I'm sure this is not a new story, at least not new to us posters on the right side. The Clinton Cash and Hannity show have covered this issue extensively. What's new here is that FBI is on the case NOW. It's frightening. The FBI and DOJ were so corrupt. The MSM can no longer ignore it.
Link: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration
Especially as it relates to what you call the mainstream media.
You don't want to trust CNN, the NY Times, WaPo, or whoever else, then don't. Your choice.
But then to hold Hannity and Fox on high? Are they impartial? Everyone else is lying and covering things up but Hannity is the truth teller in all this? Come on now.
That's the thing I don't get. You guys rip on the MSM all the time, then constantly send links from Fox News, as if FOX NEWS are the ones above the fray.
trusted, at least 100% trust their story back then. We viewed this as a single or two-source or report. Now there is report from 3rd party source. My point is MSM made no effort to do investigation on uranium story. I'm sure had they tried, they would have discovered it too, perhaps discovered more than what the Hill just reported. MSM chose to ignore uranium thing.
NYT. NYT scrutinized his material and based on this material NYT published the report. Your linked article acknowledged this. Anyway, to be fair, we should say NYT did report the content of Clinton Cash. But it's in pre-Trump era, it's before so-called "Russia-Trump" collusion. The reason why NYT remained silent later, I think because clearly "Russia-HRC collusion" is much bigger than "Russia-Trump collusion".
that is just coming out regarding the overlooking of corruption in the UraniumOne deal.
My feeling on the story is if there is anything to this, at all, the Trump DOJ won't be turning a blind eye, so time will tell.
But Eli referenced Hannity and the Clinton Cash book in his post, so I engaged with him on that.
(no message)
Bad news: it's nonsense.
You passed that point?
Remember when you were perplexed why anyone would not want to know if a foreign country had interfered in our election? So,you’re saying that pay offs to take our nuclear program’s uranium ISN’T worth investigating?!!
Be rational. This doesn’ get Trump off of the hook. But it does draw Clinton’s, Obama, Rosenstein,McCabe, and Holder into the mix.
Unfortunately, Mueller himself was head of the FBI who never informed congress of this concern of Russian bribery in 2009 onward as he was supposed to when the deal was going down. Perhaps that responsibility fell to Comey later ( the timeline will be importAnt to evaluate), but Mueller knew about this case when he accepted his role of special prosecutor into possible Russian Collusion,and he was appointed by Rosenstein- a player whom he knew had not informed congress about it. Nonetheless, he accepted his appointment.
Mueller needs to resign ( this does not end the investigation but a non interested party needs to take over)
This smells to high heaven, and it’s not going away.
And I am tired of trying to explain it to people who
1) don't understand how the US government works,
2) don't understand how nuclear weapons work, and most importantly
3) don't really care, because they really just want ammo to fire at Clinton to help Trump.
I am absolutely listening, and I don't see why Trump would get a pass regardless of other people's actions should he be found to have done something.
But you simply cannot ignore the information revealed in this article or the fact that the senate intel committee was not briefed on it back when the deal was being approved.
You can't hide behind the "you just don't know how nuclear weapons work" here.
Unlike the entire Trump/Russia investigation to date, this report has witnesses with corroborating evidence. Russia was very clearly trying to illegally pedal influence, and they were obviously able to succeed by bribing the Clinton's. When this came up in the campaign, Hillary's spokesman never mentioned that she sat on the 9 person committee that approved the deal (along with Eric Holder who slow played the investigation for 4 years resulting in no information being released about it at the time).
How on earth would Mueller not add this to his investigation which has "wide latitude", and how can he continue to stand in as the investigaotr with his personal and professional ties to Comey and even potentially to this very case where he was acting head FBI Director when it began in 2009?
It's a DOE matter. And it is a COMMERCIAL transaction, not one with national security implications.
I am not saying there was no corruption in the sale; I don't know about that either way. Russia is as corrupt as it gets. But I am saying that this has nothing to do with weapons. The sale involved low-enriched uranium usable only in nuclear power plants. It has no military function.
Russia uses plutonium in almost all its nuclear weapons, not uranium. Plutonium can be extracted from nuclear waste produced at power plants, but Russia has no need to do so, since it has literally thousands of tons of the stuff that it extracted from the tens of thousands of weapons destroyed since the end of the Cold War. It does not need more.
This was a commercial transaction, in other words.
I have already explained many times that this was not a State Department decision.
“Not providing information on a corruption scheme before the Russian uranium deal was approved by U.S. regulators and engage appropriate congressional committees has served to undermine U.S. national security interests by the very people charged with protecting them,” he said. “The Russian efforts to manipulate our American political enterprise is breathtaking.”
There was congressional concern about this deal, and the corruption investigation was hidden from congressman who had objections. I understand your point about the Russians not using the uranium to make their own nuclear bombs and in fact, part of the scam (if you read the article) was that the Russians then sold the materials back to US nuclear power plants (but the Russians needed to get congressional approval to do this - which they received in 2011). That approval wouldn't have happened if congress had known about this. THAT's why it's pertinent. It's a Russian manipulation for cash.
Also, when the Chair of the House Intel committee states that this uranium sale is against national security interests, i believe him. In the wrong hands, that could be used in many dangerous ways to harm the US. Just because they don't make bombs with it doesn't make it not dangerous. What if it found it's way into say the Great Lakes via a terrorist for instance.?
But there are no national-security implications.
If LEU found its way into the hands of terrorists, they would not be able to do anything with it. It is not even the kind of material you can make a dirty bomb with.
It is not dangerous. Google it if you doubt me.
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States:
CFIUS is an inter-agency committee authorized to review transactions that could result in control of a U.S. business by a foreign person (“covered transactions”), in order to determine the effect of such transactions on the national security of the United States. CFIUS operates pursuant to section 721 of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended by the Foreign Investment and National Security Act of 2007 (FINSA) (section 721) and as implemented by Executive Order 11858, as amended, and regulations at 31 C.F.R. Part 800.
I'm guessing you're not, either.
But I can tell you without doubt that the national security implications of the sale of LEU are nil.
Did every member of CFIUS have all relevant information on bribery and corruption derived by the FBI investigation at the time they approved the deal? If not, why not? If yes, why was the deal approved?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
It will start with guys like Lawrence ODonnel dismissing the story as cute and absurd, but it will not disappear. At some point, they will begin reporting so that they don’t look bad ( or should I say, worse).
(no message)
(no message)
What did Mueller know about the coverup and when?
And he was appointed by Rosenstein who was involved. And they both knew that this major info on Russia involving the Obama/Clinton administration had never been reported to Congress when the political pressure was on to appoint a special prosecutor
Certainly worth some close evaluation
You can't keep your conspiracy theories straight anymore.
(Psst...Mueller didn't have anything to do with the 2010 deal. He was involved in the swap of nuclear material from Georgia.)
a bit more meat than what we have been used to.
Link: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355957-senate-judiciary-opens-probe-into-obama-era-russian-nuclear-bribery
Cole talked about Mueller delivering material which, of course, has to do with the material that was taken in Georgia and delivered back to Russia, with Georgia's blessing, for forensic analysis.
this Hill report on the Uranium 1 scandal is a very big deal, and it most definitely sheds new light on those on Mueller, Rosenstein, Obama, Clinton, and McCabe.
Enough so that the senate has opened an investigation.
(no message)
Trump has been accused and is being investigated shouldn't the Dems from the same scrutiny either.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
story.
This story has not made CNN/MSNBC/NYT/or WPo yet, so the libs don't know about The Hill's blockbuster story yet.
(no message)
McCabe and Rosenstein’s involvement is disturbing in that they were both Obama appointees and they both knew about this Obama era Russian bribery at the time they appointed Mueller to investigate Trump.
Like it or not,this is a VERY big story esp with eyewitness corroboration as well as evidence to corroborate.
Clinton/ Holder/MCabe/Rosenstein/ and Obama all have a lot of explaining to do.
Link: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration