's prior work won't shed much light on the U.S. government's controversial decision in 2010 to approve Russia's purchase of the Uranium One mining company and its substantial U.S. assets.
Campbell documented for his FBI handlers the first illegal activity by Russians nuclear industry officials in fall 2009, nearly a entire year before the Russian state-owned Rosatom nuclear firm won Obama administration approval for the Uranium One deal, the memos show.
Campbell, who was paid $50,000 a month to consult for the firm, was solicited by Rosatom colleagues to help overcome political opposition to the Uranium One purchase while collecting FBI evidence that the sale was part of a larger effort by Moscow to make the U.S. more dependent on Russian uranium, contemporaneous emails and memos show.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...ush-for-us?amp
Treasure Trove of Documents Tying Russia to Uranium One
posted by Sara A. Carter | @SaraCarterDC - 2 hours ago
https://www.hannity.com/content/2017...DIbfxo.twitter
So what does this have to do with Hillary Clinton again?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
You're going to have to fit all this into your conspiracy theory, TSA.Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
I know you won't even try.
Five new revelations in the Russian uranium case
BY JOHN SOLOMON
TWEET SHARE EMAIL
Evidence gathered by an FBI undercover informant conflicts with several media reports as well as statements by Justice officials concerning the connections between a Russian nuclear bribery case and the Obama administration's approval of the sale of uranium One to Russia's state-owned Rosatom nuclear company.
Here are five revelations from those documents reviewed by The Hill:
Russia saw its purchase of Uranium One as part of a strategy to dominate global uranium markets, including making the United States more dependent on Moscow's nuclear fuel.
Documents the informant gave the FBI clearly show that the purchase of Uranium One was seen by Russia and its American consultants as one tool in a strategy to "control" the uranium market worldwide. In the United States, that strategy focused on securing billions of new uranium contracts to create a new reliance on Russian nuclear fuel just as the Cold War-era Megatons to Megawatts program was ending.
Uranium One did export some of its U.S. uranium ore.
News organizations, including The Washington Post, continue to report none of Uranium One's product left the U.S. after Russia took control. In fact, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) approved an export license for a third party trucking firm to export Uranium One ore to Canada for enrichment, and that some of that uranium ended up in Europe, NRC memos show. Uranium One itself admits that as much as 25 percent of the uranium it exported to Canada ended up with European or Asian clients through what is know in the industry as "book transfers."
The FBI informant Douglas Campbell does have information to share with Congress about Rosatom's Uranium One purchase.
Justice officials have suggested in recent stories that Campbell has little on Uranium One because his work forced on nuclear bribery involving a different Rosatom subsidiary. While it's true Campbell's undercover work focused on criminality inside the Rosatom subsidiary Tenex, he did gather extensive documents about Rosatom's efforts to win approval to buy Uranium One.
The FBI did have evidence that Rosatom officials were engaged in criminality well before the Obama administration approved Rosatom's purchase of Uranium One.
Evidence that a foreign company is involved in criminality can disqualify it from Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) approval to buy a sensitive U.S. asset. And Campbell helped the FBI recorded the first criminal activity by Rosatom officials inside its Tenex arm in November 2009, nearly an entire year before CFIUS approved Rosatom's purchase of Uranium One.
Justice officials trusted the informant Campbell enough to keep him working undercover for six years and to pay him more than $51,000 once the convictions were secured.
A check obtained by The Hill shows the FBI paid Campbell an informant fee of more than $51,000 in January 2016, shortly after the last convictions in the Russian nuclear bribery case were made.
http://thehill.com/homenews/administ...anium-case?amp
So is Clinton going to prison over this?Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
Yes or no.
lol revelations
Yes, in this life or the next.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
:lol cop out.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
For what crimes, Chris?
https://i.imgur.com/nrZcv1k.gifvQuote:
Originally Posted by Chris
https://i.imgur.com/IJu0KMg.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Quote:
Originally Posted by TSA
:lmao Chump mad that Hillary doesn't know who to order the hit on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Everyone except you knows who he is, Scoop.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurminator
:lolQuote:
Originally Posted by AaronY
:lmao Chump mad that Hillary doesn't know who to order the hit on.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
You might want to actually read the thread or perhaps the news. Anyone who has done so knows the name of the former FBI informant.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
PavlovQuote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
:lmao
Dude -- everyone knows this guy's name, including Hillary. It's repeated several times in the thread and in the linked articles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Everyone has read his name and has known it for a full week.
Except you.
:lol
Never said there wasn't a name. Doesn't change that you were crying for a name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
:lol
:lol I have the name.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
You still don't.
Way to go, big guy. Still doesn't change this:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pavlov
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
List the names of the people you personally think Hillary Clinton has had murdered.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spurtacular
Let's discuss this.
DOJ tells Senate Judiciary confidential informant wasn’t interviewed prior to indictments on Russian nuclear bribery case
Department of Justice prosecutors did not interview a confidential informant and main witness in a Russian nuclear industry bribery and laundering case in 2014, prior to issuing its indictments against the defendants, this reporter has learned.
This “oversight” was disclosed in a briefing by the Department of Justice to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Monday regarding the 2014 case against Russian nationals and co-conspirators, according to several sources directly familiar with the briefing.
William J. Campbell Jr. worked for years undercover as an FBI confidential informant. He had been blocked previously by the Obama Justice Department from relaying his collections of conversations, evidence of illegal financial transactions and intelligence to Congress. This collected evidence related to the Russian nuclear industry’s efforts to win favor with the administration for the purchase of Uranium One, as well as the billions of dollars spent on closing energy deals in the U.S. market, according to his attorney Victoria Toensing, who worked in the Reagan Justice Department and was former chief counsel of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
The Department of Justice lifted the gag order in October, allowing Campbell to testify to Congress about the alleged corruption and bribery involving the 2010 sale of Uranium One to Moscow and its push to penetrate America’s energy market.
DOJ officials told this reporter, in an earlier interview, it had authorized Campbell to speak to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee, House Oversight Committee, and House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which have all launched investigations.
Rep. Ron De Santis, a Florida Republican on the House Oversight Committee, told this reporter “it’s concerning why the informants information wasn’t brought to light prior” to the decision by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) voted to approve the sale of the Canadian firm Uranium One to Russia. At the time, Uranium One controlled 20 percent of American uranium mining capacity at the time of the sale and needed to be approved by CFIUS, due to the national security implications of selling an asset like uranium to a foreign state.
Interviewing a main witness is “just basic due diligence in any case,” said DeSantis, referencing the then prosecutors decision to not interview Campbell.
“It’s odd and it appears there’s something they’re trying to hide,” he added.
DeSantis said the committee will continue to gather documents and information through the end of the year. The committee will also be speaking with Campbell but no formal public hearings are expected until after the start of the new year, he added.
Toensing said her client is preparing to speak with members of Congress and she is also working with lawmakers to ensure he can deliver his testimony to the committees. She added that it is “a highly unusual” that the prosecutors didn’t interview Campbell.
“In all my years as a federal prosecutor I would not have ever filed an indictment without interviewing the main witness,” said Toensing. “I cannot imagine what the reason was for not doing so.”
Campbell was not interviewed by prosecutors with the DOJ until the Spring of 2015, his attorney added.
According to court records, Campbell was the main witness in the case against Russian national Vadim Mikerin and the co-conspirators and provided critical evidence in the criminal case against the defendants during his time as a confidential informant.
In Mikerin’s indictment, Campbell was referred to as “Victim 1” by then United States Attorney for the District of Maryland Rod Rosenstein, who now serves as Deputy Attorney General, according to the documents.
“The DOJ falsely described Mr. Campbell as a ‘victim’ in its initial indictment,” said Toensing, in an earlier interview. “The DOJ did not want the defense to cross exam Mr. Campbell about his counter intelligence activities. Those are the reasons Mr. Campbell was not utilized as a witness. The so-called ‘sources’ know so little about the case that they are not aware the agents gave him a check for over $50,000.”
Campbell provided troves of documents, briefs and evidence critical to American counterintelligence issues regarding the Russian nuclear industry at the time, Toensing added.
Mikerin was then a top official of Tenam, a 100 percent American subsidiary of Russia’s state controlled nuclear arm Rosatom. Mikerin, who had close ties to elite members of the Kremlin, had been an executive with Rosatom’s subsidiary Tenex as well, according to court records and documents. Boris Rubizhevsky, another Russian national from New Jersey, who was president of the security firm NEXGEN Security, also pleaded guilty in 2015, to conspiracy to commit money laundering. He served as a consultant to Tenam and to Mikerin. He was sentenced to prison last week along with three years of supervised release and a $26,500 fine, according to a recent Reuters report.
Mikerin was eventually arrested for a racketeering scheme that dated back to 2004, as well as fraud, extortion and money laundering but only plead guilty to money-laundering. He was sentenced to 48 months in prison in December 2015. In 2015, Daren Condrey, of Maryland, whose trucking company Transportation Logistics International, pleaded guilty to conspiring to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) and conspiring to commit wire fraud, according to the DOJ.
Federal court records from 2014 and 2015 also refer to Campbell as “confidential source 1,” the “contractor,” as well as the original indictments listing him as “Victim 1.”
https://saraacarter.com/2017/11/30/d...-bribery-case/
Still not much to this Campbell business.
DOJ failed to interview FBI informant before it filed charges in Russian nuclear bribery case
While he was Maryland’s chief federal prosecutor, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein’s office failed to interview the undercover informant in the FBI’s Russian nuclear bribery case before it filed criminal charges in the case in 2014, officials told The Hill.
And the prosecutors did not let a grand jury hear from the paid informant before it handed up an indictment portraying him as a “victim” of the Russian corruption scheme or fully review his extensive trove of documents until months later, the officials confirmed.
The decisions backfired after prosecutors conducted more extensive debriefings of William Campbell in 2015, learning much more about the extent of his undercover activities and the transactions he engaged in while under the FBI’s direction, the officials said.
ADVERTISEMENT
The debriefings forced prosecutors to recast their entire criminal case against former Russian uranium industry executive Vadim Mikerinn — removing the informant as a star witness and main victim for the prosecution, the officials added.
Justice Department officials began briefing Congress last week, divulging missteps in a case that nonetheless proved the Russian state-owned Rosatom was engaged in criminal activity through its top American executive beginning in 2009, well before the Obama administration made a series of favorable decisions benefitting Moscow’s nuclear giant.
Multiple House and Senate committees already are investigating whether the FBI alerted President Obama or his top aides to the Russian criminal activity and plan to interview the undercover informant soon.
The new revelations, however, could tip some scrutiny toward federal prosecutors’ own conduct in the case, a sensitive topic since Rosenstein is now Justice’s No. 2 official and the supervisor of the special counsel investigation into Russian election tampering.
Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz said it was troubling that prosecutors would ever bring a case without talking first to a person they portrayed in court as a victim, especially when that person was an FBI informant available to them.
“I’ve never heard of such a case unless the victim is dead. I’ve never heard of prosecutors making a major case and not talking to the victim before you made it, especially when he was available to them through the FBI,” Dershowitz said.
“It is negligence, and I’m sure there will be internal issues with the Justice Department and U.S. attorney for making such an obvious mistake,” he said.
Officials told The Hill that prosecutors working for Rosenstein first interviewed Campbell, the informant, after they had already filed a sealed criminal complaint against Mikerin in July 2014.
Campbell got one debriefing after the criminal charges were filed, but was never brought before the grand jury that indicted the Russian figure in November 2014 even though the informer was portrayed as “Victim One” in that indictment, the officials confirmed
When prosecutors finally interviewed Campbell more extensively in early 2015 and reviewed all of the records he had gathered for the FBI, they learned new information about the sequence of transactions he conducted while under the FBI’s supervision, as well as the extensive nature of his counterintelligence work for the U.S. government that went far beyond the Mikerin case and dated to at least 2006, the officials said.
“Based on what was learned, we decided to change the theory of the case. … A plea deal became our goal so we wouldn’t have to litigate or make an issue of some of the stuff he had done for [counterintelligence] purposes,” a source directly familiar with the case said.
Campbell’s lawyer, Victoria Toensing, confirmed the Justice officials’ account. “The first time Mr. Campbell was interviewed by the U.S. Attorney’s office was after the criminal complaint was filed, and he was never brought before the grand jury before the indictment,” she told The Hill.
Justice officials said they knew when they first brought the case that Campbell had been part of a controlled, FBI-authorized bribery scheme, meaning he had permission to make payments to the Russians as kickbacks to further the investigation.
They declined to say why, with that knowledge, they initially portrayed Campbell in the indictment as a “victim” of an extortion scheme that began in November 2009 when the FBI had authorized him to make regular kickback payments of $50,000 in order to keep his consulting work for the Russians.
They said, however, they decided to pivot the case from extortion to money laundering after the more extensive 2015 debriefings revealed other transactions that pre-dated the extortion charges.
One source familiar with the case said extortion felt like a weaker charge when Campbell was acting with the FBI’s blessing and that the evidence of money laundering that Campbell documented through secret accounts in Latvia and Cyprus was irrefutable.
Campbell, who now has leukemia, also suffered an earlier bout with cancer in the middle of the case when a lesion was detected on his brain. He survived, all the while working undercover, but he developed some memory issues after treatment, sources said.
To compensate, he developed a system of extensive note taking and documentation with his FBI handlers through email to ensure facts were captured before his memory became hazy. A lot of those notes did not get reviewed by prosecutors until 2015, well after charges were filed, the sources said.
The documentation shows Campbell’s work had exposed wide-ranging details about Russia’s nuclear activities across the globe, including efforts to corner the global uranium market, assist Iranian nuclear ambitions and to criminally compromise a U.S. trucking firm that transported Russia’s nuclear fuel, they said.
Officials said the investigation and Campbell’s work from 2006 to 2013 fell under the FBI’s counterintelligence arm and Justice’s national security division, and officials originally did not intend for it to become a criminal case.
Justice officials originally hoped they simply could use the threat of criminal prosecution to “flip” Mikerin as a cooperating asset, but their confrontation with him at an office building in 2014 failed to persuade him to cooperate, sources said.
Prosecutors in the U.S. attorney’s office in Maryland then assembled charges and an indictment, using mostly information from the FBI’s counterintelligence files and interviews of Campbell done by an Energy Department investigative agent, officials said
Mikerin was an icon in the Russian nuclear industry, a top executive of the state-controlled Rosatom firm and its Tenex subsidiary and the man Moscow sent to Washington in 2010 to oversee Russian President Vladimir Putin’s plan to grow uranium sales inside the United States under the Obama administration.
The November 2014 indictment, bearing Rosenstein’s name, charged Mikerin with felony conspiracy to interfere with interstate commerce through extortion.
Court documents alleged Mikerin was part of a larger racketeering scheme that also involved bribery, kickbacks and money laundering and that he demanded $50,000 in regular kickbacks from Campbell starting in November 2009 in order for Campbell to keep his consulting work for the Russians.
The court documents portrayed Campbell alternatively as “Victim One” or “Confidential Witness 1” who came forward to report Mikerin’s wrongdoing and cooperate with the FBI.
In fact, Campbell had been under the FBI’s control informing on the Russian nuclear industry since 2006, had signed a formal nondisclosure agreement with the FBI in 2008 and eventually was rewarded in 2016 with a $51,000 check for his extensive counterintelligence work.
Mikerin eventually pleaded guilty to a money laundering conspiracy charge and was sentenced in December 2015 to 48 months in prison.
A month later, the FBI paid Campbell compensation of more than $51,000, a transaction prosecutors did not learn about until The Hill published a copy of the check last month, officials said.
Congress is now investigating the entire Russian nuclear bribery case after The Hill disclosed Campbell’s work, with multiple committees demanding to know whether the FBI told the Obama administration about Mikerin’s criminality before the administration made favorable decisions that rewarded Rosatom with billions of dollars in new American nuclear fuel contracts.
Justice officials began briefing congressional officials this week, starting with the Senate Judiciary Committee. After the briefings end, congressional investigators plan to interview Campbell.
After Campbell’s name and work surfaced, anonymous allegations surfaced in stories by Yahoo and Reuters suggesting the Justice Department had grave reservations about Campbell’s credibility, in part because he had three misdemeanor alcohol arrests.
But officials told The Hill those leaks were not authorized by the Justice Department and did not reflect accurately the official thinking of the department.
For instance, they said prosecutors had no concerns about Campbell’s three misdemeanor alcohol arrests and that the FBI held the informant in enough esteem to pay him the check after the case ended. And after prosecutors completed three debriefings with Campbell, they approved the payment in 2015 of the last of his expenses as an undercover.
Prosecutors’ concerns primarily dealt with the sequence of events and transactions surrounding Campbell’s undercover work during the counterintelligence part of the probe before criminal prosecutors got involved, officials said.
http://thehill.com/homenews/news/363...ges-in-russian