Cash Flowed to the Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal reads the Headline in the New York Times article by Jo Becker and Mike McIntire from April 23, 2015
Sounds like tin foil hat stuff doesn’t it? Nevertheless, sometimes fact is simply stranger than fiction.
The facts say that as a result of a deal which involved both of the Clinton’s, Russia wound up with 20% of our nation’s uranium.
At the heart of this story are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who were major donors to the “charitable endeavors” of former President Bill Clinton and his spouse who would be Hillary of course.
Members of this Canadian group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.
The sale ultimately gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all of the uranium production capacity in the United States. One could say that this was not in the best interests of our nation.
What is more, as the author of “The Clinton Cash” Peter Schweitzer notes in the following video- the deal also netted the Clinton Foundation $145 Million. (“Did you say mmmm,mmmm, mmm, mmm, million dollars?” as the Danny DiVito character in Twins put it. Not exactly chump change one could validly state.)
Uranium is a strategic asset, with implications for national security. Consequently, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies.
Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama’s Secretary of State.
The Canadian company which arose from this deal, as previously mentioned, was Uranium One.
Money Flows to the Clinton Foundation
For a graph of how the cash flowed to the Clinton Foundation from the NY Times article click here
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One to State owned Rosatom, in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation.
Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors.
Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
Bill’s Speaking Fees Quickly Double
Bill Clinton’s speaking fees were already an outrageous $250,000. Serendipitously, shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Bill’s fees jumped to $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
For full NYT article click here: http://nyti.ms/2ta36om
So, My Question Is…….
Where is the media’s outrage over the Russian collusion in this deal which ultimately gave Putin (THE RUSSIANS!!!) control of one-fifth of our supply of uranium, thanks to the help of Bill and Hillary Clinton who were handsomely rewarded for their collusive assistance? Uranium, in case you forgot, is that stuff used to make atomic bombs and also can serve as a tangible source of cheaper long term energy.
No, instead the Democrats and media are chasing down every unsubstantiated claim or event that they can to drum up ANY possible link of Donald Trump to Russia.
However, let’s be honest here for a moment. This never ending story is really not about the threat of Russian interference. It is really about saving face with their supporters and obstructing the conservative, free market oriented agenda of Donald Trump.
Losing 20% of our domestic uranium reserve is a very real and tangible threat to our nation. Russia and Putin are now controlling one fifth of the Uranium stores in the U.S. thanks to Bill and Hillary.
Meanwhile the Russian collusion chanting media and Democrats like mouthy Pelosi, Waters et al have nothing to say about it? Not a word or whimper. Yet we’re supposed to take their concern for the safety of our nation against the extraordinarily horrendous Russian threat very, very seriously?
Uh, excuse me, but let’s get genuinely serious here. Would it be wrong of me to notice the high level of hypocrisy and bias here?
Gee, I don’t know but it seems kind of obvious to me. Then again, maybe I’m a bit biased towards integrity, honesty and telling the truth in place of misrepresentations and overreactions. My bad!
At the very least, isn’t this a tad bit more like real collusion than a 20 minute meeting with a Moscow lawyer with Trump’s son which produced nothing?
Methinks perchance it is, but hey…..perhaps that’s just me. What say you?