Timeline of Russian uranium deal and Clinton donations


Please consider donating to Behind the Black, by giving either a one-time contribution or a regular subscription, as outlined in the tip jar to the right or below. Your support will allow me to continue covering science and culture as I have for the past twenty years, independent and free from any outside influence.

Link here. The timeline not only puts the quid pro quo nature of the Russian uranium deal in context, it helps clarify the players and the different parts they played. It appears this deal not only involved giving Russia control of 20 percent of American uranium, that control included the corrupt Kazakhstan government.

All told, the Clintons and the Clinton Foundation appears to have received in the range of $55 million for their help in making the deal happen, all from players who benefited financially from the deal.

Share

23 comments

  • wayne

    What can I say?

    “I’m shocked, shocked to find that corruption is going on here…”
    https://youtu.be/SjbPi00k_ME
    (0:19)

  • wayne

    “Major Strausser has been shot….”
    Casablanca ending.
    https://youtu.be/G62tkd2t7qk?t=113
    (2:00)

  • BSJ

    Yeah, this surely proves the Russians couldn’t have been playing both sides.

    Don’t forget, Trump was best buddies with the Clintons before he wasn’t. Ran in the same circles you could say. Can’t imagine Trump would walk away from anyone willing to hand out cash, or influence.

  • BSJ: The timeline has nothing to do with Trump, and isn’t aimed at finding him innocent. I don’t know why you imply that. The timeline’s purpose is to show the Clintons’ involvement.

    There have been many accusations against Trump, all of which so far have appeared to me weak and unreliable. I agree that he and the Russians could have been working together, but I need some real evidence before I take the accusation seriously. The story here is about the Clintons, and it shows a lot of solid evidence that pay-offs were made

    Note too that the timeline is compiled entirely from New York Times stories, hardly a rightwing partisan news source.

  • See Evening Pause for 23 Oct 2017.

  • wayne

    This has been tribbling out for some time, (and goes way back, starting in 2005 and completed in 2010.)

    Mark Levin; discussing the NYT’s revelations
    Hillary Clinton’s uranium scandal (is also Obama’s scandal)
    >April 23, 2015 audio
    https://youtu.be/t63Wu79dAz4

    Same day that Loretta Lynch was confirmed as AG by a Republican controlled Senate.
    AG Holder btw, among almost 1/2 the Cabinet, all had to sign off on this Uranium 1 deal.
    Scores of people should already be in prison. They are all complicit.

  • Cotour

    Part of an email conversation I am having with someone who just can not see anything of importance here, AND HE IS A LAWYER! (Thinks that Bernie had some good ideas)

    http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/356778-time-for-jeff-sessions-to-stop-giving-hillary-clinton-a-pass-on-russia

    “There was more than enough smoke for the FBI to investigate official government favors in exchange for big donations to the Clinton Foundation, but agents ran into a hyper-politicized Attorney General in Loretta Lynch, whose public integrity section said it “did not have enough evidence to move forward,” according to to Washington Post in October 2016.”

    And I believe that both Mueller and Comey, both heads of the FBI during the entire episode, were ordered to sit on it all by Lynch. Lynch is central to the Clintons being able to operate as they did, remember the tarmack meeting? Remember Comey giving a 13 minute list of indictment level activities by Clinton and then concluded “But I can find no intent”. Really?

    Could you imagine the consequences that would be meted out if Hillary had won and one or all of them moved against her by pursuing an investigation? A chilling thought.

    Q: How can Mueller objectively investigate the person who sits in the presidency when that persons DOJ is investigating Muellers activities related to the Clinton Uranium One investigation? It seems a bit incestuous and counter intuitive, No?

    Mueller will most likely be removed from his position as special prosecutor. What do you think?

  • Phill O

    This Uranium One deal is probably why the Obama admin did nothing about Putin invading the Crimea? Was the Crimea given up even before Russia invaded? Remember Poland after WW2.

    I am just small potatoes but there are some questions that come up when one looks deeper: and I do not think we can look deep enough!

  • Lee S

    Phill O, I agree with much which has been written here, ( strange for a pinko commie I know, but even I consider the Clintons corrupt and dangerous..) , however I think the reason Obama did nothing about Crimea has more to do with A, they had a vote, and 90 something percent of the 90 something percent Russian speaking population of the historically Russian peninsula voted for Russian protection against the neo-Nazi harassment they were receiving after the overthrow of the democratically elected government….
    It’s not all black and white my friend…. look over here and see what’s going on in Spain with Catalonia ….. but they have no “big brother” to call upon to help….

  • Cotour

    Related:

    How you might ask does the radical Left and anti American organizations and those who oppose the Constitution get their funding? There are legal philanthropic structures set up that from where I sit are able to funnel funds to them without any legal requirement to identify where those funds come from and are soo far down the line that no one really knows where the funds go to.

    Where do organizations like Black Lives Matter, ANTIFA (An off shoot of European Communism) and Occupy Wall Street, anti American all, get their funding? Through these multi level through design Leftist based philanthropic foundations.

    When a philanthropist like George Soros, estimated net worth $26 Billion dollars, sets up a foundation called the Open Society FOUNDATION’S (plural), and you come to understand how such organizations are set up you can readily understand how the scheme operates. The prime foundation funnels funds to lesser foundations and so on and so on until the money just evaporates and miraculously condenses in the coffers of these anti American “Progressive” organizations. Its really not rocket science to be able to see, but I must ask: Why is it allowed to legally continue in such and free wheeling and unaccountable manner? I think that the American people would like to know how the attempt at their country’s “Fundamental Change” is being funded. Thats how stupid our political system has become. Let them have their free speech, but I want to have more requirements in knowing where their donated money comes from and how it is spent. I do not think that us unreasonable. “A country conceived by geniuses and run by idiots” J. Foxworthy.

    https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/225-tides-foundation-tides-center/

    “In practice, “Tides” behaves less like a philanthropy than a money-laundering enterprise (apologies to Procter & Gamble), taking money from other foundations and spending it as the donor requires. Called donor-advised giving, this pass-through funding vehicle provides public-relations insulation for the money’s original donors. By using Tides to funnel its capital, a large public charity can indirectly fund a project with which it would prefer not to be directly identified in public. Drummond Pike has reinforced this view, telling The Chronicle of Philanthropy: “Anonymity is very important to most of the people we work with.””

    “The Tides Foundation is quickly becoming the 800-pound gorilla of radical activist funding, and this couldn’t happen without a nine-figure balance sheet. Just about every big name in the world of public grantmaking lists Tides as a major recipient. Anyone who has heard the closing moments of a National Public Radio news broadcast is familiar with these names.”

    “In practice, though, the Tides Foundation has turned this well-meaning idea on its head. When traditional foundations give millions of dollars to Tides, they’re not required to tell the IRS anything about the grants’ eventual purposes. Some document it anyway; most do not. When Tides files its annual tax return, of course, it has to document where its donations went — but not where they came from.”

    This is how the people, “Glabalists”, “New World Order”, agents of “Fundamental Change” in America types, how ever you want to designate them, finance your country’s destruction. Like I said, its not rocket science.

  • Garry

    Tangent:

    Cotour wrote, “A country conceived by geniuses and run by idiots” J. Foxworthy.

    He borrowed from my all-time favorite quote, by Herman Wouk in The Caine Mutiny: “the military was designed by geniuses to be run by idiots.”

    I had that quote posted on my desk, and just below it and next to my name plate, I posted “Head Idiot”

  • wayne

    Garry–
    Good stuff. (In what part of the movie, is that quote located?)

    Cotour-
    Reference the Tides Foundation; they have been in business for 30+ years. Not to mention the Ford Foundation, the Rockefeller Foundation, et al, (and Michael Moore has a Foundation as well.) And it is designed specifically to support other causes.
    There does exist strictly conservative Foundations but the assets of the Left completely dwarf anything on the right.

    The kicker with the Foundation structure; the money passes tax-free, and the Foundation is only required to spend 5% of their assets per year, on their Mission Statement.

  • Orion314

    HRH HRC has proclaimed that “We believe this is baloney”
    That is all that the USG needs to hear. Case closed.

  • wayne

    Orion314-
    I agree. Nothing will come of this.

  • Phill O

    Lee S Let us see the outcome of the California vote.

  • Garry

    Wayne, I’m not sure the quote is in the movie; I got it from the book (assigned reading plebe year at Annapolis).

  • wayne

    Garry-
    thanks.
    It didn’t dawn on me, you probably meant the book, until after I spoke aloud. (Have not read it myself.) And I did get diverted into the Foxworthy version- hilarious.

    Referencing Hillary– just have this feeling, she’s going to skate free, no matter what.

  • Garry/Wayne:

    It appears there’s a world of difference between ‘conceived by’ and ‘designed by’.

  • Edward

    wayne asked: “In what part of the movie, is that quote located?

    It is said by the cynical Lt. Keefer as he introduces Lt. Keith and the other new Lieutenant to the ship. It is a wonderful line, but I didn’t find a video of it on Youtube.
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0046816/quotes/qt0367347

    In my search, I found the following. In the book, Wouk may have paraphrased the saying that Garry quoted:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/business/bleeding-talent-sees-a-military-management-mess.html

    It has been decades since I read it, but the movie is only the second half of the book. I still have an image of Keith taking a wrong turn on the parade ground during Annapolis graduation and ending up at the wrong end of the field.

    Yes, Garry, that would be good assigned reading, and I kid you not.

  • Garry

    Edward, I thought it was excellent assigned reading, but my prof for that class was an Air Force officer, and the wisdom/lessons of the book went right over his head (the wisdom is not limited to the plot line of the mutiny itself).

    As a plebe I was just learning how to study, had all kinds of military knowledge to learn under duress, plus marching in parades, and sports, and was always tired, so I treated reading the book as just another assignment, and not the one that could get me in the worst trouble if I just went through the motions, so that’s more or less what I did, other than picking up that gem of a quote, which has stood the test of time.

    I didn’t fully appreciate the book until I gained a little experience myself and reread it. More than a decade after I got out I read it again, and took even more lessons from it.

    I’ve had the same type of experience rereading most of the novels assigned in high school; the selections were great, but the teachers not so much.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *