Morgan

Well, that's a beginning...

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

The New York Times reported in 2015 that "shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, [former President Bill] Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock." In total, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One, which was acquired by the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatum.

www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/opinions/yes-the-clintons-should-be-investigated/2017/11/19/d88bb652-cb15-11e7-b0cf-7689a9f2d84e_story.html

This isn't exactly a secret, unless your TV is stuck on CNN.


Now for your proof?

Morgan

The book, Clinton Cash looked into donations to the Clinton Foundation; an April 2015 New York Times article also documented the connections.

In 2007, Frank Giustra, a donor to the Clinton Foundation, sold his company, UrAsia, to another company, Uranium One, and unloaded his personal stake in it. The combined company kept Uranium One as its name but Toronto as its base. Under the terms of the deal, the shareholders of UrAsia retained a 60 percent stake in the new company.

In 2009, Russia’s nuclear energy agency, Rosatom, bought a 17 percent share of Uranium One. In 2010, Rosatom sought to secure enough shares to give it a 51 percent stake.

Is this the connection you're referring to? These transitions happened before she was secretary of state.

Russia doesn’t have a license to export uranium outside the United States, so, as Oilprice.com noted, "it’s somewhat disingenuous to say this uranium is now Russia’s, to do with what it pleases."

That said, the possibility that a foreign entity would take a majority stake in the uranium operation meant that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, had to approve the deal. So did the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Utah’s nuclear regulator.

The membership of CFIUS includes the State Department, meaning that the Secretary of State(Hillary Clinton) would have had a voice. The panel also includes the attorney general and the secretaries of the Treasury (who chairs the committee), Defense, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

As far as Bill Clinton getting paid for a speech that is a separate issue from Hillary. Russian "investment" banks having links to the Kremlin I don't see as unusual, probably commonplace. Bill Clinton is a philanthropist and entrepreneur in his own right. The authors comment stating " a total, $145 million went to the Clinton Foundation from interests linked to Uranium One, which was acquired by the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatom." is unclear, what is that based on, or is it simply his word, where are the journaled and recorded facts on those numbers, the breakdown. This is an opinion piece without much merit to back it up, just more accusations.

Donald Trump -- who was running against Clinton for president -- that Clinton’s State Department "approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation."

I didn't know the Clintons had their own state department at that time?

Even if you don’t take either Clinton or Fernandez at their word, the reality is that the State Department was just one of nine government agencies that signed off on the transaction.

Second, while we concluded that nine people related to the company did at some point donate to the Clinton Foundation, we found that the bulk of the $145 million came from Giustra. Guistra said he sold all of his stakes in Uranium One in the fall of 2007, "at least 18 months before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state" and three years before the Russian deal.

We couldn’t independently verify Giustra’s claim, but if he is telling the truth, the donation amount to the Clinton Foundation from confirmed Uranium One investors drops from more than $145 million to $4 million.

read full article: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2017/oct/24/what-you-need-know-about-hillary-clinton-and-urani/

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

morgan: You really can't believe we will except inept websites like politifact? A bonafide fraud hobby site; full of liberals lies!

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

So you're saying that Russian nuclear oligarchs had an outpouring of generosity that just happened to fall into Hillary's purse and then by unrelated coincidence the Obama administration gives them control of 1/5 of America's Uranium? Seriously?

You still haven't given anything Trump has done 1/100th as sleazy.

Who's in Putin's pocket again?

Nuclearian Loc: I live in a Fascist, Liberal State

We already know that Obastard was a traitor/seditionist. He should be rotting in jail for eternity.

Trump has been many times proven not guilty of collusion. Hell, even their investigator, Mueller, said there was no collusion. But the deranged Dimbocraps cant accept that truth. Maybe because they all are mentally insane, or have dementia and/or alzheimers.

Ricktloml

Good point. Habit I guess.

Ricktloml

And it only took ONE person voting no to quash the deal. Hillary did take the oath of office didn't she? I know few live up to their oath, but that doesn't excuse Hillary violating hers. Is EVERYTHING about this woman corrupt. I can't think of a single thing connected to Hillary that has even a hint of honesty or decency about it.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Then you can't think.

The correct statement would be:

"And it only took ONE person OF THE 9 HIGH LEVEL MEMBERS OF THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION voting no to quash the deal."

Again. Nobody is claiming that Hillary is the only corrupt person in the Obama Admin.

But here is a good exercise for you.... Perhaps it will strengthen your 'Thinking Muscles'.

Name any American (not named Clinton) that benefited from the transfer of control of 20% of America's Uranium to Russia ............. Well? ........ Well? ........................ There's a reason why you're having trouble with that. The reason is that the only beneficiaries (known so far) are the Clintons and Russia.

Morgan

Do NOT put words in my mouth with all your twisting, stay on focus of what we were discussing which is not all the irreprehensible things Trump has done, that would take way to long to list them all and you would deny everything, as your trying to do now.

Facts are facts aside from who it comes from, if they are truly facts. The article I've given me listed facts and plenty of them. how many facts did your piece give?

Nothing has been shown to fall into Hillary's purse as you say, if so, she would have been indicted long ago.

Again, which you choose to ignore, Obama didn't give the control of any of it, again it was a to a committee which she was included in from her position.

The intelligence community’s conclusion that “Putin and the Russian Government aspired to help . . . Trump’s election chances.” But it does underscore that the Russians were smart in what the intelligence community calls their efforts “undermine public faith in the US democratic process.” This conclusion is another fact you and your fellow Trumpers chose to ignore.

Morgan

All the stockholders from Uranium One. Do you have privy to that list and how many Americans are included? Are you that naive to the elite? So what you're saying is that committee which again is the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States or CFIUS had to approve the deal. So did the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Utah’s nuclear regulator, made this deal just for the Clintons? Maybe you should use those thinking muscles?

I will say this, Hillary should have excused herself from the committee and had someone else be there in her stead, that would have been the right thing to do.

ldsuttonjr Loc: ShangriLa

morgan: You're a case of " A lot of speed, but no direction!"

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

You failed to list, much less prove, a single "reprehensible" thing Trump did. I'll settle for anything 1/10th as corrupt as the Uranium One deal.

So...You say the Obama administration did that to support share holders, and Hillary getting $145,000,000.00 was just a coincidence?

Does that make sense to you?

I hear there liberal line that the timeline disproves the bribery, but it doesn't. Paying in advance proves and disproves nothing.

Morgan

No he hasn't, he just hasn't been proven guilty ...yet. BIG difference. OJ was proved not guilty also, do you believe that too? There isn't any case of collusion, it would have to be under conspiracy. What would it serve to make the case now when the party in Congress will allow him anything... party before country.

What has been proven is that our counties voting process and integrity has been compromised by a foreign power and just by sheer coincidence it has been done with the first president who was "friendly" with this power...beforehand. Hmmm? if it walks like a duck... Your scenario that half the country is insane doesn't quite fly either.

Morgan

Read my lips, I'm NOT discussing Trump with you, been there done that, a complete waste of my time.

That's perfect, a timeline doesn't matter? When timelines prove peoples innocence or guilt, it's interesting you choose to ignore it,and that would be alleged bribery. All the GOP has to do is throw out accusations and you guys just automatically run with it without seeking any validity to it. It's kinda taking the ball and running downfield to the wrong goal post.