Fox News Fair & Balanced Uranium One Deal

[Doc Savage Fan]

If I remember correctly from the video, the uranium mined at that location must remain in the US.

Yep: https://youtu.be/RnsAZzsdI1U?t=244

This is not exactly true. The uranium does leave the country as it's processed in Canada. Also, some of this uranium sent to Canada was book transferred to other countries.

 

[woolfe9998]

This is not exactly true. The uranium does leave the country as it's processed in Canada. Also, some of this uranium sent to Canada was book transferred to other countries.

The limited export license, which I directly linked in another thread, specifies that after transfer to Ontario for processing, agency approval must be obtained before any of the uranium could be shipped outside the US. Do you have a source to support what is bolded? I'm curious where it was shipped to if they did indeed get regulatory approval to do so.

 

[BigDH01]

This is not exactly true. The uranium does leave the country as it's processed in Canada. Also, some of this uranium sent to Canada was book transferred to other countries.

http://www.factcheck.org/2017/10/facts-uranium-one/

In a June 2015 letter to Rep. Peter Visclosky, the NRC said it granted RSB Logistics Services an amendment to its export license in 2012 to allow the Kentucky shipping company to export uranium to Canada from various sources — including from a Uranium One site in Wyoming. The NRC said that the export license allowed RSB to ship uranium to a conversion plant in Canada and then back to the United States for further processing.

Canada must obtain U.S. approval to transfer any U.S. uranium to any country other than the United States, the letter says.

“Please be assured that no Uranium One, Inc.-produced uranium has been shipped directly to Russia and the U.S. Government has not authorized any country to re-transfer U.S. uranium to Russia,” the 2015 letter said.

“That 2015 statement remains true today,” David McIntyre, a spokesman for the NRC, told us in an email.

RSB Logistics’ current export license, which expires in December, still lists Uranium One as one of its suppliers of uranium.

So it seems that the US still has ultimate control over where the uranium goes.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

That's inane. Nine agencies of our own govt & the Canadians looked the deal over before Obama approved it.

Good point however given what we know now I am assuming you are not alright with Russia owning this

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

The limited export license, which I directly linked in another thread, specifies that after transfer to Ontario for processing, agency approval must be obtained before any of the uranium could be shipped outside the US. Do you have a source to support what is bolded? I'm curious where it was shipped to if they did indeed get regulatory approval to do so.

It is my understanding that explicit approval was avoided by amending and piggy backing on a prior approval. This was covered in the previous thread on this subject...as well as the book transfer of a portion of this uranium to other countries. I'm pretty sure citations were provided which included NRC emails.

 

[SMOGZINN]

It was my understanding that explicit approval was avoided by amending and piggy backing on a prior approval. This was covered in the previous thread on this subject...as well as the book transfer of a portion of this uranium to other countries. I pretty sure citations were provided which included NRC emails.

'Book Transferred' is misleading. My understanding of this is that no actual uranium is being transported to other countries than Canada, at most profits from the sale of uranium is being transferred.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

'Book Transferred' is misleading. My understanding of this is that no actual uranium is being transported to other countries than Canada, at most profits from the sale of uranium is being transferred.

I took it to mean that uranium ownership was traded 'on the books' with uranium owned by others and located in other countries...likely to avoid either incremental transportation costs or processing costs.

 

[UNCjigga]

So if I understand Republicans correctly, the solution to this whole dilemma would have been to buy or seize all US assets of a Canadian-owned company (Uranium One) the minute the Russkies obtained a controlling interest? Does NAFTA even allow for an asset seizure? Is there a precedent?

Assuming that the 9 US agencies did not approve the deal, I'm assuming nothing would prevent the merger/sale to Rosneft from going through because we have no say in what a Canadian/South African company does. I'm assuming we (American taxpayers) would have to pay a fair market rate for the US assets/mining rights and compensate the parties involved. Where would the budget to do that come from?

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

So if I understand Republicans correctly, the solution to this whole dilemma would have been to buy or seize all US assets of a Canadian-owned company (Uranium One) the minute the Russkies obtained a controlling interest? Does NAFTA even allow for an asset seizure? Is there a precedent?

Just exactly how did you arrive at this conclusion?

 

[Starbuck1975]

What corruption does it indicate here, specifically?

Conflict of interest

 

[brandonbull]

It's because you don't like the simple answer. If you are a Cabinet member with signator authority over a US government approved trade deal, you cannot accept a donation into your private family foundation. Perhaps not criminal, but politically exploitable. Clinton surrogates complain about the endless witch hunts. Maybe the Clintons should stop choosing to wear witch costumes.

Furthermore, the Mueller investigation is going well beyond the confines of election tampering to explore the economic ties of Trump associates and Trump himself. This investigation is already ensnaring some Clinton ties as well. It's a small world after all.

Don't forget the hiring of the Podesta group to lobby the state department by Uranium one. Failed to report the donation to the foundation and John Podesta sharing board seats of a small energy company with Kremlin backed investors and failing to fully disclose that.

 

[pauldun170]

Don't forget the hiring of the Podesta group to lobby the state department by Uranium one. Failed to report the donation to the foundation and John Podesta sharing board seats of a small energy company with Kremlin backed investors and failing to fully disclose that.

John Podesta left the Podesta group in 1993.

 

[brandonbull]

John Podesta left the Podesta group in 1993.

Do you know the relationship John Podesta has with the Podesta group, the Clintons, and Obama?

 

[fskimospy]

Conflict of interest

So no actual corrupt actions from Clinton other than having a nonprofit that accepted donations at some point prior to her taking office?

That's some weak shit.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Do you know the relationship John Podesta has with the Podesta group, the Clintons, and Obama?

Brandon, did you watch the video and what are your thoughts about it?

 

[WHAMPOM]

Is mistaken, misinformed and misread the soul source of argument in this thread?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Is mistaken, misinformed and misread the soul source of argument in this thread?

no look at the tags

 

[Jhhnn]

Conflict of interest

The Clintons profited in what way, exactly? I mean, yeh, sure, It was good for their image before the right wing spooged all over it.... but that's about it.

 

[brandonbull]

So no actual corrupt actions from Clinton other than having a nonprofit that accepted donations at some point prior to her taking office?

That's some weak shit.

So Uranium one didn't donate $2.35M between 2009-2013 that went unreported, as promised, by Clinton? I wonder if any of that money came from Russia?

 

[pauldun170]

Is mistaken, misinformed and misread the soul source of argument in this thread?

Dude,
That's not their names.
It's Steve, Brian and Ainsley

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So Uranium one didn't donate $2.35M between 2009-2013 that went unreported, as promised, by Clinton? I wonder if any of that money came from Russia?

Maybe so, we'll see
$2.35 million is quite a bit different than $146 million
Also NO URANIUM LEFT THE COUNTRY
Will you be man enough to admit you were wrong?

 

[Jhhnn]

Good point however given what we know now I am assuming you are not alright with Russia owning this

If we ever want it back we'll just offer them a deal they can't refuse. In the meanwhile I fail to see how it harms us in any way.

The whole deal is Benghazi all over again. Cuz OMFG Uranium! fits right into the cacophony of FUD.

 

[nickqt]

If we ever want it back we'll just offer them a deal they can't refuse. In the meanwhile I fail to see how it harms us in any way.

The whole deal is Benghazi all over again. Cuz OMFG Uranium! fits right into the cacophony of FUD.

Well, it's a mixture of DeathPanels, FastnFurious, Benghazi, JadeHelm, with extra scoops of Benghazi, Benghazi, Vincent Foster, and of course, Benghazi.

Also: Transcripts.

 

[SMOGZINN]

Well, it's a mixture of DeathPanels, FastnFurious, Benghazi, JadeHelm, with extra scoops of Benghazi, Benghazi, Vincent Foster, and of course, Benghazi.

Also: Transcripts.

Butteremail!

 

[Starbuck1975]

So no actual corrupt actions from Clinton other than having a nonprofit that accepted donations at some point prior to her taking office?

That's some weak shit.

And surrogates and donors who benefitted directly from the outcome, or were otherwise tangentially involved, is SOP for the Clinton's.

No, excusing an utter lack of transparency, and playing semantics to excuse it because it's your team, is some weak sh!t.

I suppose we could have the federal bureau of matters look into these matters.