Thread: 2016 Democratic US Presidential Candidates

Originally Posted by piwanoi

RP please be patient Harry's going to bring forth evidence that she had SFA to do with the Uranium deal , ain't that right Harry ?

It's a shame that one has to waste one's time posting FACTS to debunk the rubbish you two post, but since there's more than one of you idiots I'll post more than the link.

The basic facts: This story is about the sale of a controlling stake in a Canadian company called Uranium One to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. Because Uranium One controlled uranium mines in the United States, the sale had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment In the United States (CFIUS), part of the executive branch.

A number of investors in Uranium One gave donations to the Clinton Foundation during the time the sale was being considered (between 2008 and 2010), in part through the participation of Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who was a large donor to the Foundation and who had controlled a company that eventually bought Uranium One (according to the Times, Giustra sold his interest in the company in 2007, before the Rosatom deal).

In addition, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 in 2010 to give a speech to a Russian bank with ties to the Russian government. The U.S. government eventually approved the deal in 2010.

What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.

What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.

What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The Director of National Intelligence and the Secretary of Labor are non-voting members, and CFIUS's work is also observed by representatives of other agencies like the National Security Council and the Office of Management and Budget. The idea that Clinton could have convinced all those officials and all those departments to change their position on the sale, even if she had wanted to, borders on the absurd.

Furthermore, the official who was the State Department's representative on CFIUS at the time, Jose Hernandez, told Time magazine that Clinton did not participate in the evaluation of this deal: "Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter," he said.

So now we've laid that Clinton Cash bollocks to rest, you can stop trying to spin your little fairy story as facts.





Everything we know about the Hillary Clinton-Russia-Uranium 'scandal' - Business Insider

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donars ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donors ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

So the NYT and NYP has issued a public apology for dragging her name through the shit then? , and just who was responsible for not disclosing donations from Uranium One thus breaking Hilarious's agreement ? as this was not disclosed in your article .

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donars ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

What Investigations Harry ? , take your pick Articles: Three Strikes and You're Out, Hillary Oh what a tangled web she weaves

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donars ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

What Investigations Harry ? , take your pick Articles: Three Strikes and You're Out, Hillary Oh what a tangled web she weaves

Posting this link for Harry or Snubbles is a major waste of time, neither one will allow themselves to process the information as it goes against their core beliefs.

I cannot remember a political family involved in as many scandles as the Clintons it just never stops.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I cannot remember a political family involved in as many scandles as the Clintons it just never stops.

That's because (1) You only ever get your news from Fox and (2) Your memory is failing with old age.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I cannot remember a political family involved in as many scandles as the Clintons it just never stops.

That's because (1) You only ever get your news from Fox and (2) Your memory is failing with old age.

Would you like to post a few rather than post meaningless crap?

Originally Posted by piwanoi

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donars ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

What Investigations Harry ? , take your pick Articles: Three Strikes and You're Out, Hillary Oh what a tangled web she weaves

Yes, another feeble trick, try and conflate one subject with another one.

There is no investigation of the Clinton Foundation nor of Hillary's involvement in the Uranium decision. Because one was not needed, for the reasons given above.

The story is rubbish.

The undeclared donations are irrelevant as they do not relate to any State Department business.

Fairy stories off right wing websites that name other right wing websites are still fairy stories.

The "investigation" into Huma Abedin is about the fact that the State Dept. kept paying her when she was on maternity leave. The DoJ refused to treat this as a criminal matter, big fucking surprise.

I'm afraid you're like all republican squealing, angry old white men.

You squeal everything the right wing publicity machine tells you to squeal, but the truth is you're the only idiots that buy it.

And since the Democrats were never going to get your vote anyway, it's really just a fucking comedy show for the outside observer.

"Emailgate" will end up like "Benghazigate", just another huge waste of the peoples' money to try and satisfy the never ending republitard addiction to fake scandals, witch hunts and kangaroo courts.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by piwanoi

According to your article the jury is still out as Investigations are still ongoing and also in your article and I quote , When Clinton became sec of state she made an agreement with the administration to publicly disclose all its donars ,but donations from Uranium one was not disclosed , how convenient

That article is a year old. What investigation?

Or are you like the coffin dodger and believe in every word you hear on Focks News?

The fact is she did not disclose the donation,and that is not the only donation not reported.