• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

$145 million bribe to the Clinton Foundation for Hillary Clinton’s influence over the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States

Thazgor

Banned
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
569
Reaction score
84
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What about this dems?

Why does this not get media attention? Becouse media are democrats?


Remember US Attorney John Huber? He was appointed by then Attorney General Jeff Sessions to look into the Clinton Foundation, and when it was revealed that he did practically nothing, his investigations were turned over US Attorney John Durham as part of his review into the origins of the Russia probe.

A source familiar with Durham’s investigation on Thursday said that elements of what Huber was investigating in 2017 that involved the Clinton Foundation, have been merged into Durham’s investigation.

In November 2017, then-Attorney General Jeff Sessions told Huber, the US attorney for Utah, and other senior prosecutors to evaluate “certain issues” involving the sale of Uranium One, and other dealings associated to the Clinton Foundation. One of those issues was a $145 million bribe to the Clinton Foundation for Hillary Clinton’s influence over the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States (CFIUS) to vote for the sale of Uranium One to the Russians. They wanted the company, which held 20% of US uranium deposits, because Vladimir Putin wanted to corner the North American market on uranium.

Sessions tapped Huber after demands by congressional Republicans, who were calling for the appointment of a special counsel to look into the matters. It now appears like Sessions made the appointment just to get the congressmen off his back.

Huber was additionally tasked with reviewing the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe/scandal, along with allegations that the Justice Department and FBI “policies or procedures” weren’t followed.

The source added that many are “very concerned about why there hadn’t been more done.”
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist

Thazgor

Banned
Joined
Jun 2, 2020
Messages
569
Reaction score
84
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why is corruption OK when it's about dems?
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Why is corruption OK when it's about dems?

You do realize that Clinton was one of 8+ people/organisations that had to okay the sale and the final say was Obama. So if someone did bribe Clinton, then there was 8+ others who could block the sale. Or are you saying that the CIA, NSA, Obama and others ALL got bribed to sell a small uranium mine company?
 

HennyBogan

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
2,951
Reaction score
612
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
You do realize that Clinton was one of 8+ people/organisations that had to okay the sale and the final say was Obama. So if someone did bribe Clinton, then there was 8+ others who could block the sale. Or are you saying that the CIA, NSA, Obama and others ALL got bribed to sell a small uranium mine company?

Small? Wasn’t it like 20% of the uranium being mined in the US?
 

post

Lady of the house wonderin' where it's gonna stop
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 23, 2006
Messages
4,353
Reaction score
1,177
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Why is corruption OK when it's about dems?

All worked up and no validation, no satisfaction.....

Lawyers for Ukrainian oligarch have another client: The ...
www.politico.com › news › 2019/10/24 › ukraine-oliga...


Oct 24, 2019 - Conservative legal duo Joe diGenova and Victoria Toensing represent gas tycoon Dmitry Firtash as well as the writer John Solomon.

thehill.com › policy › national-security › 377404-dems...
Mar 8, 2018 - An attorney for Campbell, Victoria Toensing, tweeted Thursday that the ... "#UraniumOne witness also told Congress Russians were confident ...
Here's Why Republicans Stopped Talking About a Uranium One
www.motherjones.com › politics › 2018/03 › heres-wh...

Mar 8, 2018 - Here's Why Republicans Stopped Talking About a Uranium One “Whistleblower” ... reported, decided against using Campbell as a witness against Mikerin after ... Campbell's new claims came after he hired Victoria Toensing, ...

At Least Joe DiGenova And Victoria Toensing Are Having Fun
www.buzzfeednews.com › article › miriamelder › victo...

Dec 11, 2019 - Victoria Toensing and Joe diGenova, two lawyers who informally advise Trump ... in print or on television more than 300 times by late February 1998, less ... recordings Tripp had made of Lewinsky discussing her affair with the ...

February 27, 1998;
".. The two law partners not only talk about the Monica Lewinsky investigation -- they've been quoted or on the tube more than 300 times in the month since the story broke -- but have been drawn into the vortex. Toensing was approached by an intermediary for a Secret Service agent who had supposedly seen something untoward involving President Clinton and the former intern. DiGenova was at the heart of a quickly retracted Dallas Morning News account of that matter..."

LOL ! Yawn.... There were approx. 36 Benghazi hearings and an FBI investigation:

Clinton's email server prompted 3 investigations over 5+ years

State Department finds no 'deliberate mishandling of classified ...
www.cnn.com › state-department-clinton-email-server

Oct 18, 2019 - The report states that 38 people employed at one time by the State Department had sent classified emails to Hillary Clinton's private email server ...

You've been promised Barr-Durham "prosecutions" ....

Trump claimed Strzok and Lisa Page deserved the death penalty.

Trump, not understanding treason, names people he thinks ...
www.washingtonpost.com › politics › 2019/05/23 › tru...


May 23, 2019 - Trump suggests former FBI officials committed treason ... officials James B. Comey, Andrew McCabe, Peter Strzok and Lisa Page committed treason. ... “Sir," NBC's Peter Alexander said, "the Constitution says treason is punishable by death. ... TREASON means long jail sentences, and this was TREASON!

Judge Slams 'Stunning' Trump Bid to Toss Suits by Ex-FBI ...
www.courthousenews.com › judge-slams-stunning-tru...


3 days ago - Strzok, a veteran FBI counterintelligence agent, and Page, an FBI lawyer, had worked on the Russia investigation headed by former special ...

The only people arrested and prosecuted are linked to Trump or his campaign.

How do I know what I know? I routinely share links to sources that prove reliable over time....

 
Last edited:

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Small? Wasn’t it like 20% of the uranium being mined in the US?

No. At the time they had 20% of the licensend production/refining capacity in the US.. that is now around 10%.

Regardless, any uranium mined and produced/refined in the US has to be sold to US government approved clients, which usually means the US government it self. Just because a Russian company owns it, does not mean the uranium goes to Russia. Remember, the previous owner was Canadian.

On top of all that, to be approved, the deal had to pass national security concerns and a bunch of other regulatory hurdles and if just one of 8+ agencies put up a red flag, then it would have been stopped.

That is why this story is all about nothing.
 

Utility Man

Sidewalk Inspector
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
6,875
Reaction score
7,906
Location
US
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"Any port in a storm"

Even starts out with "what about".

Don't you all love the smell of desperation in the morning.

c751f57120fb73c08cafb809e8899ff9d48bdd1f.jpg


Why not "lock her up" instead of whatabouting her name to death ?

Seemed as though the cult was pretty sure she would be locked up by now.

After all that mindless chanting they did.
 

HennyBogan

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
2,951
Reaction score
612
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
No. At the time they had 20% of the licensend production/refining capacity in the US.. that is now around 10%.

Regardless, any uranium mined and produced/refined in the US has to be sold to US government approved clients, which usually means the US government it self. Just because a Russian company owns it, does not mean the uranium goes to Russia. Remember, the previous owner was Canadian.

On top of all that, to be approved, the deal had to pass national security concerns and a bunch of other regulatory hurdles and if just one of 8+ agencies put up a red flag, then it would have been stopped.

That is why this story is all about nothing.

At the time! 20% of licensed production/ capacity et. >> that is not small potatoes is it
 

TomFitz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 3, 2012
Messages
11,831
Reaction score
7,644
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
What about this dems?

Why does this not get media attention? Becouse media are democrats?


Maybe it’s because the GOP beat this dead horse relentlessly four years ago.

It was made up nonsense from a guy paid to write right wing attack screeds for use by right wing media to push its various memes.

Schweitzer never had much credibility. But he had more than Jerome Corsi, who had been the go to mouthpiece for anti Clinton attack books for two decades.

Hillary Clinton is not running for President. There never was any evidence that she was involved in making sure that the Russians could buy interest in Uranium One.

That deal would certainly have gone through under Trump. Putin would have mentioned it in one of his many phone conversations with Trump, and that would have been it.

Oh, and so you’ll be spared future disappointment, Barack Obama is not running for President either.
 

dixon01767

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 15, 2019
Messages
11,132
Reaction score
1,592
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
You do realize that Clinton was one of 8+ people/organisations that had to okay the sale and the final say was Obama. So if someone did bribe Clinton, then there was 8+ others who could block the sale. Or are you saying that the CIA, NSA, Obama and others ALL got bribed to sell a small uranium mine company?

That's not how these things usually go. Not Russians offering $145 million to Clinton to approve the sale but instead the Clintons demanding $145 million to not block the sale.
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
52,928
Reaction score
22,696
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
What about this dems?

Why does this not get media attention? Becouse media are democrats?


What exactly is the "media" ignoring? All I saw was a bunch of warmed over nonsense. And it's about Hillary, and last I checked she's not running for any office.
 

JasperL

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2014
Messages
52,928
Reaction score
22,696
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
At the time! 20% of licensed production/ capacity et. >> that is not small potatoes is it

What is the worst case here? So a Russian company owns 20% of U.S. active reserves. Sounds bad! They can't export any of it without Trump's approval, and so now we have the possibility that a Russian owned company will be mining uranium and selling it in the U.S. if we want and need the production, and the uranium cannot be exported unless we allow it specifically.

And we import about 90% of our uranium because mining for it is dirty business and we don't want to do it. So that means the sale transferred to a Russian owned company about 20% of 10% or 2% of our annual usage. Doesn't seem like much, and Canada supplies 24%, Australia 18%. And Uranium is a commodity traded on world markets. So if the Russian shut down all that production, other countries fill in the gap.

Anyway, when this came up years ago, I tried to figure out what the issue was and never could do it. As far as I could tell, the issue was URANIUM!!! NUCLEAR!! CLINTON!!! with no dots connecting anywhere, nor any reason to care if the dots did connect.. If we need more uranium, it's all over the place, all that's missing is a profit for U.S. companies to mine it in the U.S.
 

bongsaway

DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 16, 2019
Messages
24,493
Reaction score
12,724
Location
Flori-duh
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
That's not how these things usually go. Not Russians offering $145 million to Clinton to approve the sale but instead the Clintons demanding $145 million to not block the sale.

And this you can of course prove right?
 

Hatuey

Rule of Two
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2006
Messages
56,493
Reaction score
23,675
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Lmao is this from "mainstream media"?

Can someone put their journo hat on and tell me?


------------------------

Thought had by person at the White House: If you can remember, man, woman, car, camera, TV, you are fit to lead a country and no one has anything to worry about
 

PeteEU

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
36,145
Reaction score
12,527
Location
Denmark
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
At the time! 20% of licensed production/ capacity et. >> that is not small potatoes is it

Actually it is. Only so much uranium is needed, so having 20% of the production/capacity does not mean that Uranium One would be using said capacity.

Also, any sale of uranium in the US, has to go through the US government.. so who really cares who owns what, if the market is so "communist" that the US government determines who can get the uranium that is produced by anyone in the US. And the US could easily nationalise any company they wish.

And again, why was it not a problem when it was owned by the Canadians?
 

HennyBogan

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Messages
2,951
Reaction score
612
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Pay to play, the Hildabeast was selling the US off piece by piece.
 

RAMOSS

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
55,495
Reaction score
21,118
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You do realize that Clinton was one of 8+ people/organisations that had to okay the sale and the final say was Obama. So if someone did bribe Clinton, then there was 8+ others who could block the sale. Or are you saying that the CIA, NSA, Obama and others ALL got bribed to sell a small uranium mine company?
It's just a repeat of the Point answered a thousand time. It happens over and over again. A lie, repeated 10,000 times can be believed by the gullible
 
Top Bottom