BOMBSHELL! Clinton/Russia collusion goes deeper than imagined

[marvin martian]

Bill Clinton sought "permission" from his wife's State Department to meet with top Russian government officials days before Obama "approved" the deal to sell out our uranium industry to the Clintons' Russian allies. Of course, this being the Clintons, LOTS of money changed hands.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/356323-bill-clinton-sought-states-permission-to-meet-with-russian-nuclear

As he prepared to collect a $500,000 payday in Moscow in 2010, Bill Clinton sought clearance from the State Department to meet with a key board director of the Russian nuclear energy firm Rosatom — which at the time needed the Obama administration’s approval for a controversial uranium deal, government records show.

Arkady Dvorkovich, a top aide to then-Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and one of the highest-ranking government officials to serve on Rosatom’s board of supervisors, was listed on a May 14, 2010, email as one of 15 Russians the former president wanted to meet during a late June 2010 trip, the documents show.

Get a load of that Russian official's name! LOL!!!

Click the link for the rest of the story.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

How does this constitute a bomb shell since it was well known before the election? Weren't we talking about this in early 2016?

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

You know how lovers who don't want to get caught act in public view? they hate each other. but close the blinds and lock the door you would think they were fighting but they are banging each other hard sexually.

 

[marvin martian]

How does this constitute a bomb shell since it was well known before the election? Weren't we talking about this in early 2016?

This is compelling evidence that the Clintons were running the show with Russia and handling the cash drops while Obama rubber-stamped the deal. It brings new light to Obama's remark about having more "flexibility" after his election; he was referring to the Clintons handling the money laundering aspect of their Russian collusion game. It makes sense, given the Clinton Foundation was basically the money-washing system for Hillary to sell influence while she was Secretary of State.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Russia and the clintons

 

[as seen on tv]

Hillary used the state department to help Russian criminals leave the USA the same week bill was scheduled to collect $500K for a speech to Putin's cronies

 

[marvin martian]

Hillary used the state department to help Russian criminals leave the USA the same week bill was scheduled to collect $500K for a speech to Putin's cronies

Correct, and that was all during the run-up to Obama rubber-stamping the uranium deal while the Clintons raked in millions in "donations" to their money-laundering operation.

 

[justoffal]

Hmmmm.... That's a little spooky

 

[justoffal]

Correct, and that was all during the run-up to Obama rubber-stamping the uranium deal while the Clintons raked in millions in "donations" to their money-laundering operation.

Really behind to wonder how many of these hacks who post here are American citizens.

Jo

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

Hmmmm.... That's a little spooky

No it isn't it's the democrat way.

 

[Arkady]

This is compelling evidence that the Clintons were running the show with Russia and handling the cash drops while Obama rubber-stamped the deal. It brings new light to Obama's remark about having more "flexibility" after his election; he was referring to the Clintons handling the money laundering aspect of their Russian collusion game. It makes sense, given the Clinton Foundation was basically the money-washing system for Hillary to sell influence while she was Secretary of State.

As a reminder, Obama didn't rubber-stamp the deal. It never went to the president for approval at all. It was subject to approval by a long list of regulators, all of whom agreed there was no reason to block the deal..... for the same reason that you don't today hear anyone pushing to block those mining rights. There was no reason to regard it as a threat.

Look, if you HONESTLY think that it's somehow a security threat for foreign companies to operate uranium mines in the US, then push for that practice to be ended. It would be very easy to seize those licenses by eminent domain and then sell them off to the highest-bidding US mining company. But, like everyone else, you don't really regard those licenses as a security threat. You just pretend you do for partisan puprposes.

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

As a reminder, Obama didn't rubber-stamp the deal. It never went to the president for approval at all. It was subject to approval by a long list of regulators, all of whom agreed there was no reason to block the deal..... for the same reason that you don't today hear anyone pushing to block those mining rights. There was no reason to regard it as a threat.

Look, if you HONESTLY think that it's somehow a security threat for foreign companies to operate uranium mines in the US, then push for that practice to be ended. It would be very easy to seize those licenses by eminent domain and then sell them off to the highest-bidding US mining company. But, like everyone else, you don't really regard those licenses as a security threat. You just pretend you do for partisan puprposes.

Arkie with his comedy hour lol

 

[Arkady]

Arkie with his comedy hour lol

How about you -- are you going to write to Trump and demand that he use executive authority to block those leases on national security grounds? Are you going to write to your Congress member and tell him to present a bill to use eminent domain to seize those leases and sell them off to a US company? Or do you accept that, in fact, a foreign company running a US mining operation isn't actually a national security threat? If so, you're in good company -- everyone in a relevant role in both the Obama and the Trump administration agrees. So, can we drop the charade?

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

How about you -- are you going to write to Trump and demand that he use executive authority to block those leases on national security grounds? Are you going to write to your Congress member and tell him to present a bill to use eminent domain to seize those leases and sell them off to a US company? Or do you accept that, in fact, a foreign company running a US mining operation isn't actually a national security threat? If so, you're in good company -- everyone in a relevant role in both the Obama and the Trump administration agrees. So, can we drop the charade?

hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahaha breath hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahabreath roll breath

 

[marvin martian]

As a reminder, Obama didn't rubber-stamp the deal. It never went to the president for approval at all. It was subject to approval by a long list of regulators, all of whom agreed there was no reason to block the deal..... for the same reason that you don't today hear anyone pushing to block those mining rights. There was no reason to regard it as a threat.

Look, if you HONESTLY think that it's somehow a security threat for foreign companies to operate uranium mines in the US, then push for that practice to be ended. It would be very easy to seize those licenses by eminent domain and then sell them off to the highest-bidding US mining company. But, like everyone else, you don't really regard those licenses as a security threat. You just pretend you do for partisan puprposes.

Well done Arkady. Putin is proud of you.

 

[Arkady]

hahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahaha breath hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahabreath roll breath

You hadn't thought it through, had you? Well, once you have, you can stop pretending to laugh and respond seriously.

 

[Spamature]

Bill Clinton sought "permission" from his wife's State Department to meet with top Russian government officials days before Obama "approved" the deal to sell out our uranium industry to the Clintons' Russian allies. Of course, this being the Clintons, LOTS of money changed hands.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/356323-bill-clinton-sought-states-permission-to-meet-with-russian-nuclear



Get a load of that Russian official's name! LOL!!!

Click the link for the rest of the story.

From your article.

Requests of this type were run by the State Department as a matter of course. This was yet another one of those instances. Ultimately, President Clinton did not meet with these people,” Angel Urena, the official spokesperson for the former president, told The Hill.

So how does a meeting that never took place cause LOTS of money changed hands ?

Anyway you got one thing right. It was up to Obama, not Clinton, to approve the deal.

 

[marvin martian]

From your article.

Requests of this type were run by the State Department as a matter of course. This was yet another one of those instances. Ultimately, President Clinton did not meet with these people,” Angel Urena, the official spokesperson for the former president, told The Hill.

So how does a meeting that never took place cause LOTS of money changed hands ?

Anyway you got one thing right. It was up to Obama, not Clinton, to approve the deal.

The $500,000 Bill got right before Obama rubber-stamped the uranium deal. Not to mention the millions in Russian cash that went into the Clinton foundation in the run-up to the deal. The Clinton-Russia connection is deep.

 

[Spamature]

The $500,000 Bill got right before Obama rubber-stamped the uranium deal. Not to mention the millions in Russian cash that went into the Clinton foundation in the run-up to the deal. The Clinton-Russia connection is deep.

And he made a lot more speeches that paid him $500,000 that had nothing to do with Russia.



Here’s a list of all the speeches for which Clinton received a fee of $500,000 or higher, including the year, location, host and actual fee:

1. 2003 -- Japan, $500,000 Sakura Asset Management (Japanese finance corporation) (A note: This speech was canceled, but the fee went to Clinton’s presidential library foundation);
   
2. 2008 -- California, $500,000, Power Within (life coach Anthony Robbins’ brand);
   
3. 2010 -- Russia, $500,000, Renaissance Capital (Russian finance corporation);
   
4. 2010 -- United Arab Emirates, $500,000, Novo Nordisk (Danish pharmaceutical company);
   
5. 2011 -- Nigeria, $700,000, THISDAY (newspaper);
   
6. 2011 -- Austria, $500,000, Center for Global Dialogue and Cooperation (Austrian nongovernmental organization);
   
7. 2011 -- Netherlands, $600,000, Achmea (Dutch finance corporation);
   
8. 2011 -- China, $550,000, Huatuo CEO Forum (business conference);
   
9. 2011 -- United Arab Emirates, $500,000, Abu Dhabi Global Environmental Data Initiative (international environmental information organization);
   
10. 2011 -- Hong Kong, $750,000, Ericsson (Swedish multinational communications technology company);
    
11. 2012 -- Nigeria, $700,000, THISDAY (newspaper);
    
12. 2012 -- Austria, $500,000, Center for Global Dialogue and Cooperation (Austrian nongovernmental organization);
    
13. 
    2012 -- Italy, $500,000, Technogym (fitness equipment manufacturer).

http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/apr/26/peter-schweizer/fact-checking-clinton-cash-author-claim-about-bill/

 

[Constitutional Sheepdog]

You hadn't thought it through, had you? Well, once you have, you can stop pretending to laugh and respond seriously.

I found it amusing that once again liberals need trump to bell out America because of obama and or clinton incompetence.
Really the sooner we get this war going the better it will be for America because it will have rid itself of cancer known as liberalism.