Uranium One

Pretty good article on the timeline of the Russian acquisition of US and Canadian uranium mining interests.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

"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.

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.

The New York Times’s examination of the Uranium One deal is based on dozens of interviews, as well as a review of public records and securities filings in Canada, Russia and the United States.

Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0

The article says even more, I only pulled a few paragraphs. Best information I've read yet on the entire sketchy deal.
There's nothing to see here, folks. Please move along.
I look forward to the Clinton lovers comments, and am sure they will be factual, as usual.
Quote

Originally posted by: drmilled
I look forward to the Clinton lovers comments, and am sure they will be factual, as usual.


I would actually like to see any serious factual opposing views to what was written(if one read the entire article), makes for better discussion.
Screaming faux news, kool aid or any other "I have no argument" BS is completely worthless though.


Benghazi dies at the hands of Republican Congressmen who made the mistake of speaking honestly....and we immediately move on to the next conspiracy theory. Shouldn't the birthers first confess their Benghazi outrage was fabricated and based on ...nothing but sour grapes?


The entire conspiracy presumes that Hillary Clinton took cash in exchange for NOT BLOCKING the uranium company's aquisition. Unfortunately for the birthers, Hillary Clinton had no such power to bargain with as already revealed by fact checking on this subject. So Boilerman's last post was dead on balls accurate...maybe his first post this year.
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Benghazi dies at the hands of Republican Congressmen who made the mistake of speaking honestly....and we immediately move on to the next conspiracy theory. Shouldn't the birthers first confess their Benghazi outrage was fabricated and based on ...nothing but sour grapes?


The entire conspiracy presumes that Hillary Clinton took cash in exchange for NOT BLOCKING the uranium company's aquisition. Unfortunately for the birthers, Hillary Clinton had no such power to bargain with as already revealed by fact checking on this subject. So Boilerman's last post was dead on balls accurate...maybe his first post this year.

Yeah PJ. Hillary has had absolutely no power or influence anywhere about anything. The Russians just liked her and Bill so much that they funneled that much money into their foundation. Keep sticking your head even deeper into the sand.
Why didn't the clintons report the donation if there wasn't anything wrong? Any email correspondence on this might have been accidentally deleted as part of the 30,000 yoga emails that she deleted.
There is zero reason for the Russian company/government to donate to Hillary unless they expect favors from Hillary. Zero, zero, zero reason.
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Benghazi dies at the hands of Republican Congressmen who made the mistake of speaking honestly....and we immediately move on to the next conspiracy theory. Shouldn't the birthers first confess their Benghazi outrage was fabricated and based on ...nothing but sour grapes?


The entire conspiracy presumes that Hillary Clinton took cash in exchange for NOT BLOCKING the uranium company's aquisition. Unfortunately for the birthers, Hillary Clinton had no such power to bargain with as already revealed by fact checking on this subject. So Boilerman's last post was dead on balls accurate...maybe his first post this year.


First, why in the world do you keep saying"you birthers"? ,it makes your argument look weak. So does your continuing mention of Benghazi, you're sidestepping any legitimate argument that there may be.

Secondly, are you trying to say the State Dept. couldn't block this deal. The simple statement that the State Dept. approved it, I sure take that to mean they could've NOT GIVEN APPROVAL and that would kill the deal. I'm fully aware that there were many who had to sign off on it, but it only took one to put a kibosh on the deal. Hillary was head of State then, can't say she had no power to stop it, pure bunk.

Third, do you approve that the Russians control 20% of the US's uranium supply?
Quote

Originally posted by: jatki99
Quote

Originally posted by: pjstroh
Benghazi dies at the hands of Republican Congressmen who made the mistake of speaking honestly....and we immediately move on to the next conspiracy theory. Shouldn't the birthers first confess their Benghazi outrage was fabricated and based on ...nothing but sour grapes?


The entire conspiracy presumes that Hillary Clinton took cash in exchange for NOT BLOCKING the uranium company's aquisition. Unfortunately for the birthers, Hillary Clinton had no such power to bargain with as already revealed by fact checking on this subject. So Boilerman's last post was dead on balls accurate...maybe his first post this year.


First, why in the world do you keep saying"you birthers"? ,it makes your argument look weak. So does your continuing mention of Benghazi, you're sidestepping any legitimate argument that there may be.

Secondly, are you trying to say the State Dept. couldn't block this deal. The simple statement that the State Dept. approved it, I sure take that to mean they could've NOT GIVEN APPROVAL and that would kill the deal. I'm fully aware that there were many who had to sign off on it, but it only took one to put a kibosh on the deal. Hillary was head of State then, can't say she had no power to stop it, pure bunk.

Third, do you approve that the Russians control 20% of the US's uranium supply?


I don't say anything. Factcheckers say things and I post their verdict. Factcheckers say Hillary has no power as Secretary of state to veto corporate acquisitions. You say thats bunk. You should prove it with a factchecking source that contradicts mine - or admit you don't know but just hoping thats true. I understand you don't like Hillary but that doesn't mean you are allowed to make up things to rationalize your dislike of her. You know - like you did when you told us only 10% of the CLinton Foundation went to the underlying charity?

As to my feelings about it? I dont like Russian aquisition of US assets of any kind - especially the nuclear kind. But that doesn't make it all Hillary's fault just because you dont like her - does it?

Fact: According to your article the same Russian donors were giving money to the Clinton FOundation as far back as 2005 - long before HIllary was secretary of state

Fact: According to your article the Russians began aquiring US assets in Uranium before either Obama or HIllary took office in 2009. So can you show me your post making a big stink out of this prior to Jan 2009?

Fact: Donations made to the CLinton Foundation do not go to Hillary's superpac or her political campaign...they go to build infrastructure, provide drinking water, medicine, and education all over the globe - including Russia.

Fact: More Russian nuclear fuel was secured and disposed of during the Obama/Clinton administration than in any preceding administration since Reagan.


Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now