Why should I do that. If someone posts his drivel, I know instantly that person is an idiot. Nice identification tool.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to...
- Thread starter Vigilante
- Start date
Vigilante
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 51,327
- 18,076
- Thread starter
- #22
Why should I do that. If someone posts his drivel, I know instantly that person is an idiot. Nice identification tool.Vaginal, dumb old fuck. Obviously you did not research that insane article. There are no uranium, nor any other commercially valuable deposits known to be in the area of the Malhuer Refuge. There are some massive epithermal deposits, very low grade, east of there in the Owyhee, but none that I have ever heard of in that area.
Well then, I suggest you WRITE the articles author, and COMPLAIN BITTERLY about his MIS-INFORMATION, if that makes you wet!
Because you're the one COMPLAINING! DUH!
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
I thought the story was "out there" so I researched it:
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
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
Whatever the details of the politics of the deal, it had nothing to do with either the Hammond's or the Malhuer Refuge. The uranium prospect in question is in the McDermitt Caldera, which lies far east of there on the Nevada, Oregon border.I thought the story was "out there" so I researched it:
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
IcebergSlim
Diamond Member
- Oct 11, 2013
- 10,886
- 9,142
Vaginal, dumb old fuck. Obviously you did not research that insane article. There are no uranium, nor any other commercially valuable deposits known to be in the area of the Malhuer Refuge. There are some massive epithermal deposits, very low grade, east of there in the Owyhee, but none that I have ever heard of in that area.
Well then, I suggest you WRITE the articles author, and COMPLAIN BITTERLY about his MIS-INFORMATION, if that makes you wet!
What if you stopped uncritically regurgitating the crap Drudge pours into the funnel fused to your toothless gums?
Vigilante
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 51,327
- 18,076
- Thread starter
- #28
Vaginal, dumb old fuck. Obviously you did not research that insane article. There are no uranium, nor any other commercially valuable deposits known to be in the area of the Malhuer Refuge. There are some massive epithermal deposits, very low grade, east of there in the Owyhee, but none that I have ever heard of in that area.
Well then, I suggest you WRITE the articles author, and COMPLAIN BITTERLY about his MIS-INFORMATION, if that makes you wet!
What if you stopped uncritically regurgitating the crap Drudge pours into the funnel fused to your toothless gums?
Then you would have nothing to TROLL about! You'd DIE under your hand painted ROCK!
IcebergSlim
Diamond Member
- Oct 11, 2013
- 10,886
- 9,142
No, just correcting a fool, so that no one else will be fooled by such drivel.
Is that why you have such LOW RATINGS, you don't post drivel?...You certainly posted it here!
Old Rocks is beating you into a coma with the facts, Vag......why don't you escape to that OP you started about stocks not being cheap.....there's a beating waiting for you.....
Vigilante
Diamond Member
- Mar 9, 2014
- 51,327
- 18,076
- Thread starter
- #30
No, just correcting a fool, so that no one else will be fooled by such drivel.
Is that why you have such LOW RATINGS, you don't post drivel?...You certainly posted it here!
Old Rocks is beating you into a coma with the facts, Vag......why don't you escape to that OP you started about stocks not being cheap.....there's a beating waiting for you.....
Of course the deaf, DUMB, and blind think so!
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
More Information...
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.
“Only the President has the authority to suspend or prohibit a covered transaction,” the guidelines say.
Through a spokeswoman, author Peter Schweizer told us he meant that Clinton could have forced the issue to the president’s desk. But that’s not what he said when he appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” where he discussed the uranium deal and his upcoming book to be released on May 5.
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. Mitt Romney said the money donated to the Clinton Foundation “looks like bribery,” and Sen. Rand Paul called for an investigation.
But Schweizer and the Times presented no evidence that the donations influenced Clinton’s official actions.
The fact is, Clinton was one of nine voting members on the foreign investments committee, which also includes the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, the attorney general, and representatives from two White House offices — the United States Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy. (Separately, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission needed to approve (and did approve) the transfer of two uranium recovery licenses as part of the sale.)
Chris Wallace, host of “Fox News Sunday,” made that point when he questioned Schweizer about his lack of evidence connecting the donations to the uranium deal. (Fox News wasamong the media outlets that received an advance copy of his book.) 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.
Wallace, April 26: Nine separate agencies and they [Clinton campaign officials] point out there’s no hard evidence, and you don’t cite any in the book that Hillary Clinton took direct action, was involved in any way in approving as one of nine agencies the sale of the company?
Schweizer: Well, here’s what’s important to keep in mind: it was one of nine agencies, but any one of those agencies had veto power. So, she could have stopped the deal. So, what’s interesting about this, of all those nine agencies, who was the most hawkish on these types of issues? Hillary Clinton. She had a reputation going back to the Dubai Ports deal.
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 its final 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
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.
“Only the President has the authority to suspend or prohibit a covered transaction,” the guidelines say.
Through a spokeswoman, author Peter Schweizer told us he meant that Clinton could have forced the issue to the president’s desk. But that’s not what he said when he appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” where he discussed the uranium deal and his upcoming book to be released on May 5.
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. Mitt Romney said the money donated to the Clinton Foundation “looks like bribery,” and Sen. Rand Paul called for an investigation.
But Schweizer and the Times presented no evidence that the donations influenced Clinton’s official actions.
The fact is, Clinton was one of nine voting members on the foreign investments committee, which also includes the secretaries of the Treasury, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce and Energy, the attorney general, and representatives from two White House offices — the United States Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy. (Separately, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission needed to approve (and did approve) the transfer of two uranium recovery licenses as part of the sale.)
Chris Wallace, host of “Fox News Sunday,” made that point when he questioned Schweizer about his lack of evidence connecting the donations to the uranium deal. (Fox News wasamong the media outlets that received an advance copy of his book.) 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.
Wallace, April 26: Nine separate agencies and they [Clinton campaign officials] point out there’s no hard evidence, and you don’t cite any in the book that Hillary Clinton took direct action, was involved in any way in approving as one of nine agencies the sale of the company?
Schweizer: Well, here’s what’s important to keep in mind: it was one of nine agencies, but any one of those agencies had veto power. So, she could have stopped the deal. So, what’s interesting about this, of all those nine agencies, who was the most hawkish on these types of issues? Hillary Clinton. She had a reputation going back to the Dubai Ports deal.
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 its final 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
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
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 the Committee 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
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 the Committee 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
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
This is nothing to do with Drudge. I just googled Uranium One because the story was teetering between believable and incredulous. Wanted to find out more details from sources that weren't biased.Vaginal, dumb old fuck. Obviously you did not research that insane article. There are no uranium, nor any other commercially valuable deposits known to be in the area of the Malhuer Refuge. There are some massive epithermal deposits, very low grade, east of there in the Owyhee, but none that I have ever heard of in that area.
Well then, I suggest you WRITE the articles author, and COMPLAIN BITTERLY about his MIS-INFORMATION, if that makes you wet!
What if you stopped uncritically regurgitating the crap Drudge pours into the funnel fused to your toothless gums?
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
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" thatattempted to dismiss ethical questions about the former president's ties to the lucrative contract.
Hillary for America and the Clinton-aligned group Media Matterspushed 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.
RELATED: Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'
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" thatattempted to dismiss ethical questions about the former president's ties to the lucrative contract.
Hillary for America and the Clinton-aligned group Media Matterspushed 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.
RELATED: Bill Clinton on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'
Clinton 'fact-check' under fire
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
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 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 on foundation donors: 'I just work here, I don't know'
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
Clinton Foundation donor can't explain role in Russian uranium deal
A major Clinton Foundation donor who stood to profit immensely from the highly scrutinized takeover of Uranium One by the Russian government struggled to explain his involvement with the charity under questioning Tuesday.
Frank Holmes, one of several investors cited in a New York Timesarticle about the deal, attempted to dismiss allegations that he had donated to the Clinton Foundation in an effort to secure Hillary Clinton's approval for the 2010 transaction during an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box."
Several of his claims directly contradicted statements that flashed on the screen while he was speaking.
A fact box on the screen indicated U.S. Global Investors, of which Holmes is CEO, held $4.7 million in shares of Uranium during the first quarter of 2011.
But Holmes said his company was "long gone before 2008."
"We sold, and before it became with Kazakhstan that the government got involved, et cetera, and all that drama's taken place in 2010, whatever these other dates are, we were long gone by 2008," Holmes said during the interview.
Much of the controversy surrounding the Uranium One deal has focused on the origins of its stake in Kazakh uranium mines. In his book Clinton Cash, author Peter Schweizer suggested both Clintons had helped their friend Frank Giustra, also a foundation donor, snap up the stakes from the Kazakh government in 2005.
An official who was closely involved with the transaction, Mukhtar Dzhakishev, wound up behind bars for his role in the deal several years later.
Uranium One ultimately inherited Giustra's Kazakh assets when it acquired his company in 2007.
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton sat on a cabinet-level committee tasked with reviewing commercial transactions with foreign entities that may have affected national security.
Because Uranium One, then a Canada-based firm, owned a significant portion of uranium deposits in the U.S., its transfer to a state-owned Russian atomic agency placed the deal before the committee in 2010.
Hillary Clinton's State Department was among the agencies that signed off on the controversial takeover amid a policy "reset" with Russia.
Ian Telfer, Uranium One's chairman during the acquisition, funneled $2.35 million into the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013. The charity never disclosed those contributions despite an agreement with the White House to name its foreign donors.
Clinton Foundation donor can't explain role in Russian uranium deal
A major Clinton Foundation donor who stood to profit immensely from the highly scrutinized takeover of Uranium One by the Russian government struggled to explain his involvement with the charity under questioning Tuesday.
Frank Holmes, one of several investors cited in a New York Timesarticle about the deal, attempted to dismiss allegations that he had donated to the Clinton Foundation in an effort to secure Hillary Clinton's approval for the 2010 transaction during an interview on CNBC's "Squawk Box."
Several of his claims directly contradicted statements that flashed on the screen while he was speaking.
A fact box on the screen indicated U.S. Global Investors, of which Holmes is CEO, held $4.7 million in shares of Uranium during the first quarter of 2011.
But Holmes said his company was "long gone before 2008."
"We sold, and before it became with Kazakhstan that the government got involved, et cetera, and all that drama's taken place in 2010, whatever these other dates are, we were long gone by 2008," Holmes said during the interview.
Much of the controversy surrounding the Uranium One deal has focused on the origins of its stake in Kazakh uranium mines. In his book Clinton Cash, author Peter Schweizer suggested both Clintons had helped their friend Frank Giustra, also a foundation donor, snap up the stakes from the Kazakh government in 2005.
An official who was closely involved with the transaction, Mukhtar Dzhakishev, wound up behind bars for his role in the deal several years later.
Uranium One ultimately inherited Giustra's Kazakh assets when it acquired his company in 2007.
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton sat on a cabinet-level committee tasked with reviewing commercial transactions with foreign entities that may have affected national security.
Because Uranium One, then a Canada-based firm, owned a significant portion of uranium deposits in the U.S., its transfer to a state-owned Russian atomic agency placed the deal before the committee in 2010.
Hillary Clinton's State Department was among the agencies that signed off on the controversial takeover amid a policy "reset" with Russia.
Ian Telfer, Uranium One's chairman during the acquisition, funneled $2.35 million into the Clinton Foundation between 2009 and 2013. The charity never disclosed those contributions despite an agreement with the White House to name its foreign donors.
Clinton Foundation donor can't explain role in Russian uranium deal
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
But does it go further into Uranium One?Whatever the details of the politics of the deal, it had nothing to do with either the Hammond's or the Malhuer Refuge. The uranium prospect in question is in the McDermitt Caldera, which lies far east of there on the Nevada, Oregon border.I thought the story was "out there" so I researched it:
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
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
There were many other articles about Uranium One, but I selected The Washington Examiner, New York Times and Wikipedia for the references. I will check for more. It seems to be centering around the donations to the Clinton funds and whether the donors were getting or profitting from their connections with Hillary.
Jackson
Gold Member
- Dec 31, 2010
- 27,502
- 7,917
Firm Co-Founded By Hillary’s Campaign Chair Lobbies For Russia’s Uranium One
Chalk it up to a small world or to a tangled web, but Uranium One, the Russian-owned uranium mining company at the center of a recent scandal involving the Clintons and a close Canadian business partner, has lobbied the State Department through a firm co-founded by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign chairman.
Senate records show that The Podesta Group has lobbied the State Department on behalf of Uranium One — once in 2012, when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, and once in 2015.
Uranium One paid The Podesta Group $40,000 to lobby the State Department, the Senate, the National Park Service and the National Security Council for “international mining projects,” according to a July 20, 2012 filing.
Clinton left the State Department on Feb. 1, 2013.
And according to a disclosure filed April 20, Uranium One spent $20,000 lobbying the Senate and State Department on the same issue.
The Podesta Group was founded in 1988 by brothers Tony and John Podesta. Tony Podesta now heads the group while John Podesta, who has not worked for the family business for years but has been involved in plenty of other projects, leads Hillary Clinton toward a Democratic nomination.
Uranium One is significant because it fell under the corporate control of Rosatom, Russia’s atomic energy agency, through a series of transactions approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Rosatom’s acquisition of Uranium One effectively gave Russia control of 20 percent of uranium in the U.S.
How all of that came to pass has fostered questions about how the Clintons operate their charity, the Clinton Foundation.
The Uranium One story starts in 2005 when Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra and several business partners came to own a small mining company called UrAsia Energy.
Clinton flew with Giustra in September 2005 on a private jet to Kazakhstan. There, the mining tycoon negotiated with that nation’s mining agency, Kazataprom, for rights to three mines. After Clinton appeared publicly in support of Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who had just allegedly won an election with more than 90 percent of the vote, the mining deal was approved.
Months later, Giustra donated $31 million to the Clinton Foundation with a pledge of $100 million more.
In 2007, UrAsia Energy, with its access to Kazakhstan’s lucrative mines, me
rged with South Africa’s Uranium One in a $3.5 billion deal.
Giustra sold his stake in the company soon after, pocketing a tidy profit. But other investors and executives with close ties to Giustra maintained their interests and donated millions more to the Clinton group.
As money was flowing to the Clinton Foundation, the State Department, which came under the control of Hillary Clinton in January 2009, approved a series of transactions that allowed Russia’s Rosatom to buy up shares in Uranium One. By June 2009, Rosatom had a 51 percent stake in the company.
Firm Co-Founded By Hillary’s Campaign Chair Lobbies For Russia’s Uranium One
Chalk it up to a small world or to a tangled web, but Uranium One, the Russian-owned uranium mining company at the center of a recent scandal involving the Clintons and a close Canadian business partner, has lobbied the State Department through a firm co-founded by Hillary Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign chairman.
Senate records show that The Podesta Group has lobbied the State Department on behalf of Uranium One — once in 2012, when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, and once in 2015.
Uranium One paid The Podesta Group $40,000 to lobby the State Department, the Senate, the National Park Service and the National Security Council for “international mining projects,” according to a July 20, 2012 filing.
Clinton left the State Department on Feb. 1, 2013.
And according to a disclosure filed April 20, Uranium One spent $20,000 lobbying the Senate and State Department on the same issue.
The Podesta Group was founded in 1988 by brothers Tony and John Podesta. Tony Podesta now heads the group while John Podesta, who has not worked for the family business for years but has been involved in plenty of other projects, leads Hillary Clinton toward a Democratic nomination.
Uranium One is significant because it fell under the corporate control of Rosatom, Russia’s atomic energy agency, through a series of transactions approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Rosatom’s acquisition of Uranium One effectively gave Russia control of 20 percent of uranium in the U.S.
How all of that came to pass has fostered questions about how the Clintons operate their charity, the Clinton Foundation.
The Uranium One story starts in 2005 when Canadian mining magnate Frank Giustra and several business partners came to own a small mining company called UrAsia Energy.
Clinton flew with Giustra in September 2005 on a private jet to Kazakhstan. There, the mining tycoon negotiated with that nation’s mining agency, Kazataprom, for rights to three mines. After Clinton appeared publicly in support of Kazakhstan’s president, Nursultan Nazarbayev, who had just allegedly won an election with more than 90 percent of the vote, the mining deal was approved.
Months later, Giustra donated $31 million to the Clinton Foundation with a pledge of $100 million more.
In 2007, UrAsia Energy, with its access to Kazakhstan’s lucrative mines, me
rged with South Africa’s Uranium One in a $3.5 billion deal.
Giustra sold his stake in the company soon after, pocketing a tidy profit. But other investors and executives with close ties to Giustra maintained their interests and donated millions more to the Clinton group.
As money was flowing to the Clinton Foundation, the State Department, which came under the control of Hillary Clinton in January 2009, approved a series of transactions that allowed Russia’s Rosatom to buy up shares in Uranium One. By June 2009, Rosatom had a 51 percent stake in the company.
Firm Co-Founded By Hillary’s Campaign Chair Lobbies For Russia’s Uranium One
IcebergSlim
Diamond Member
- Oct 11, 2013
- 10,886
- 9,142
This is nothing to do with Drudge. I just googled Uranium One because the story was teetering between believable and incredulous. Wanted to find out more details from sources that weren't biased.Vaginal, dumb old fuck. Obviously you did not research that insane article. There are no uranium, nor any other commercially valuable deposits known to be in the area of the Malhuer Refuge. There are some massive epithermal deposits, very low grade, east of there in the Owyhee, but none that I have ever heard of in that area.
Well then, I suggest you WRITE the articles author, and COMPLAIN BITTERLY about his MIS-INFORMATION, if that makes you wet!
What if you stopped uncritically regurgitating the crap Drudge pours into the funnel fused to your toothless gums?
Where do you think Vag got the story?
Similar threads
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 3
- Views
- 440
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 112
- Replies
- 3K
- Views
- 49K
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 82
- Replies
- 5K
- Views
- 76K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8404
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 478
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-