- Was there a qui pro quo?
- Did the Clintons meet their disclosure requirements?
- Did the Clintons personally profit?
- Putting aside who got rich, did this series of uranium deals damage or compromise national security?
- Is this cherry-picking or low-hanging fruit?
In case you need the answer key, here it is: yes, no, yes, yes, and everything with the Clintons is low-hanging fruit.
Then the entire story vanished. Poof! It was gone, as the Clinton solar system vacuumed up everything that could possibly damage her run. It turned out that the email problems–which were supposed to have been deep-sixed also, stuck around while Uranium One remained buried.
It would have stayed there had Clinton succeeded in winning the presidency. Does anyone doubt that every scandal, every dirty deal, every political quid pro quo the Clintons ever initiated would have vanished like Bill’s inhibitions at a Jeff Epstein getaway weekend?
And Hillary, ever ready and willing to gaslight, but without the skill of her husband, had the nerve to tell C-SPAN that “there’s been no credible evidence by anyone” that this scandal could be laid at her feet.
Just like with the email scandal–a “smoking gun” would mean Hillary was caught on video with a bag of Russian cash in one hand, and her Blackberry to her ear, telling Huma Abedin, “I got the cash, approve the Rosatom/ARMZ deal!”
It would be funny if it wasn’t so frustrating and flat out dangerous for our country. Clinton claims that because Trump won the election and the Russians are always trying to interfere with our country, that, ispo facto, there was collusion between Trump and Russia, and against her.
But on the Uranium One deal, back in 2015, when the New York Times originally reported this, “[the] Clinton perspective is that, although the approvals were delivered by the State Department when Clinton led it, there is no evidence that she personally delivered them, or of the ‘pro’ in the equation.”
To Clinton, and by extension the Democrat-friendly MSM, it’s perfectly clear that events without a clear nexus, using various cut-outs, shills, and opposition-friendly sources, can be laid on President Trump’s lap as proof of collusion. But when investigative journalist Peter Schweizer pens an entire book on “Clinton Cash,” that’s prejudicial because the NYT used Schweizer as a source.
As Andrew C. McCarthy noted over the weekend in National Review, “The cool half-million bucks the Putin regime funneled to Bill Clinton was five times the amount it spent on those Facebook ads — the ones the media-Democrat complex ludicrously suggests swung the 2016 presidential election to Donald Trump.”
While the Clintons claim that Russia somehow stole an election using Twitter eggs, bots and $6,500 in Facebook election ads (the Russians also funded far-left activists like BLM and Occupy) and handed it to Trump, the Obama administration presided over a Russian takeover of tens of billions of dollars in U.S. uranium reserves.
Scandal doesn’t begin to describe this.
This was an incredibly complex series of transactions and foreign involvement, and the Justice Department and the FBI were all over it. They knew how dirty the Russians were, because they had an informant, known as “CS-1.” And get this tidbit from McCarthy:
At the time this unidentified man became an informant, the FBI was led by director Robert Mueller, who is now the special counsel investigating whether Trump colluded with Russia. The investigation was centered in Maryland (Tenam’s home base). There, the U.S. attorney was Obama appointee Rod Rosenstein — now President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and the man who appointed Mueller as special counsel to investigate Trump.
Going back to 2005, Bill Clinton was palling around with Frank Giustra, jetting to Kazakhstan to seal a deal with the dictator in charge. That led to a merger with Uranium One and a cool $3.5 billion for Giustra, who paid fealty (tens of millions) to the Clintons through the Clinton Foundation.
Putin, who wanted Kazakh uranium for Rosatom, had the dictator arrest the official who sold mining rights to Uranium One. By that time, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton came to the rescue, arranging a truce with Putin, and a 17 percent stake in Uranium One for Rosatom.
In the midst of this, a Russian bank with ties to Putin threw a $500,000 speaking fee at Bill Clinton (way more than his usual fee). Bill gave the speech in Moscow, and the floodgates opened–a reported $145 million to the Clinton Foundation.
Then, in October of 2010, despite Congressional opposition and without disclosure of the FBI’s racketeering findings to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFUIS) or to Congress, ding!–the deal was approved and Rosatom owned Uranium One.
Then there was the sordid coverup. DOJ did all they could not to ring any alarm bells to Congress in 2014 as the racketeering case was finally prosecuted. And who ran the case? Rod Rosenstein and Andrew Weissmann, who ran the DOJ’s Fraud Section. Weissmann now works for Robert Mueller, investigating Donald Trump’s Russian ties.
But then the original informant from 2009 wanted to tell his story to Congress. This could not be allowed. His lawyer explained that DOJ “induced him to sign a non-disclosure agreement.”
The Justice Department warned him that it was enforceable — even against disclosures to Congress. (Because, you know, the FBI is opposed to all leaks and disclosures of confidential investigative information . . . except those initiated by the FBI, of course.) In addition, when the informant was primed to file a federal civil lawsuit to recover his own losses from the scheme, he claims that the Justice Department threatened him with prosecution, warning that a lawsuit would violate the non-disclosure agreement. The Hill reports that it has obtained emails from a civil lawyer retained by the witness, which describe pressure exerted by the Justice Department to silence the informant.
What a coincidence: That was in 2016, the stretch run of Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign.
President Trump has every reason to be leery of the Mueller investigation–the same crew that did Obama’s and Clinton’s bidding and covered up the Uranium One-Russia scandal, is now investigating him and ties to Russians. No conflict there, eh?
I’ll only cry crocodile tears for either of them. Both Clinton and Trump brought this pox upon both their houses, and fully deserve what they reap from it.
But let’s ask a question: which is absolutely provable and certain to have damaged American national security interests? Which deal has given American nuclear raw material to the Russians–to bargain with Iran, or North Korea, or whomever they please?
And one more question: which deal without question put hundreds of millions of dollars into Clinton-controlled charities, with more cash directly into the Clintons’ pockets?
While the Special Counsel hunts down evidence of Paul Manafort’s covorting with Russians, and likely will string him up for a prison sentence, Hillary Clinton nearly won the presidency, and this entire sordid, criminal enterprise would have been disappeared.
That’s scary as hell.