Let’s face it, if Hillary Clinton were captured on video murdering someone, 95 percent of those who are “ready” for her would still be ready. The mainstream media and Democratic party are supine, and the Clinton’s counterattack machine is ruthless and vicious. Which means the following article, from The New York Times, may turn out to be enormously important. It details a fairly simple story that goes far beyond the usual Clinton scandal allegations, involving hefty donations to the Clinton Foundation and later, payment of a half-a-million dollars speaker’s fee to Bill Clinton from a Canadian company, Uranium One, and its officials in 2010, while the sale of its majority control to a Russian company was under consideration by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), on which Hillary was a member. The Canadian company controlled 20 percent of US uranium production and two important mines in Kazakhstan. Neither Russia nor the US are self-sufficient in uranium.
The implications of the story are inescapable, but the subtext is important as well. The New York Times could have sat on, or downplayed, this story, as it has done many times for the Clintons. That it published this story now may simply be a matter of strategic positioning: Peter Schweizer’s book, Clinton Cash, will be released next month; he has allowed the Times a preview; the book details some of the connections between Uranium One and the Clintons. Even if that is the case, however, through the years the Times has ignored countless meritorious books and stories in other news outlets about the Clintons’ scandals. This one appears to be both too big and too straightforward to ignore: the Clinton’s accept money to allow a company based in Russia, almost by definition in bed with the Russian government, the head of which Hillary last year likened to Adolf Hitler, to buy up a good chunk of the world’s productive capacity of what is obviously one of its most important strategic minerals, uranium. Anyone who wants to mount a defense of Hillary, and undoubtedly many will try, has to explain why the donations to the Clinton Foundation were not disclosed, in clear contravention of Hillary’s pledge to do so when she became Secretary of State.
The New York Times and The Washington Post are to the Democratic party what The Wall Street Journal and Fox News are to the Republican party. That the Times has published this story suggests that perhaps the Democratic powers that be have decided that there are just too many scandals and Hillary is just too maladroit a campaigner to carry the party to victory in 2016. Therefore, it’s time to cut her loose, while there is still time to come up with another candidate (the Democrats don’t have much of a bench). That, however, is conjecture; stay tuned. From Jo Becker and Mike McIntire at nytimes.com:
The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”
The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.
But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.
At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.
Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, 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 Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
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. 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.
And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.
At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
To continue reading: Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal
Like this:
Like Loading...
STRAIGHT LINE LOGIC 