You mean uranium one is BS

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.
You're a pussy for not admitting to your obvious error.

Your latest quibble is also not true. It's a cabinet level decision and the deal fails without committee approval. You're also losing the fact that she can't be taking in any foreign money while the SOS. Doesn't really matter if it was or weren't quid pro quo or not, she can't legally take such money. Quid pro quo means that she gave something for the money, since you're challenged in this area. You're welcome.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.


People in Washington never get their way unless they're on a committee. Who knew!
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by ip_law-hokie »

HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
I haven’t been following the story.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by awesome guy »

HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
But, but, but they promised that it would never be exported! They shockingly exported it anyway, those dastardly Russians!
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

TheH2 wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
there is actual evidence in the obummer admin issues, sorta different
What "actual evidence" is that?
I got this one:
Obama and Hillary and the democrats were all living in the U.S.


Hitler and Stalin both lived in Vienna.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by 133743Hokie »

TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
This is old news. It was a multi organizational deal, with DoS as one of the organizations required to sign off/approve the deal. Where Shep is wrong is his statement that the deal doesn't allow the uranium to leave the country. We now know that to be false (and he should have too). The DoS (Hillary's organization) approved an amendment to a trucking company contract allowing them to carry uranium to Canada, which they then did, and whereby some/all of that US sourced uranium was then shipped out of Canada to eastern Europe and Asia. This is the big story IMO.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by 133743Hokie »

HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
They bypassed all of that . The DoS, under Clinton, amended a trucking company contract to allow them to transport uranium from the US to Canada. This company was then used to ship some of the uranium acquired under this deal to Canada where it was then shipped to eastern Europe and Asia.
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
Except some of it has been exported to our friends. Seriously, anyone who defends this goddam bullshit should just be quiet. Rosatom should have 0% stake in our uranium assets.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

133743Hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
This is old news. It was a multi organizational deal, with DoS as one of the organizations required to sign off/approve the deal. Where Shep is wrong is his statement that the deal doesn't allow the uranium to leave the country. We now know that to be false (and he should have too). The DoS (Hillary's organization) approved an amendment to a trucking company contract allowing them to carry uranium to Canada, which they then did, and whereby some/all of that US sourced uranium was then shipped out of Canada to eastern Europe and Asia. This is the big story IMO.
Agreed. They clearly created a flimsy work-around to circumvent the promises about exporting. Someone in Congress should get the details on that (how much, where), which have been withheld so far.
HokieFanDC
Posts: 18547
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 8:57 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieFanDC »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
Except some of it has been exported to our friends. Seriously, anyone who defends this goddam bullshit should just be quiet. Rosatom should have 0% stake in our uranium assets.
I'm just trying to correct the false beliefs about the actual deal.
User avatar
ip_law-hokie
Posts: 19133
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:20 pm
Alma Mater: Manchester
Location: New York, NY

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by ip_law-hokie »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
Except some of it has been exported to our friends. Seriously, anyone who defends this goddam bullshit should just be quiet. Rosatom should have 0% stake in our uranium assets.
You got Hillary in your bracket too?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
With their Cap’n and Chief Intelligence Officer having deserted them, River, Ham and Joe valiantly continue their whataboutismistic last stand of the DJT apology tour.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

133743Hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
This is old news. It was a multi organizational deal, with DoS as one of the organizations required to sign off/approve the deal. Where Shep is wrong is his statement that the deal doesn't allow the uranium to leave the country. We now know that to be false (and he should have too). The DoS (Hillary's organization) approved an amendment to a trucking company contract allowing them to carry uranium to Canada, which they then did, and whereby some/all of that US sourced uranium was then shipped out of Canada to eastern Europe and Asia. This is the big story IMO.
Yes, there was nothing shady about the uranium one deal. It never was news, unless of course pizzagate, etc. was news.

Interesting bit on the export. I'm not sure there is much there because there is no shortage of uranium, Canada mines (or did mine) a ton of it, it's a commodity that can be easily purchased for a very low price historically because Japan.
Image

Are we really worried about getting uranium? Canada is (was?) one of the largest producers and Australia is right there with them.
People who know, know.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

HokieJoe wrote:
HokieFanDC wrote:
HokieJoe wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
Many strange things happened under the 8 years of Obummer, but you think that this deal was 100% legit....you should get cattle future contracts from Thunder thighs then. And you trust the various Obummer depts even though more and more info is coming out about how corrupt the whole joint was.... ok
So let's unpack this. Per you, many strange things, unrelated to this, happened under Obummer. This leads you to believe this is crooked, despite direct evidence to the contrary. Thunder thighs.

But when an Alabama congressman get accussed of finger banging a 14 year old, and there are other strange things, but admitted to, and very much related to the matter, this leads you to suspend judgment.

Seems a little inconsistent.
You don't think it strange that we gave the Russians mining rights control to 20% of our uranium ore (which is a strategic asset)?

Keep on running with that ip. Sounds like a winner.
What rights do you think Russia has?

The US subsidiary of Uranium One holds a license to mine a certain amount of ISR production capacity. It's not 20% of US uranium. It's not even 20% of US uranium mining capacity. And it can't be exported to Russia, because they don't hold an export license. In 2016, they mined about 2% of all US production.
Except some of it has been exported to our friends. Seriously, anyone who defends this goddam bullshit should just be quiet. Rosatom should have 0% stake in our uranium assets.
Russia has a ton of uranium that can be mined in their own country. Uranium is a commodity and Russia can buy and sell it (see Canada).
People who know, know.
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by RiverguyVT »

TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
BS how, exactly?
BS as a national security threat, or BS as a matter of corruption? If you're denying corruption, you are ignoring quite a bit.

As for the CFIUS, do you really think Clinton & Obama don't get acquiescence if they wanted it? Reeeeally?

I couldn't read your article, as it is pay-walled.

Here are some reasonable pieces, IMHO:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... l-security

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268169/ ... greenfield
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
User avatar
Major Kong
Posts: 15726
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:35 pm
Alma Mater: Ferrum VT ASU
Party: Independent
Location: Somewhere between Marion and Seven Mile Ford

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by Major Kong »

WAR Coles Hill :!: :D
I only post using 100% recycled electrons.

Image
HokieJoe
Posts: 13122
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 2:12 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Eclectic

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by HokieJoe »

TheH2 wrote:Russia has a ton of uranium that can be mined in their own country. Uranium is a commodity and Russia can buy and sell it (see Canada).
I hear Russia has lots of water resources. Hey, lets sell them some of our aquifers since they have so much of it! Russia's our friend! But wait, Trump is in office now though. No, no, they're not our friend...Russia's bad...Bad Russia!
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
User avatar
UpstateSCHokie
Posts: 11907
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 11:31 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by UpstateSCHokie »

Shep Smith could not even pronounce the names of those involved correctly. That guy has no credibility. Fox should have sent him packing years ago. He's nothing more than another unhinged Trump hater.

===========================================================


FACT-CHECK: Shep Smith’s Fake ‘Debunking’ of Uranium One Story Ends in Humiliation, Embarrassment
by Jerome Hudson15 Nov 20178,443

Fox News’ Shepard Smith drew applause from liberal media outlets Tuesday in a “fact check” marred with mispronunciations and misrepresentations.

Smith, one of Fox’s top liberals and who frequently opposes the network’s narratives, spoke at length on his show Shepard Smith Reports after Attorney General Jeff Sessions floated the idea of a special counsel to investigate recent revelations surrounding the 2010 partial sale of Canadian firm Uranium One to Russian energy giant Rosatom. The sale was approved by the Obama administration as it included the sale of 20 percent of U.S. uranium to the Russian giant.

In laying out the widely reported story, Smith mispronounced the name of the Canadian investor at the center of the scandal (calling him ‘Gweh-strah,’ then ‘Gwy-strah’ instead of the correct ‘Joo-strah’); the name of the government body that reviewed the deal (‘Si-fuhs’ instead of the correct ‘Sif-ee-us); and the name of a senior State Department official involved in the review (‘Fernando’ instead of the accurate ‘Fernandez’). Smith also incorrectly describes Uranium One is a South African company. It was Canadian and is now, in fact, a Russian state-owned company.

The details of the Uranium One story have received broad coverage from outlets such as the New York Times and considerable attention on Fox News, including a one-hour special hosted by Bret Baier which aired in 2015 on the release of the book Clinton Cash.

Among the many things Smith objected to was Clinton’s ability to influence the deal’s approval. “The Clinton State Department had no power to approve or veto that transaction. It could do neither,” he said.

He correctly states that it was CFIUS — the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States — that made the decision. CFIUS is a cabinet-level committee consisting of representatives from several Departments and Agencies, including the Secretaries of the Treasury, State, Defense, etc. Smith claims that State was only one member and that the real decision was the President’s. However, Smith’s claim is misleading. While the final decision technically rests with the White House, CFIUS traditionally, and as far as is publicly known, operates by unanimous consent. Crucially, any one member can block a transaction. Such a “veto” can only be undone by the President, though there is no known case of the President overruling CFIUS since the committee was set up in 1975. In short, the Clinton State Department had the power to effectively gut the deal.

Hillary Clinton, in particular, has a history of resisting these sorts of deals. In one high profile case, a Dubai-based company withdrew from a deal that would put it in charge of several major US ports after a major public outcry. Then-Senator Hillary Clinton was an outspoken critic of the deal and went so far as to co-author a bill blocking the sale. In the case of Uranium One, an objection from a sitting committee member would have been crippling for the deal.

It is only by ignoring this de facto veto that Smith can dismiss Clinton’s role in the approval. Of course, his overall point that her corruption is somehow less severe because she was only one vote is irrelevant to the allegation being made. The particular circumstances of the decision are irrelevant — bribery statutes apply no matter how close the vote.

Smith also claims that the majority of the donations to the Clinton Foundation came via Frank Giustra — a mining financier who sold his stake in the uranium company before it was sold and before Clinton became secretary of State. “The timing is inaccurate,” Smith complains.

But it is Smith who is being inaccurate. As noted in Clinton Cash and the New York Times, the Clintons helped Giustra acquire Kazakh uranium assets in 2005. Mukhtar Dzhakishev, then head of the Kazakh state nuclear agency, who met with the Clintons in Chappaqua, declared in 2010 that Hillary Clinton extorted and pressured Kazakh officials to grant those uranium concessions to Giustra. Shortly after they granted those concessions, $30 million was dropped into Clinton Foundation coffers by Giustra.

Smith never mentions any of this.


“The timing is inaccurate” only if you exclude key events.

Smith also fails to account for the fact that Uranium One’s Chairman Ian Telfer moved $2.3 million, much it undisclosed, to the Clinton Foundation as the deal was being reviewed by CFIUS. Furthermore, Smith falsely claims that the Clinton Foundation disclosed these donations to the charity but simply forgot to reveal the individual names of the donors. This is entirely false.

But Smith is not done excluding key facts which confirm the timing of funds flowing to the Clintons. Smith also strangely omits the $500,000 speaking fee Bill Clinton was paid by a Russian bank involved with Uranium One during the review process.

So, was Hillary Clinton involved in the Uranium One CFIUS review? Smith says we can take her word that she wasn’t and then trots out former Assistant Secretary of State Fernandez to say her hands are clean. Smith never bothers to describe to his audience who Fernandez actually is. A quick search of the Podesta emails on Wikileaks reveals him to be a Clinton partisan, writing to Podesta “I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign.” Those words were written less than a week before Fernandez first went public with his declaration of Clinton’s innocence. One would expect Fox News viewers to be interested in such information.

But Smith isn’t done with his misrepresentations or falsehoods. He then boldly declares that no uranium from Uranium One’s US mines has left the country. A simple look at reporting by the New York Times and The Hill reveals that, in fact, it has happened on multiple occasions. Again, one would expect this to be of interest to Fox News viewers.

Fact checks should include all major transactions that relate to the question at hand. One can only wonder why Shepard Smith decided to include misleading analysis while excluding central facts which run counter to the claims he is making.

You can watch Smith’s alleged debunking below:
http://www.breitbart.com/big-journalism ... rrassment/
Image

“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
User avatar
RiverguyVT
Posts: 30268
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:30 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by RiverguyVT »

TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.

That's not true at all, H2.
Not even close to being true.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by 133743Hokie »

RiverguyVT wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.

That's not true at all, H2.
Not even close to being true.
It does sound like any one of the participating organizations could have killed the approval, and that there is precedent for it having happened before. So the question is why didn't any of the entities veto it? Further, with the FBI aware of he Russia scheming as reported by the informant, why wasn't this grounds for killing the deal?
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

RiverguyVT wrote:
TheH2 wrote:I'm shocked. Shep Smith no less, he's better than this.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... 3f84234427

I've got to stop getting my news from UWS. Well ok, it's just this once. I'm back and all-in on UWS news.
BS how, exactly?
BS as a national security threat, or BS as a matter of corruption? If you're denying corruption, you are ignoring quite a bit.

As for the CFIUS, do you really think Clinton & Obama don't get acquiescence if they wanted it? Reeeeally?

I couldn't read your article, as it is pay-walled.

Here are some reasonable pieces, IMHO:

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/45 ... l-security

http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268169/ ... greenfield
Was it a national security threat, no. Given 1, was there a reason to stop the deal? If there is no reason to stop the deal then there is no reason for Clinton's involvement. The eye popping $145 million is wrong too. There is about as much there as the staffer being killed by Clinton. Even Sessions says there is nothing there. Sorry, I want to believe UWS news, it's been so accurate, but this one doesn't hold water.
People who know, know.
TheH2
Posts: 3168
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 1:06 pm

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by TheH2 »

133743Hokie wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.

That's not true at all, H2.
Not even close to being true.
It does sound like any one of the participating organizations could have killed the approval, and that there is precedent for it having happened before. So the question is why didn't any of the entities veto it? Further, with the FBI aware of he Russia scheming as reported by the informant, why wasn't this grounds for killing the deal?
What was the national security threat?
People who know, know.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: You mean uranium one is BS

Post by awesome guy »

TheH2 wrote:
133743Hokie wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
TheH2 wrote:
awesome guy wrote:It's hilarious watching you try and spin out of this. You're a fool that no speakith gooderly, all the while insulting me and others as having comprehension issues. So much hate and silliness.
She was not on the committee for the State Department. Even if she was, she COULD NOT HAVE APPROVED OR STOPPED THE SALE. That's all that matters.

That's not true at all, H2.
Not even close to being true.
It does sound like any one of the participating organizations could have killed the approval, and that there is precedent for it having happened before. So the question is why didn't any of the entities veto it? Further, with the FBI aware of he Russia scheming as reported by the informant, why wasn't this grounds for killing the deal?
What was the national security threat?
Put on your thinking cap, why would a nation want to keep control over it's own uranium ore? And why would a nation not want it's Secretary of State taking bribes?
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
Post Reply