Toronto Escorts

Washington Times: Russia tables turn, roping Clinton, Obama, Holder, not Trump

PornAddict

Active member
Aug 30, 2009
3,620
0
36
60
Washington Times: Russia tables turn, roping Clinton, Obama, Holder, not Trump
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/oct/18/russia-tables-turn-roping-clinton-obama-holder-not/

By Cheryl K. Chumley - The Washington Times - Wednesday, October 18, 2017
ANALYSIS/OPINION:
The tables have turned and what was once the media’s favorite message — President Donald Trump colluded with Russia to steal the election — has now grown silent.
Apparently, it’s Bill and Hillary Clinton who’ve been doing the behind-scenes and suspicious dealings with Russia all along. Oh, and perhaps others in the Barack Obama administration, too.
You think special counsel Robert Mueller might switch the target of his investigation any time soon? Seems a bit time-wasting — not to mention taxpayer dollar-wasting — to keep on the Trump trail, desperately searching for signs of a collusion that just didn’t happen.

Futile is a word that comes to mind.
Better to dig deeper into this, as reported by The Hill: “Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States.”
Intercepted emails shows that Russia had actually gained an inroad in America and compromised a U.S. uranium trucking firm with bribes.

But this is the bigger news: The feds also found an eyewitness who provided documented evidence to show that these Russia nuke officials had sent millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation — at a time when Hillary was serving as secretary of state and on a government body that extended favor to Russia.
Of course, this isn’t exactly new.

Way back in April of 2015, The New York Times ran this headline: “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.” And among its many, many lines was this one: “As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation.”

In fact, that “flow of cash” was actually four separate flows of cash, for a total amount of $2.35 million. And, we also learned from this New York Times piece, “those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons.”
A lot of this was also uncovered a outlined by other writers, as well — John Rappoport, investigative journalist, comes to mind, as well as Peter Schweitzer, of “Clinton Cash” author fame.

But what is coming to light is what others knew, and when.
The feds suspected as early as 2009 that Russia was engaged in this dirty dealing. And the United States, under Barack Obama’s administration, did nothing.
“Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting [Vladimir] Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions,” The Hill wrote.
The American people want to know — was U.S. security compromised by the Obama-Clinton deals with Russia?

Mueller’s tasked with the wrong job. If he really wants to find out if America’s interests were compromised in any way by Russia, he needs to quit looking Trump’s way and start digging deep into the Clintons and yes, the Obama administration.
The Hill asked both Clinton and then-attorney general Eric Holder for comment. Curiously, neither had anything to say at this time. Their silence is both telling, and unacceptable. Now if only the same leftists who’ve been clamoring for impeachment of Trump over supposed collusion with Russia would similarly demand answers about Clinton, Holder and Obama — maybe we’d get to the finally get to the bottom of this.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
While I thought it was just campaign theatrics at the time the “lock her up” chants might have been prophetic
 

Smallcock

Active member
Jun 5, 2009
13,703
21
38
Incredible.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com
Crickets from the Russia conspiracy theorists..... I can’t imagine why. :rolleyes:
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,819
3,473
113
Crickets from the Russia conspiracy theorists..... I can’t imagine why. :rolleyes:
Their credibility is on the line. And the click is ticking.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,717
17,862
113
Their credibility is on the line. And the click is ticking.
Its rated as a four Pinochio lie, this claim.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-russian-uranium-deal/?utm_term=.6fa4702d8b27

Trump and his campaign claim that Clinton “gave” or “handed over” 20 percent of American uranium rights to the Russians. Through the Uranium One deal, the Russian state-owned nuclear energy company does now have control over 20 percent of U.S. uranium extraction capacity. But it cannot export the uranium.

In 2010, the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States approved the sale of the majority of the shares to the Russians. The State Department was one of nine agencies on the committee that approved the deal. The deal was also separately approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

There is no evidence Clinton herself got involved in the deal personally, and it is highly questionable that this deal even rose to the level of the secretary of state. Theoretically, as Schweizer says, Clinton could have intervened. But even then, it ultimately would have been Obama’s decision whether to suspend or block the deal.

We wavered between Three and Four Pinocchios. Trump so often uses broad-brushed language that pushes him into Four Pinocchio territory, and this is yet another one of those cases. He specifically names Hillary Clinton as the active agent in the Uranium One deal, saying she “gave them” or “handed over” uranium to the Russians, but that is not the case. Then, he further claimed the sale went forward in exchange “for a big payment.” There’s no evidence for that claim either.
 

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,819
3,473
113

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,717
17,862
113
Not addressing the money however I see. I have no idea if this has legs but we shall see.

And my comment is about the Mueller investigation. The public won't stand for it to go on forever. And if nothing comes up against Trump his critics in the press will take a huge hit.

And some politicians as well.
Read the article, they discuss the donations, which were to the Clinton Foundation and not to the Clintons personally.

Its true, the Mueller investigation is slow, but it is a massive investigation on the president so it has to be done correctly.
Here's what's been going on.
May 17: Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein appointed Mueller to spearhead the Russia probe.

June 16: Mueller began investigating Jared Kushner’s finances.

July 15-16: Mueller reportedly asked for the name of the person who represented two Russians with connections to Trump’s Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013 during a 2016 meeting attended by Donald Trump Jr.

July 25: Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager, had his house raided by the FBI under Mueller’s inquiry, The New York Times reported. Authorities found binders and other documents that could lead to possible secret offshore bank accounts opened by Manafort.

August 1: Mueller appointed former U.S. Justice Department official Greg Andres, who then became the 16th lawyer on the team.
August 3: Mueller named a "grand jury," signaling that a larger investigation was underway.

August 31: Mueller reportedly teamed up with New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to investigate Manafort.

September 15: Mueller obtained a search warrant for Facebook accounts linked to Russian operatives that aimed to influence the 2016 presidential election. Experts called the warrant a “turning point” in the investigation.

September 26: Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut announces that Manafort and Trump’s former national security advisor Michael Flynn could face criminal charges as part of Mueller’s investigation.

September 28: Ivanka Trump and Kushner’s private email domains face investigation, as well as batches of emails from White House senior aides. The investigation, conducted by the White House, hopes to find anything relevant to Mueller’s Russia probe.

October 13: Mueller interviewed Priebus.

October 17: Mueller sat down with Spicer.
 

onthebottom

Never Been Justly Banned
Jan 10, 2002
40,558
23
38
Hooterville
www.scubadiving.com

Butler1000

Well-known member
Oct 31, 2011
28,819
3,473
113
Read the article, they discuss the donations, which were to the Clinton Foundation and not to the Clintons personally.

Its true, the Mueller investigation is slow, but it is a massive investigation on the president so it has to be done correctly.
Here's what's been going on.
If you think that the Foundation isn't paying for a good portion of the Clinton's bills you are naive.

And the public will only allow things to go on for so long. If the press thinks that they can use it during the midterms to help the Dems they will find an electorate white sick of it.
 

Frankfooter

dangling member
Apr 10, 2015
80,717
17,862
113
The can will be opened....

https://www.circa.com/story/2017/10...er-fbi-informant-to-testify-about-uranium-one

If they follow the money through the Clinton Foundation (which is their money laundering operation) it could get very interesting.
If there is anything there.
It looks like a witch hunt, if the FBI investigated and didn't find anything then there likely isn't anything there.
But by all means, lets see what they find and if there is dirt there then lay some charges.

The dossier is still in play, even today Trump was tweeting about it. He even went so far as to accuse the FBI of a conspiracy against him.
By they way, the rumour still says that the dossier was originally funded by a #nevertrump republican.

And here's snopes on the Clinton accusations.
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

Lets see who gets charged first, Trump or Clinton.
Lock them both up!
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
A certain truism strikes again- if you want to know what Dems are up to, listen to what they accuse their enemies of. Like Harvey Weinstein, we always knew that Clintons were dirty. So far, all have been scared to speak openly. But, like Weinstein, the empress has been deposed and stripped of her power.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
27,469
5,660
113
If there is anything there.
It looks like a witch hunt, if the FBI investigated and didn't find anything then there likely isn't anything there.
But by all means, lets see what they find and if there is dirt there then lay some charges.

The dossier is still in play, even today Trump was tweeting about it. He even went so far as to accuse the FBI of a conspiracy against him.
By they way, the rumour still says that the dossier was originally funded by a #nevertrump republican.

And here's snopes on the Clinton accusations.
https://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

Lets see who gets charged first, Trump or Clinton.
Lock them both up!
Definitely Trump. The man who is also awaiting lawsuits of sexual assault. That is in the pipeline.
 

jcpro

Well-known member
Jan 31, 2014
24,673
6,836
113
We know that the right wingies are trying to pick at straws, especially that Sean Hanstupidity presenter who in conjunction with the Breitfart news blows things out of proportion. The FBI will be investigating nil, nada, as there is nothing to investigate.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...m-and-hillary-clinton/?utm_term=.dd1d38f3b7bb
First of all, cute names, but they make you sound childish and invested. Secondly, and most importantly, lack of substance never stopped the FBI before- like in Trump's case. I'll help you with a prediction
The President will direct the AG to unleash the FBI at the Clinton Foundation and Hillary. Because she did not shut her trap after being defeated like a good candidate suppose to. And Donald does not forget this kind of slight, one aimed at his enormous opinion of himself.
 

bver_hunter

Well-known member
Nov 5, 2005
27,469
5,660
113
First of all, cute names, but they make you sound childish and invested. Secondly, and most importantly, lack of substance never stopped the FBI before- like in Trump's case. I'll help you with a prediction
The President will direct the AG to unleash the FBI at the Clinton Foundation and Hillary. Because she did not shut her trap after being defeated like a good candidate suppose to. And Donald does not forget this kind of slight, one aimed at his enormous opinion of himself.
You are definitely brainwashed by the fake news that has no real evidence. You can keep your predictions to yourself. Trump is a name calling rat who has attacked Clinton from day 1. Remember "Lock her up", and "I will appoint a Special Attorney to investigate her" nonsense that all the cheerleaders bought. Where has that gone??? By the way Clinton barely uttered a word after the election, until weeks later.
 

oldjones

CanBarelyRe Member
Aug 18, 2001
24,495
11
38
Interesting how much of this 'damning' new information was already reported by the MSM, in fact by the tame Clinton-loving New York Times two and three years ago. And none of those dedicated truth-tellers of the alt-right like Breitbart caught it. Or even dug past the original Good Grey Times reporting to better sources. Never mind quoting the Times very selectively.

Way to go Ms. Chumley! That's what I call good old news reporting. Emphasis on the 'old'.
 
Toronto Escorts