FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama admn approved nuclear deal

[Jhhnn]

Nothing wrong with accepting millions from foreign governments while Secretary of State?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...e7ba8439ca6_story.html?utm_term=.9cfff581c2bf

...
Foreign governments and individuals are prohibited from giving money to U.S. political candidates, to prevent outside influence over national leaders. But the foundation has given donors a way to potentially gain favor with the Clintons outside the traditional political limits.

The Clinton foundation, a top ranked charity, received the funds, not the Clintons. Then they spent it helping poor people around the world. Eeevil!

 

[OutHouse]

The Clinton foundation, a top ranked charity, received the funds, not the Clintons. Then they spent it helping poor people around the world. Eeevil!

of course you dont see any problem with a semi-hostile government giving a shit ton of money to a charity who's founder and board chairman is a former US President who happens to be married the Secretary of State who has considerable influence in approving the land deals....

 

[JSt0rm]

I meant that as separate from the quote. But I highly doubt that hasn't happened. She has also had lobbyists of companies donate both to the foundation and her campaign. Also, have no idea why you think having 200 million means that no one would be able to tell you what to do. The dotard exemplifies this bigly.



It's being used as a platform for access and receiving money for personal enrichment and their political ambitions. I have to laugh that you think nothing could possibly be wrong when they said themselves that they would stop taking foreign and corporate donations to the foundation. How would anyone know influence wasn't bought prior?



lol How am I right-wing?

The dotard is being told what to do through right wing media. Its perfect. For them. The russians. He would never say he has handlers because of money. He is even simpler then that. My point was once you have fcuk you money you no longer need to take orders from anyone. The clintons have fcuk money. They also have enemies that pump out propaganda to the low iq low edu americans.

 

[JSt0rm]

of course you dont see any problem with a semi-hostile government giving a shit ton of money to a charity who's founder and board chairman is a former US President who happens to be married the Secretary of State who has considerable influence in approving the land deals....

please. You guys are sided with the russians. You have no basis to criticize anyone. Traitors. All of you.

 

[BxgJ]

Seems like the chaos this is going to cause is in itself worth whatever they spent. Reason enough to do it, without reaching for other reasons.

 

[Jhhnn]

of course you dont see any problem with a semi-hostile government giving a shit ton of money to a charity who's founder and board chairman is a former US President who happens to be married the Secretary of State who has considerable influence in approving the land deals....

Semi-hostile? None of the govts named are vaguely that. Algeria has been trying to suck up to Washington for years. The rest already have established relationships.

What land deals do you speak of, Kimosabe?

 

[UglyCasanova]

Semi-hostile? None of the govts named are vaguely that. Algeria has been trying to suck up to Washington for years. The rest already have established relationships.

What land deals do you speak of, Kimosabe?

Russia? Or

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/...-charity.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

The kingdom of Saudi Arabia donated more than $10 million. Through a foundation, so did the son-in-law of a former Ukrainian president whose government was widely criticized for corruption and the murder of journalists. A Lebanese-Nigerian developer with vast business interests contributed as much as $5 million.

 

[brandonbull]

From my understanding the prevailing legal opinion is that the president cannot be prosecuted for any crime, at least not while in office.

I think the Comey firing pretty obviously amounts to obstruction of justice though. I mean he fired him, lied about why he fired him initially, then came out and straight up said on national television that he fired him because of the Russia investigation, and then told the Russians that firing Comey took the pressure of the investigation off him. I imagine Mueller's report will include findings that the president committed a crime in that respect.

I think after hearing Comey speak a few times in front of Congress is enough reason why he was fired. Botched multiple large investigations and admitted to leaking information to the press.

 

[brandonbull]

please. You guys are sided with the russians. You have no basis to criticize anyone. Traitors. All of you.

I don't think were are the Democrats. I guess we know who the Russian sympathizers are on this board. I'm sure the average Russian is nice but we don't need the Russian government influencing America via colluding with the Democrats or anyone else.

 

[fskimospy]

I think after hearing Comey speak a few times in front of Congress is enough reason why he was fired. Botched multiple large investigations and admitted to leaking information to the press.

It doesn't matter what you think, all that matters is what Trump thinks. He lied about his reasons repeatedly and then admitted to firing Comey over the Russia investigation, which is obstruction of justice.

 

[ch33zw1z]

So the Failing NYT is cool now. got it.

 

[ivwshane]

Here's one quote from a factcheck

"It is possible the foundation has boosted the Clintons’ public image since Bill Clinton left office, and this has helped them command hefty speaker fees and book advances, and it’s also given them extra opportunities to mingle with the global elite. But they may have gotten these benefits even without the Clinton Foundation. Their celebrity primarily comes from their track record in politics."

They would get donations etc. from some of the same donors of the foundation. Do you think accepting speaking fees after the presidency also has no appearance of corruption?

Considering every president has done the whole speaking for fees thing as have millions of successful Americans, no it doesn't have the appearance of corruption to anyone but the most partisan and gullible of people.

Have been to a corporate paid speech before? I have multiple times and its so far from a possible form of corruption that the claim is laughable.

 

[ivwshane]

Russia? Or

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/08/...-charity.html?referer=https://www.google.com/

The kingdom of Saudi Arabia donated more than $10 million. Through a foundation, so did the son-in-law of a former Ukrainian president whose government was widely criticized for corruption and the murder of journalists. A Lebanese-Nigerian developer with vast business interests contributed as much as $5 million.

And? What did they get in return?

 

[ivwshane]

of course you dont see any problem with a semi-hostile government giving a shit ton of money to a charity who's founder and board chairman is a former US President who happens to be married the Secretary of State who has considerable influence in approving the land deals....

Land deals such as?

 

[DarthKyrie]

Land deals such as?

Uranium One having access to mine up to 20% of US uranium. The same Uranium One that President Putin has a substantial financial interest in. The same Uranium One that Madam Secretary had to sign off on having access to that 20% of US uranium that Mr. Putin will see a profit from. But it's President Trump that has ties to President Putin.

Edit: Don't a damn one of you try to accuse me of being a right-wing troll. I voted for Obama in 2012 and voted for Bernie in the primary then I voted for Dr. Stein in the general. FDR is my favorite President of all time and Alexander Hamilton is my favorite of the Founders.

 

[Maxima1]

Considering every president has done the whole speaking for fees thing as have millions of successful Americans,

What kind of logic is that? So the revolving door in politics means nothing as well, since it has been around for ages? It's funny because Soetoro said he would change Washington and the lobbying, but he was lying the whole time. Him accepting speaking fees from Wall Street firms shows that he was fine with them and being disingenuous with the public. It's like Hillary. No one thinks she would say "cut it out" (absurd and telling response) once she got into office. She would say, "How can I help you, sir"?

no it doesn't have the appearance of corruption to anyone but the most partisan and gullible of people.

WTF Democrats are having an image problem, and that's a large part of it. Do you think Booker wasn't influenced by his campaign contributions when he opposed the drug reform? All the pols say it never influences them, but it's easy to see how this stuff does.

 

[fskimospy]

Uranium One having access to mine up to 20% of US uranium. The same Uranium One that President Putin has a substantial financial interest in. The same Uranium One that Madam Secretary had to sign off on having access to that 20% of US uranium that Mr. Putin will see a profit from. But it's President Trump that has ties to President Putin.

Edit: Don't a damn one of you try to accuse me of being a right-wing troll. I voted for Obama in 2012 and voted for Bernie in the primary then I voted for Dr. Stein in the general. FDR is my favorite President of all time and Alexander Hamilton is my favorite of the Founders.

Yes you pretty much nailed it, it’s Trump that has ties to Putin. That’s what happens when you hire a campaign manager who is up to his eyeballs in Russian government contacts and when your son lies repeatedly about meeting with people connected to Russian intelligence as part of the Russian government’s attempt to get you elected.

Being head of one of nine agencies to sign off on something barely moves the needle.

Edit: and speaking of ties to Putin holy shit you voted for Jill Stein.

 

[Victorian Gray]

And Putin says, "Thanks America, keep up the good work"

 

[fskimospy]

What kind of logic is that? So the revolving door in politics means nothing as well, since it has been around for ages? It's funny because Soetoro said he would change Washington and the lobbying, but he was lying the whole time. Him accepting speaking fees from Wall Street firms shows that he was fine with them and being disingenuous with the public. It's like Hillary. No one thinks she would say "cut it out" (absurd and telling response) once she got into office. She would say, "How can I help you, sir"?

WTF Democrats are having an image problem, and that's a large part of it. Do you think Booker wasn't influenced by his campaign contributions when he opposed the drug reform? All the pols say it never influences them, but it's easy to see how this stuff does.

Interesting that enacting some of the most sweeping regulation of Wall Street in 80 years doesn’t prevent you from being a secret tool of Wall Street if you give a speech to them afterwards.

lolwut.

 

[IronWing]

According to Uranium One's website, its US operations account for less than 1% of the company's annual production. Given that the company can't export the uranium from the US and that the US has no enrichment capacity at the moment, all that Uranium One can do with it's 45t per year US production is sit on it.

 

[Maxima1]

Interesting that enacting some of the most sweeping regulation of Wall Street in 80 years doesn’t prevent you from being a secret tool of Wall Street if you give a speech to them afterwards.

lolwut.

It was a compromise to appease people and the elite of Wall Street. Similar to Obamacare and the insurance companies.. The alternatives that could have been put forth relative to what Soetoro did would have had them screaming bloody murder.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Chuck Grassley sending out letters regarding Uranium One:

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/file-library?PageNum_rs=1&

"The donations raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest for Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration. The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in the United States were under criminal investigation as a result of a U.S. intelligence operation apparently around the time CFIUS approved the Uranium One/Rosatom transaction raises questions about whether that information factored into CFIUS’ decision to approve the transaction."

 

[IronWing]

According to Uranium One's website, its US operations account for less than 1% of the company's annual production. Given that the company can't export the uranium from the US and that the US has no enrichment capacity at the moment, all that Uranium One can do with it's 45t per year US production is sit on it.

Hmm, looking at the spot price for uranium, it appears that Uranium One's US production is worth about $2.5 million (that is the value of the product, not the profits, if any, which there aren't because they can't sell it). If the Russians slipped the Clinton Foundation a few million bucks to do the deal, they got ripped off.

 

[fskimospy]

Chuck Grassley sending out letters regarding Uranium One:

https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/file-library?PageNum_rs=1&

"The donations raise concerns about potential conflicts of interest for Secretary Clinton and the Obama administration. The fact that Rosatom subsidiaries in the United States were under criminal investigation as a result of a U.S. intelligence operation apparently around the time CFIUS approved the Uranium One/Rosatom transaction raises questions about whether that information factored into CFIUS’ decision to approve the transaction."

I love how you think congressional Republicans sending out letters attacking Democrats means even the slightest thing, haha.

I’m sure when they were sending out letters about the 11th Benghazi investigation you were soberly nodding your head and saying ‘well Congress wouldn’t be investigating it if there wasn’t something sinister afoot!’

 

[ivwshane]

Uranium One having access to mine up to 20% of US uranium. The same Uranium One that President Putin has a substantial financial interest in. The same Uranium One that Madam Secretary had to sign off on having access to that 20% of US uranium that Mr. Putin will see a profit from. But it's President Trump that has ties to President Putin.

Edit: Don't a damn one of you try to accuse me of being a right-wing troll. I voted for Obama in 2012 and voted for Bernie in the primary then I voted for Dr. Stein in the general. FDR is my favorite President of all time and Alexander Hamilton is my favorite of the Founders.

Lol you haven't explained the connection between Russia and the Clinton foundation and you completely ignore the fact that the deal required multiple agencies to sign off on it.
Putin has a financial interest in a lot of things, was there a law or sanction that prevented Putin from benefiting from a deal in which he had a minority interest in?


Btw,
www.nbcnews.com/news/world/amp/guess-who-came-dinner-flynn-putin-n742696

Your faux concern about Russia is showing.