Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 08:53 AM Apr 2016

How did I miss the Uranium One deal?

In case anyone else did too, here is 5,000 words of investigative journalism by the Gray Lady, from a year ago.

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

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.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

I've always suspected Good Ol' Bill's ethics, right back to the beginning.

[center]
Good Ol' Bill, picking up some early pointers at the monsters' table.[/center]
39 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How did I miss the Uranium One deal? (Original Post) GliderGuider Apr 2016 OP
Well we can count on the Clintons to look after our national interests right?! haikugal Apr 2016 #1
Ewww AxionExcel Apr 2016 #2
what a pretty birdie! does birdie want some meat? charcoal? pitchblende? MisterP Apr 2016 #30
So Are Paid Speeches A Way To Launder Money?.... global1 Apr 2016 #3
It is one way.... As are "charitable donations" to the family foundation. peacebird Apr 2016 #4
But its all coincidental lol elehhhhna Apr 2016 #8
+1 glinda Apr 2016 #23
No silly, that's Hillary's way of raising the average hourly pay for women. Scuba Apr 2016 #35
you can be forgiven AgerolanAmerican Apr 2016 #5
That write-up is the best I have seen on that free-for-all yourpaljoey Apr 2016 #6
I call it bribery. Make it legal, it's still bribery. chknltl Apr 2016 #7
Yes, we all know that there are lawyers who use their jwirr Apr 2016 #29
Pay To Play MoFo's scottie55 Apr 2016 #9
Shhhhhh!! Else You Are Mad Apr 2016 #10
Hillary??? Gosh no!!! GliderGuider Apr 2016 #11
They share a bank account... Else You Are Mad Apr 2016 #12
Shhhhh! You don't want to get in trouble with the authorities, do you? nt GliderGuider Apr 2016 #13
Didn't Chelsea get her name recently added? glinda Apr 2016 #24
Guess the Hillarian's are going to stay away form tthis one Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #14
Hillarity would ensue! GliderGuider Apr 2016 #15
My dad would have loved it greiner3 Apr 2016 #18
Is this Free Republic? Democat Apr 2016 #16
As far as I'm concerned, it hasn't changed. kracer20 Apr 2016 #19
Thanks for chiming in! GliderGuider Apr 2016 #20
I'm stealing that chart. Scuba Apr 2016 #37
Be my guest! I think it represents a lot of us on here GliderGuider Apr 2016 #38
This is only one example kracer20 Apr 2016 #17
But but greiner3 Apr 2016 #21
But she HAS been "thoroughly vetted". Proof enclosed. GliderGuider Apr 2016 #22
Thanks to all the Republicans who responded to this thread. Leontius Apr 2016 #25
You don't need to be a Republican to dislike the Clintons. GliderGuider Apr 2016 #26
This message was self-deleted by its author SocialLibFiscalCon Apr 2016 #27
Republicans? When Did Republicans Begin Opposing Corruption? scottie55 Apr 2016 #28
I first heard about this when the Bundy people were holed up in the Refuge blathering on enough Apr 2016 #31
What's that old saying about stopped clocks? nt GliderGuider Apr 2016 #32
What always strikes me about these Clinton "trades" Hydra Apr 2016 #33
Los Alamos has a Truman "New Deal" Jeffersons Ghost Apr 2016 #34
Yeah, but she hasn't been convicted of anything, so it's all good. Read that right here on DU. Scuba Apr 2016 #36
Poppy, too, loves minerals and those who extract them. Octafish Apr 2016 #39

global1

(25,225 posts)
3. So Are Paid Speeches A Way To Launder Money?....
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 09:02 AM
Apr 2016

Are they kind of a way to pay off someone for services rendered but make it look like it is an honorable fee for inviting a person to speak and thereby rendering what looks like a legitimate service?

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
35. No silly, that's Hillary's way of raising the average hourly pay for women.
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 07:49 AM
Apr 2016

It's very altruistic. If you can't see that, you must hate women.















sarcasm thingy here for those w/o the gene

 

AgerolanAmerican

(1,000 posts)
5. you can be forgiven
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 09:12 AM
Apr 2016

there are so many corrupt and questionable dealings where the Clintons are concerned it takes quite a bit of time and effort to keep track of them

yourpaljoey

(2,166 posts)
6. That write-up is the best I have seen on that free-for-all
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 09:28 AM
Apr 2016

They thought they would not get caught; ain't that something?

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
29. Yes, we all know that there are lawyers who use their
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:50 AM
Apr 2016

knowledge to allow actions to come right up to the edge of the law. Still legal but not moral. This post is an example of one way to use that.

If we think this is going to stop once Hillary is president then we are dreaming.

 

scottie55

(1,400 posts)
9. Pay To Play MoFo's
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 10:46 AM
Apr 2016

If you don't understand how the system works, you must live in a cave, or under a rock.

One candidate is trying to change this bribery ran form of government.

One is getting rich off it......

Time to wake up.

New York??????????

http://mic.com/articles/125813/jimmy-carter-tells-oprah-america-is-no-longer-a-democracy-now-an-oligarchy#.hN9vp6KqN

kracer20

(199 posts)
19. As far as I'm concerned, it hasn't changed.
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:10 AM
Apr 2016

To me, this is a place that supported people, and it was us against the party establishment (mostly the R's, but some D's).

Still is as far as I can tell.

Maybe you're looking in from the wrong side?

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
20. Thanks for chiming in!
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:10 AM
Apr 2016

I'm not exactly right-wing:


Hell, I'm not even American. I just have slightly higher ethical standards than Slick Willie and his blushing bride.

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
38. Be my guest! I think it represents a lot of us on here
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 09:44 AM
Apr 2016

and the fundamental problem we have with any of the candidates.

kracer20

(199 posts)
17. This is only one example
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:06 AM
Apr 2016

of the questionable ethics of the Clintons and their foundation.

I'm afraid if she makes it to the general these types of things will be brought out front and center and will completely destroy any hopes of her winning.

 

greiner3

(5,214 posts)
21. But but
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:12 AM
Apr 2016

But one of their talking points as to why Hillary needs to be the candidate is 'she's been thoroughly vetted'. If that's the case both she and Bill would be in jail.

 

Leontius

(2,270 posts)
25. Thanks to all the Republicans who responded to this thread.
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:30 AM
Apr 2016

Your dislike for the Clintons is well known but again thanks for the comments.

 

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)
26. You don't need to be a Republican to dislike the Clintons.
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:36 AM
Apr 2016

You shall be known by the company you keep.
What you sow is what you reap.





I don't know about you, but I wouldn't vote for that even if I could!

Response to Leontius (Reply #25)

 

scottie55

(1,400 posts)
28. Republicans? When Did Republicans Begin Opposing Corruption?
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:50 AM
Apr 2016

If I told you what I thought of someone calling me a Republican I would be banned for 100 lifetimes.

The Clinton Foundation is DIRTY.

Deal with it.

Our whole system is corrupt.

Deal with it.

Pretending corruption doesn't exist means one lives in a cave, or under a rock.

I can see another member deleted their post. Must have been pissed off at you too, and didn't want to show the world how they feel about being called a Republican by a corruption enabler.

enough

(13,255 posts)
31. I first heard about this when the Bundy people were holed up in the Refuge blathering on
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 01:17 PM
Apr 2016

about all kinds of crazy stuff. One of the craziest was something about uranium, the Russians, and the Clintons. I thought at first that this was just another one of their many delusions. How could anything that far-fetched be true?

Then I looked it up.

Hydra

(14,459 posts)
33. What always strikes me about these Clinton "trades"
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 10:55 PM
Apr 2016

Is how little money it actually takes to bribe them. It's highly possible they are getting other types of favors with it, but really, a million here and there for hundreds of millions or billions in profits or strategic gain? That's pretty cheap.

Jeffersons Ghost

(15,235 posts)
34. Los Alamos has a Truman "New Deal"
Sat Apr 9, 2016, 11:34 PM
Apr 2016

["idiots" I saw the Joe Biden vehicle arcade today AND drew Chinese satellite attacks away from IT today, before getting 4 teeth - Chinese satellites broke with illegal biologicla implaqnts - pulled by "MOM" = Mother Russia! fuck-ups]

Octafish

(55,745 posts)
39. Poppy, too, loves minerals and those who extract them.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 03:58 PM
Apr 2016

Take gold. Greg Palast explains how Barrick Gold became one of Poppy Bush's favorite charities.



The guy really gave rise to compassionate conservative, as in helping the rich and their corporations.



Poppy Strikes Gold

Sunday, April 27, 2008
Originally Posted July 9, 2003
By Greg Palast

EXCERPT...

And while the Bush family steadfastly believes that ex-felons should not have the right to vote for president, they have no objection to ex-cons putting presidents on their payroll. In 1996, despite pleas by U.S. church leaders, Poppy Bush gave several speeches (he charges $100,000 per talk) sponsored by organizations run by Rev. Sun Myung Moon, cult leader, tax cheat—and formerly the guest of the U.S. federal prison system. Some of the loot for the Republican effort in the 1997–2000 election cycles came from an outfit called Barrick Corporation.

The sum, while over $100,000, is comparatively small change for the GOP, yet it seemed quite a gesture for a corporation based in Canada. Technically, the funds came from those associated with the Canadian's U.S. unit, Barrick Gold Strike.

They could well afford it. [font color="green"]In the final days of the Bush (Senior) administration, the Interior Department made an extraordinary but little noticed change in procedures under the 1872 Mining Law, the gold rush–era act that permitted those whiskered small-time prospectors with their tin pans and mules to stake claims on their tiny plots. The department initiated an expedited procedure for mining companies that allowed Barrick to swiftly lay claim to the largest gold find in America. In the terminology of the law, Barrick could "perfect its patent" on the estimated $10 billion in ore—for which Barrick paid the U.S. Treasury a little under $10,000. Eureka![/font color]

Barrick, of course, had to put up cash for the initial property rights and the cost of digging out the booty (and the cost of donations, in smaller amounts, to support Nevada's Democratic senator, Harry Reid). Still, the shift in rules paid off big time: According to experts at the Mineral Policy Center of Washington, DC, Barrick saved—and the U.S. taxpayer lost—a cool billion or so. Upon taking office, Bill Clinton's new interior secretary, Bruce Babbitt, called Barrick's claim the "biggest gold heist since the days of Butch Cassidy." Nevertheless, because the company followed the fast-track process laid out for them under Bush, this corporate Goldfinger had Babbitt by the legal nuggets. Clinton had no choice but to give them the gold mine while the public got the shaft.

Barrick says it had no contact whatsoever with the president at the time of the rules change.(1) There was always a place in Barrick's heart for the older Bush—and a place on its payroll. In 1995, Barrick hired the former president as Honorary Senior Advisor to the Toronto company's International Advisory Board. Bush joined at the suggestion of former Canadian prime minister Brian Mulroney, who, like Bush, had been ignominiously booted from office. I was a bit surprised that the president had signed on. When Bush was voted out of the White House, he vowed never to lobby or join a corporate board. The chairman of Barrick openly boasts that granting the title "Senior Advisor" was a sly maneuver to help Bush tiptoe around this promise.

CONTINUED...

http://www.gregpalast.com/poppy-strikes-gold/



The story continues, in which Mr. Palast details how said gold mining company employed pure fascist tactics to take over the mine, a plan which involved bulldozing the miners' homes and mines, some with the miners and their families still inside.

Let that, uh, sink in for a moment. For his trouble in reporting the story, Barrick threatened to sue.



The Truth Buried Alive

—By Greg Palast, From The Best Democracy Money Can Buy (Penguin/Plume, 2003)

Source: UTNE Reader
April 2003 Issue

EXCERPT...

Bad news. In July 2001, in the middle of trying to get out the word of the theft of the election in Florida, [font color="red"]I was about to become the guinea pig, the test case, for an attempt by a multinational corporation to suppress free speech in the USA using British libel law. I have a U.S.-based Web site for Americans who can’t otherwise read my columns or view my BBC television reports. The gold-mining company held my English newspaper liable for aggravated damages for my publishing the story in the USA. If I did not pull the Bush-Barrick story off my U.S. Web site, my paper would face a ruinously costly fight.(1)[/font color]

Panicked, the Guardian legal department begged me to delete not just the English versions of the story but also my Spanish translation, printed in Bolivia. (Caramba!)

The Goldfingers didn’t stop there. [font color="green"]Barrick’s lawyers told our papers that I personally would be sued in the United Kingdom over Web publications of my story in America, because the Web could be accessed in Britain. The success of this legal strategy would effectively annul the U.S. Bill of Rights.[/font color] Speak freely in the USA, but if your words are carried on a U.S. Web site, you may be sued in Britain. The Declaration of Independence would be null and void, at least for libel law. Suddenly, instead of the Internet becoming a means of spreading press freedom, the means to break through censorship, it would become the electronic highway for delivering repression.

And repression was winning. InterPress Services (IPS) of Washington, DC, sent a reporter to Tanzania with Lissu. They received a note from Barrick that said if the wire service ran a story that repeated the allegations, the company would sue. IPS did not run the story.

I was worried about Lissu. On July 19, 2001, a group of Tanzanian police interest lawyers wrote the nation’s president asking for an investigation–instead, Lissu’s law partner in Dar es Salaam was arrested. The police were hunting for Lissu. They broke into his home and office and turned them upside down looking for the names of Lissu’s sources, his whereabouts and the evidence he gathered on the mine site clearance. This was more than a legal skirmish. Over the next months, demonstrations by vicims’ families were broken up by police thugs. A member of Parliament joining protesters was beaten and hospitalized. I had to raise cash quick to get Lissu out, and with him, his copies of police files with more evidence of the killings. I called Maude Barlow, the “Ralph Nader of Canada”, head of the Council of Canadians. Without hesitation, she teamed up with Friends of the Earth in Holland, raised funds and prepared a press conference–and in August tipped the story to the Globe & Mail, Canada’s national paper.

CONTINUED...

http://www.mapcruzin.com/palast-2.htm



Greg Palast did something very, very bad from the secret government and secret government beneficiary insider's perspective: He told the truth, including the bits about the buried alive gold miners, as it happens. So, the Big Corporation sued and sued and sued. With their deep pockets, they can buy justice, judges, prime ministers and whoever and whatever else they need to turn a buck, even presidents and their dim sons.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»How did I miss the Uraniu...