Big Questions around the Clinton Foundation and Massive Payoffs without Disclosures

[Jackson]

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”

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.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/u...s-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html

More info to follow...

 

[Jackson]

No ‘Veto Power’ for Clinton on Uranium Deal

The author of “Clinton Cash” falsely claimed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State had “veto power” and “could have stopped” Russia from buying a company with extensive uranium mining operations in the U.S. In fact, only the president has such power.

At the time of the sale, Clinton was a member of the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States, which is required by law to investigate all U.S. transactions that involve a company owned or controlled by a foreign government. Federal guidelines say any one of nine voting members of the committee can object to such a foreign transaction, but the final decision then rests with the president.

Schweizer’s book — “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” — focuses on foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation, a nonprofit created by former President Bill Clinton. In his book, Schweizer, a former fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution, seeks to link some of those donations to the official actions taken by Clinton when she was Secretary of State.

The New York Times, which received an advance copy of the book, wrote an article April 23 that said the Clinton Foundation failed to publicly disclose millions in contributions it received from investors who stood to profit from the sale of Uranium One, a Canadian-based company with uranium mining stakes in the West, to Rosatom, the Russian nuclear energy agency.

The Times said its article “built upon” Schweizer’s reporting.

That sale was approved by the Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States in October 2010, giving Russia control over 20 percent of uranium production in the United States, according to the Times.

The book in general and the Times article in particular have stirred up the 2016 presidential campaign.

The Clinton Foundation was forced to acknowledge that it “made mistakes” in failing to disclose some of its donations, and Republicans have questioned Hillary Clinton’s role in the sale.

Schweizer made the counterargument — again without any evidence — that the investors bought her silence by making contributions to the Clinton Foundation.
More at link:

Schweizer speculated that investors were worried about Clinton’s history of opposing the sale of “critical assets” in the U.S., citing her opposition as a senator to the 2006 sale of six U.S. ports to Dubai Ports World, a state-owned business in the United Arab Emirates.

But Schweizer is wrong when he says that Clinton had “veto power” and “could have stopped the deal.” At best, she could have forced the president to make a decision.

The committee, which is known by its acronym CFIUS, can approve a sale, but it cannot stop a sale. Only the president can do that, and only if the committee recommends or “any member of CFIUS recommends suspension or prohibition of the transaction,” according to guidelines issued by the Treasury Department in December 2008 after the department adopted itsfinal rule a month earlier.

Treasury Department, Dec. 8, 2008: Only the President has the authority to suspend or prohibit a covered transaction. Pursuant to section 6(c) of Executive Order 11858, CFIUS refers a covered transaction to the President if CFIUS or any member of CFIUS recommends suspension or prohibition of the transaction, or if CFIUS otherwise seeks a Presidential determination on the transaction.

From Factcheck
No ‘Veto Power’ for Clinton on Uranium Deal


If Hillary had a history of opposing the sale of “critical assets “ in the US, why did she approve the sale Uranium One which had mining stakes in the west to Rosatom, the Russian Nuclear Energy Agency?

Could it have anything to do with the fact the Clinton Foundation received millions in donations from the investors that stood to profit from the sale of Uranium One? Donations she failed to disclose, by the way?

That gave Russia over 20% stake in our uranium mines, according to The Times.
Is your “Hinky Meter” going off? Mine is.

 

[S.J.]

Backroom deals, skirting laws, obstructing justice, lying to Congress, kickbacks and payoffs, the culture of corruption is endless with the Clintons (especially Hillary). Compare that to Trump, whose life has been an open book. What you see is what you get. With Hillary, it's more like "Trust me, I know what I'm doing".

 

[Jackson]

More background...

Uranium One is a uranium mining company owned by the Russian government with headquarters in Toronto and operations in Australia, Canada, Kazakhstan, South Africa and the United States. It is a Canadian corporation. Rosatom, a Russian State-owned enterprise, through its subsidiary ARMZ Uranium Holding, purchased the balance of a 100% stake in the firm January 2013.[2]

The company was founded January 2, 1997 as Southern Cross Resources Inc.
On July 5, 2005, Southern Cross Resources Inc. and Aflease Gold and Uranium Resources Ltd announced that they would be merging under the name SXR Uranium One Inc.[3]

In 2007 Uranium One acquired a controlling interest in UrAsia Energy, a Canadian firm with headquarters in Vancouver, from Frank Giustra.[4] UrAsia Energy has interests in rich uranium operations in Kazakhstan.[5]

UrAsia Energy's acquisition of its Kazakhstan uranium interests from Kazatomprom followed a trip to Almaty in 2005 by Giustra and former U.S. President Bill Clinton where they met with Nursultan Nazarbayev, the leader of Kazakhstan. Substantial contributions to the Clinton Foundation by Giustra followed.[4][6][7]

In June 2009, the Russian uranium mining company ARMZ Uranium Holding Co. (ARMZ), a part of Rosatom, acquired 16.6% of shares in Uranium One in exchange for a 50% interest in Karatau uranium mining project, a joint venture with Kazatomprom.[8] In June 2010, Uranium One acquired 50% and 49% respective interests in southern Kazakhstan-based Akbastau and Zarechnoye uranium mines from ARMZ.

In exchange, ARMZ increased its stake in Uranium One to 51%. The acquisition resulted in a 60% annual production increase at Uranium One, from approximately 10 million to 16 million lb.[9][10] The deal was subject to anti-trust and other conditions and was not finalized until the companies received Kazakh regulatory approvals, approval under Canadian investment law, clearance by the US Committee on Foreign Investments, and approvals from both the Toronto and Johannesburg stock exchanges.

The deal was finalized by the end of 2010.[10]Uranium One paid its minority shareholders a significant dividend of 1.06 United States Dollars at the end of 2010.

ARMZ took complete control of Uranium One in January 2013[2] in a transaction which was reviewed by theCommittee on Foreign Investment in the United States.[6] In December 2013 an internal reorganization of Rosatom extinguished the interest of ARMZ making Uranium One a direct subsidiary of Rosatom.[3]

Approval of the transfer of American uranium resources to a Russian controlled-company occurred during Hillary Clinton's tenure as United States Secretary of State. There were a number of donations to the Clinton Foundation by principals of Uranium One.

During the same period there was a speaking engagement in Russia by former president Bill Clinton for which he was paid $500,000.[6][11] There is no hard evidence of a quid pro quo in any instance involving Bill Clinton.


Uranium One - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No evidence of wrong doing, but the suspicions are mounting.

 

[Jackson]

Clinton 'fact-check' under fire

A Kazakh official involved in brokering a controversial mining deal for a major Clinton Foundation donor is behind bars for his role in the transaction, undercutting a Clinton campaign "fact-check" that attempted to dismiss ethical questions about the former president's ties to the lucrative contract.

Hillary for America and the Clinton-aligned group Media Matters pushed back on allegations that the Clintons had used their political clout to drum up millions in foundation donations and speaking fees by furthering the financial interests of friends in the wake of Tuesday's publication of Peter Schweizer's Clinton Cash.

Schweizer dedicated an entire chapter to a 2005 deal in which Bill Clinton allegedly helped his friend Frank Giustra break into a fiercely competitive uranium market, setting the stage for the high-profile takeover of mining conglomerate Uranium One by Russia.

Next:
RELATED: Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'

Remember Frank Giustra? He’s the investor who gave millions in donations to the Clinton Foundation, $31.3 millionis cited. But Clinton disclosed between $10-25 million.
(wikiedia)

 

[Jackson]

Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here."

"There's one set of rules for politics in America and there's another set of rules in real life, and you just have to learn to deal with it," Clinton said when pressed about the controversy onstage during the event's opening session before quickly changing the subject.

Mo Ibrahim, a strong supporter of the Clinton Foundation, blasted the "American media" for hyping the sources of the charity's donations rather than the actual work of the organization.

Still, he questioned why the Clinton Foundation has done little to defend its philanthropy.

"I don't see anybody from the foundation standing up," Ibrahim, whose daughter serves on the foundation's board, told the former president. "You should stand up."

Hillary Clinton was slated to appear at the Marrakech summit, but her name was removed from the schedule as scrutiny over the foundation's foreign activities heated up in April.

A phosphate exporter called OCP, owned by Morocco's King Mohammed VI, is providing much of the funding for the high-profile event.

Bill and Chelsea Clinton traveled to the conference from Kenya, where they had spent several days with major donors before heading to the lavish Palmeraie Golf Palace in Marrakech, where the three- day event is taking place.

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here.
[FONT=Georgia, serif][/FONT]


He doesn’t know…he just works there???? So he doesn’t know who the foundation donors are. But maybe his wife knows?

 

[Claudette]

The Clintons are crooks.

They were crooks when he Governed Arkansas and nothing has changed.

Once a crook. Always a crook.

Those willing to vote for Hitlery obvious don't care.

Those with a brain do.

 

[imawhosure]

Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here."

"There's one set of rules for politics in America and there's another set of rules in real life, and you just have to learn to deal with it," Clinton said when pressed about the controversy onstage during the event's opening session before quickly changing the subject.

Mo Ibrahim, a strong supporter of the Clinton Foundation, blasted the "American media" for hyping the sources of the charity's donations rather than the actual work of the organization.

Still, he questioned why the Clinton Foundation has done little to defend its philanthropy.

"I don't see anybody from the foundation standing up," Ibrahim, whose daughter serves on the foundation's board, told the former president. "You should stand up."

Hillary Clinton was slated to appear at the Marrakech summit, but her name was removed from the schedule as scrutiny over the foundation's foreign activities heated up in April.

A phosphate exporter called OCP, owned by Morocco's King Mohammed VI, is providing much of the funding for the high-profile event.

Bill and Chelsea Clinton traveled to the conference from Kenya, where they had spent several days with major donors before heading to the lavish Palmeraie Golf Palace in Marrakech, where the three- day event is taking place.

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here.
[FONT=Georgia, serif][/FONT]


He doesn’t know…he just works there???? So he doesn’t know who the foundation donors are. But maybe his wife knows?

You know what Jackson, you just brought up a topic that will be used in the general election if Hilly is the nominee, congrats; a little in advance, but oh well. The reason it is so powerful is...........even the New York Times; the media bastion of liberalism, is questioning it, and has reported it, lol.

The reason it has few responses is...........the Democrats would like it to go away, will ignore it unless they must address it now, and I am sure they are all on a conference call with Debbie, Wasserman, (I know nothing, NOTHING) Shutz, discussing a way to spin it, if they haven't discussed it already.

I am sure the 1st response given will be something that goes like this---------> Didn't happen you sexist!

The next attempt will go along the lines of, "trying to derail the thread," by deflection.

Keep your research handy on your computer my friend, because even if this question dies today, I promise you that if Hilly gets the nod, it will become a hot (no pun intended) topic down the road.

 

[washamericom]

there is a north korean element in play as well.

ABC News has obtained State Department e-mails that shed light onBill Clinton’s lucrative speaking engagements and show he and theClinton Foundation tried to get approval for invitations related to two of the most repressive countries in the world -- North Korea and theDemocratic Republic of the Congo.

While Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, Bill Clinton earned speaking fees around the globe totaling more than $48 million -- speeches that had to be vetted by the State Department to ensure there were no conflicts of interest with his wife's work as America's top diplomat. These newly revealed emails show speech requests that the State Department refused to approve.
The emails -- which have come to light because of a public records request by the conservative group Citizens United, which sued the State Department to get the documents -- show just how far Bill Clinton was willing to go to earn those lucrative fees -- seeking approval for appearances with ties to two of the most brutal countries in the world.
Clinton Foundation Taking Money From Accused Rights Violator
Hillary Clinton: IG's Urge Justice Department to Probe Her Emails
Bill Clinton Cashed In When Hillary Became Secretary of State
One email sent in June 2012 to Clinton State Department chief of staff Cheryl Mills from Amitabh Desai, a foreign policy director at the Clinton Foundation, passed on an invitation for a speaking engagement inBrazzaville, Congo.
The catch? The dictators of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo would both be attending -- and required photos with Bill Clinton. The speaking fee? A whopping $650,000.
The Harry Walker Agency, which worked with Clinton on coordinating his speeches, recommended declining the invite, noting the particularly grim human rights record of the Democratic Republic of Congo and its leader, Joseph Kabila.
"Given President Kabila and others involvement [sic] we anticipate you'll want us to quickly decline" the Harry Walker representative wrote.
The speaking agency's vetting of the Democratic Republic of the Congo noted the “prevalence and intensity of sexual violence against women in eastern Congo is widely described as the worst in the world.”

[FONT=Proxima-Nova, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Bill Clinton Paid Speeches Declined By State Department[/FONT]

http://nypost.com/2015/08/28/hillar...ts-to-give-speeches-in-north-korea-and-congo/

 

[washamericom]

Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here."

"There's one set of rules for politics in America and there's another set of rules in real life, and you just have to learn to deal with it," Clinton said when pressed about the controversy onstage during the event's opening session before quickly changing the subject.

Mo Ibrahim, a strong supporter of the Clinton Foundation, blasted the "American media" for hyping the sources of the charity's donations rather than the actual work of the organization.

Still, he questioned why the Clinton Foundation has done little to defend its philanthropy.

"I don't see anybody from the foundation standing up," Ibrahim, whose daughter serves on the foundation's board, told the former president. "You should stand up."

Hillary Clinton was slated to appear at the Marrakech summit, but her name was removed from the schedule as scrutiny over the foundation's foreign activities heated up in April.

A phosphate exporter called OCP, owned by Morocco's King Mohammed VI, is providing much of the funding for the high-profile event.

Bill and Chelsea Clinton traveled to the conference from Kenya, where they had spent several days with major donors before heading to the lavish Palmeraie Golf Palace in Marrakech, where the three- day event is taking place.

Bill Clinton downplayed criticism of his family's foundation during a fundraiser in Morocco on Wednesday by claiming not to understand the "problem" with accepting foreign donations because he "just works here.
[FONT=Georgia, serif][/FONT]


He doesn’t know…he just works there???? So he doesn’t know who the foundation donors are. But maybe his wife knows?

this reminds me of when jay carney said (while press secretary) "you'd have to check with the White House on that".

unbelievable.

 

[imawhosure]

there is a north korean element in play as well.

ABC News has obtained State Department e-mails that shed light onBill Clinton’s lucrative speaking engagements and show he and theClinton Foundation tried to get approval for invitations related to two of the most repressive countries in the world -- North Korea and theDemocratic Republic of the Congo.

While Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, Bill Clinton earned speaking fees around the globe totaling more than $48 million -- speeches that had to be vetted by the State Department to ensure there were no conflicts of interest with his wife's work as America's top diplomat. These newly revealed emails show speech requests that the State Department refused to approve.
The emails -- which have come to light because of a public records request by the conservative group Citizens United, which sued the State Department to get the documents -- show just how far Bill Clinton was willing to go to earn those lucrative fees -- seeking approval for appearances with ties to two of the most brutal countries in the world.
Clinton Foundation Taking Money From Accused Rights Violator
Hillary Clinton: IG's Urge Justice Department to Probe Her Emails
Bill Clinton Cashed In When Hillary Became Secretary of State
One email sent in June 2012 to Clinton State Department chief of staff Cheryl Mills from Amitabh Desai, a foreign policy director at the Clinton Foundation, passed on an invitation for a speaking engagement inBrazzaville, Congo.
The catch? The dictators of Congo and the Democratic Republic of the Congo would both be attending -- and required photos with Bill Clinton. The speaking fee? A whopping $650,000.
The Harry Walker Agency, which worked with Clinton on coordinating his speeches, recommended declining the invite, noting the particularly grim human rights record of the Democratic Republic of Congo and its leader, Joseph Kabila.
"Given President Kabila and others involvement [sic] we anticipate you'll want us to quickly decline" the Harry Walker representative wrote.
The speaking agency's vetting of the Democratic Republic of the Congo noted the “prevalence and intensity of sexual violence against women in eastern Congo is widely described as the worst in the world.”

[FONT=Proxima-Nova, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Bill Clinton Paid Speeches Declined By State Department[/FONT]

http://nypost.com/2015/08/28/hillar...ts-to-give-speeches-in-north-korea-and-congo/

I have a question for you. Off topic I know, but I really do not want to make a thread since I seen one long ago.

QUESTION: If things stay as they are today with the Democrats being virtually 80% on the wrong side of the issues; and with Hillary not likely to be able to conclusively obtain the "likeability" factor from the GOP; what do you think the odds are within 6 weeks we will have the DNC (behind the scenes of course) asking her to step down for health or other reasons from the Democratic primaries?

 

[mikegriffith1]

It is obvious to all but liberal bots that Hillary used her position as Secretary of State for influence peddling and improper solicitations. She did this over and over again. If a regular federal employee did what she did, they would face dismissal and possibly prosecution (they'd probably just have their clearance revoked and get fired).

 

[TheOldSchool]

Why isn't this in the "conspiracy theories" forum?

 

[paulitician]

Arrest the Clintons. If they were Republicans, Hussein would have already done it.

 

[Jackson]

Why isn't this in the "conspiracy theories" forum?

Because the information brought forth is factual.

 

[TheOldSchool]

Why isn't this in the "conspiracy theories" forum?

Because the information brought forth is factual.

That the Clinton's secretly rule the world and have paid off everybody to control everything? No, that's a conspiracy theory.

 

[paulitician]

If this were a Republican organization, the Clinton/Obama-Bots would be calling for heads. The Clintons should probably be arrested.

 

[Jackson]

Clinton Foundation faces fresh scrutiny

The Clinton family’s charitable foundation is defending its fundraising practices amid renewed scrutiny of its donors, and it’s promising to take “appropriate” measures if former secretary of state Hillary Clinton runs for president.

The Clinton Foundation, started by former president Bill Clinton after he left the White House, has come under fire this week after the foundation disclosed information about its recent fundraising that raised fresh questions about potential conflicts of interest.

For instance, The Wall Street Journal reported that the foundation has quietly started accepting money from foreign governments, including an agency of the Canadian government responsible for promoting the controversial Keystone XL pipeline, which would carry tar sands from Canada to the U.S. Gulf Coast. And The Washington Post noted overlaps between the Clintons’ philanthropic and political donor networks.

The Clinton Foundation’s relationships with corporations and wealthy donors have been an issue in the past and could come up on the campaign trail if Clinton decides to run for president in 2016. Both liberal Democrats hoping for an alternative to Clinton and Republicans trying to defeat her will likely see the revelations as a confirming some of their worst suspicions about the likely Democratic front runner, whom both camps portray as out of touch and too close to powerful interests.

Republicans were quick to seize on the new reports, suggesting that donors were trying to buy access to a potential future president though gifts to the foundation, while even some Democrats expressed unease. Some environmentalists, meanwhile, said the donations from the Canadian government and oil and gas companies raised “red flags.”

When Clinton became secretary of state in 2009, similar questions about the perception of conflict of interest were raised. The Obama administration and the Clinton Foundation struck a deal to limit the foundation’s fundraising practices, including curbing donations from foreign governments. And the foundation agreed to disclose far more about its fundraising than is typically required of charities.

The Clinton Foundation has said it has raised nearly $2 billion since its creation, the vast majority of which goes to program costs in a wide range of areas. The foundation has been on an intense fundraising drive and it tries to build a $250 million endowment, in part to ensure it can continue its work even if the Clintons retake the White House and have their philanthropic activities limited.

Explore:
The Place for Politics, Bill Clinton, Democrats, Election

Clinton Foundation faces fresh scrutiny

The Clintons have raised $2 Billion in donations and have had a problem of disclosing them publicly as they are supposed to do. Questions keep coming about new donations and lucrative speaking deals for Bill to the amount going as high as $650,000 from foreign countries while she was Secretary of State.
All this comes from MSNBC...

 

[Jackson]

Why isn't this in the "conspiracy theories" forum?

Because the information brought forth is factual.

That the Clinton's secretly rule the world and have paid off everybody to control everything? No, that's a conspiracy theory.

Just where did I say the Clinton secretly rule the world and payoff everybody to control everything. I'm afraid you came to that opinion reading the news articles!

 

[TheOldSchool]

Why isn't this in the "conspiracy theories" forum?

Because the information brought forth is factual.

That the Clinton's secretly rule the world and have paid off everybody to control everything? No, that's a conspiracy theory.

Just where did I say the Clinton secretly rule the world and payoff everybody to control everything. I'm afraid you came to that opinion reading the news articles!

That is the implication of the article yes