5
0

FBI uncovers BRIBERY plot: Russian nuclear official routed millions to benefit Clinton Foundation


 invite response                
2017 Oct 17, 9:16am   9,735 views  49 comments

by MrMagic   ➕follow (2)   💰tip   ignore  

In the run-up to the approval of the deal by the State Department, nine shareholders of Uranium One just happened to make $145mm in donations to the Clinton Foundation. Moreover, the New Yorker confirmed that Bill Clinton received $500,000 in speaking fees from a Russian investment bank, with ties to the Kremlin, around the same time. Needless to say, the State Department approved the deal giving Russia ownership of 20% of U.S. uranium assets

Russian Purchase of US Uranium Assets in Return for $145mm in Contributions to the Clinton Foundation - Bill and Hillary Clinton assisted a Canadian financier, Frank Giustra, and his company, Uranium One, in the acquisition of uranium mining concessions in Kazakhstan and the United States. Subsequently, the Russian government sought to purchase Uranium One but required approval from the Obama administration given the strategic importance of the uranium assets.

Now, thanks to newly released affidavits from a case that landed one of the Russian co-conspirators, Vadim Mikerin, in jail, we learn that not only was the Obama administration aware the Russians' illegal acts in the U.S. but it may have also been fully aware 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."

And guess who ran the FBI's investigation into this particular Russian plot? As The Hill notes, the Mikerin probe began in 2009 under Robert Mueller, now the special counsel in charge of the Trump case, and ended in late 2015 under the controversial, former FBI Director James Comey who was relieved of his duties by President Trump.

Perhaps this is what the "most transparent" President in history meant when he told Medvedev that he would have "more flexibility" after his 2012 election.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-10-17/fbi-uncovered-russian-nuclear-bribery-plot-obama-approved-uranium-one-deal-netting-c

« First        Comments 41 - 49 of 49        Search these comments

41   Tenpoundbass   2017 Oct 22, 9:23am  

Ooops almost had it!

42   MisdemeanorRebel   2017 Oct 22, 10:07am  

Everybody knows the Media is "All In" for Clinton.

As I've said before, the primary Media bias is what they refuse to cover, on cover only superficially, before moving on to much smaller items that confirm their worldview.

Every reporter wants to be the one who "Brings Down Trump" not the one who "Ends the Clinton Control of the Dem Party".
43   HEY YOU   2017 Oct 22, 11:07am  

Hillary is not President.
Everything is on Trump & Republicans.

Russia is a major nuclear power & Trump hasn't taken away their nuclear weapons & ICBMs.
He's done nothing about China,either.
He doesn't care about the safety of America.
He can't stop a little rogue nation,North Korea,from it's nuclear ambitions.
What a FAILURE! His failure will not protect Republicans.
Watch the drone videos of California's fire devastation & if Trump doesn't disarm all the nuclear nations,
all of America will look like that,only worse.
Wish we had a Commander -in- Chief.

President Nero will be playing golf while America burns.
44   komputodo   2017 Oct 22, 11:09am  

me123 says
n the run-up to the approval of the deal by the State Department, nine shareholders of Uranium One just happened to make $145mm in donations to the Clinton Foundation.


but it wasn't for the clintons, it was for charity.........lololololol
45   joeyjojojunior   2017 Oct 22, 11:39am  

TwoScoopsMcGee says
Every reporter wants to be the one who "Brings Down Trump" not the one who "Ends the Clinton Control of the Dem Party".


Well, one is the President of the US and the other is in hiding.

The American people already ended the Clinton Control of the Dem Party.
46   joeyjojojunior   2017 Oct 22, 11:42am  

Tenpoundbass says
Ooops almost had it!



NYT clearly didn't understand conditional probability and error bars, but it's hilarious that you guys think that when someone has a 90% probability of winning happens to lose, that somehow the probability must have been wrong.

Has no one in the Republican party ever taken prob and stats?
47   joeyjojojunior   2017 Oct 22, 4:34pm  

me123 says
That certainly would be you, since you STILL feel Hillary won and Nate Silver was accurate with all his predictions.


And thank you for proving my point. CIC is exhibit A.

« First        Comments 41 - 49 of 49        Search these comments

Please register to comment:

api   best comments   contact   latest images   memes   one year ago   random   suggestions