Welcome to the Utopia Forums! Register a new account
The current time is Thu Mar 28 19:18:12 2024

Utopia Talk / Politics / Sessions May Assign Special Consul To
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 05:27:44

Clinton.


Sessions directs prosecutors to 'evaluate certain issues' involving Uranium One and Clinton, leaves door open on special counsel

By Brooke Singman | Fox News


EXCLUSIVE – Attorney General Jeff Sessions directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate “certain issues” requested by congressional Republicans, involving the sale of Uranium One and alleged unlawful dealings related to the Clinton Foundation, leaving the door open for an appointment of another special counsel.

In a letter first obtained by Fox News, the Justice Department responded to July 27 and September 26 requests from House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., and other committee members, who called for the appointment of a special counsel to investigate the matters in question.

The letter comes on the eve of Sessions’ testimony before the same committee, scheduled for Tuesday.

“The Attorney General has directed senior federal prosecutors to evaluate certain issues raised in your letters,” Assistant Attorney General Stephen Boyd wrote.

“These senior prosecutors will report directly to the Attorney General and the Deputy Attorney General [Rod Rosenstein], as appropriate, and will make recommendations as to whether any matters not currently under investigation should be opened, whether any matters currently under investigation require further resources, or whether any matters merit the appointment of a Special Counsel,” Boyd wrote.

The Justice Department does not ordinarily confirm or deny investigations, and Boyd wrote that “this letter should not be construed to do so.”

The Justice Department’s letter specifically said that some of the topics requested by Goodlatte and other committee members were already being investigated by the department’s Inspector General’s office.

The letter specifically mentioned allegations related to the FBI’s handling of the Clinton email probe, including allegations that DOJ and FBI “policies or procedures” were “not followed in connection with, or in actions leading up to or related to” then-FBI Director James Comey’s public announcement to close the Clinton email “matter” on July 5, 2016, or the letter he sent lawmakers on October 28, 2016, about newly discovered Clinton emails, and that those “investigative decisions were based on improper considerations.”

“The Department has forwarded a copy of your letters to the IG so he can determine whether he should expand the scope of his investigation based on the information contained in those letters,” Boyd wrote. “Once the IG’s review is complete, the Department will assess what, if any, additional steps are necessary to address any issues identified by that review.”

While the Justice Department did not confirm or deny an ongoing investigation into Clinton matters, administration officials pointed Fox News to the attorney general’s testimony at his confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee in January, raising questions over whether he would recuse himself from this investigation.

“With regard to Secretary Clinton and some of the comments I made, I do believe that that could place my objectivity in question,” Sessions said in response to committee Chairman Chuck Grassley’s, R-Iowa, asking whether he could approach a Clinton investigation “impartially.” Sessions added at the time, “I believe the proper thing for me to do would be to recuse myself from any questions involving those kind of investigations that involve Secretary Clinton and that were raised during the campaign or to be otherwise connected to it.”

Former FBI Director Robert Mueller was appointed in May as a special counsel to investigate accusations of collusion between Russia and officials close to President Trump.

Fox News' Jake Gibson contributed to this report.


http://www...e-uranium-one-and-clinton.html

CrownRoyal
Member
Tue Nov 14 06:22:30
It was surprising that they didn't appoint a special council to investigate the hilary pizza-pedophile ring
hood
Member
Tue Nov 14 07:28:57
"How can we milk the retards for more support over complete bullshit? Hmm.....

OH RIGHT, HILLARY! They love a good Hillary shitfest, don't even care how pointless it is or how much money we waste."
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 07:34:22

She is one helluva lot more guilty than Trump ever was or will be.

Rugian
Member
Tue Nov 14 08:07:09
"Sessions May Assign Special Consul To"

I've heard Cato the Elder would be a good choice. Cicero is also an option but frankly he has a small problem with respecting due process. Whatever they do they'd better not go with Marius, it's always tempting to pick him but he'll end up being a major headache by the end.
patom
Member
Tue Nov 14 09:08:11
The trials of Hillary chapter XXIV?

Let's see now, the Republicans have tried to repeal the ACA for almost 8 years. Granted the first 30 or so times they were blocked by an Obama veto. But hey!!! They now have control of all 3 branches of Govt. What happens? Well doh. They have neglected to do the work of forming a replacement that even remotely serves the citizens of this country as well (even though flawed) as the ACA.

Does anyone here think that this group of no nothings that currently have the reigns of power in DC are capable of actually bringing forth enough evidence and putting that evidence together in an orderly manner. That will convince a Jury that Hillary Clinton is guilty of High Crimes?

Hell, these clowns would fuck up a soup sandwich.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 09:43:42
so we are now trying to find 3-5 million fraud voters that there is literally no evidence exist, & also tie HIllary to a deal 7 years ago that we already know she was barely involved with because... Trump
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 11:24:40

Well, the current Consul is doing a pretty good job on what some of Trump's campaign people did some years before the campaign.

Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 11:28:06

My question is, why did nine Americans, delegated with the power to do so, sign over 20% of our uranium to the Russians.

I wonder, are they really Americans?

Why did the do it?

Why?

Wrath of Orion
Member
Tue Nov 14 11:44:44
My question is, why has Pedo Rod not been arrested for his crimes against children yet.

I wonder, is he really American?

Why did he do it?

Why?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 12:03:24
just going from memory, i'm going to say the Russians didn't get 20% of our uranium as you would think from watching Fox News... a Russian company bought control of a company w/ a uranium mine in the USA, and doesn't have an export license... i'm unaware of any claim they've gotten any uranium to Russia

feel free to prove me wrong... especially using Trump's massive knowledge of the subject...
Delude
Member
Tue Nov 14 13:17:25
Let us not forget this was a Canadian company this was purchased from...
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 13:18:16
Sessions has been testifying again all day

he just fucked over a Republican hack questioner :p the guy was trying to make something about Loretta Lynch using a pseudonym & he answered that he has one as well & believed standard policy & questioner quickly says 'i'm no longer interested in that' :p


all the R's want special counsels for Uranium One & the Dossier, yadda yadda... all the D's going after the Russian connections as usual
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 13:25:31
"Let us not forget this was a Canadian company this was purchased from... "

true

and if the deal really was a threat to our national security (as noted by various people like Seb Gorka who suggested Hillary be executed over it) why did it take 7 years to notice the threat, why wasn't the mine seized by our gov't before, & why no calls to seize it now
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 13:57:14

LOL@woo.

See how silly he can be when it comes to matters of National Security.

He certainly seems to have lost all touch with reality.

Maybe he will become more mature when he gets out of grade school.




tw, I have heard that it has been smuggled out of the country. I have not verified it. It was just spot on the TV.

Forwyn
Member
Tue Nov 14 14:04:39
People were bringing up U1 years ago.

http://www...l-of-uranium-company.html?_r=1
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 14:05:05
why hasn't Trump 'eminent domain'd the mine? ... like he tried to do to that old woman's home to put in his limo garage...
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 14:08:34
"People were bringing up U1 years ago. "

yes, which suggests any investigating that needed done has been done... plus the idea of it being a threat to our national security seems new
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 14:22:21

I know that common sense is alien to you.

But please explain why would Russia give $145 Million to the Clinton charity and pay Bill $500,000.00 for a short speech if the uranium was not going to leave the country?

Why.

swordtail
Anarchist Prime
Tue Nov 14 14:28:19
why?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 14:38:16
wow... Bill got $500k so Russia must've be getting the uranium out?

as to the charity money... via Snopes:
"
Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state.
"

this is what it says about Bill
"
The timing of Telfer’s Clinton Foundation donations and Bill Clinton’s Renaissance Capital speaking fee might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all. Moreover, neither Clinton nor her department possessed sole power of approval over said transaction.
"

why it's clear she had little power:
"
All nine federal agencies and the Utah Division of Radiation Control were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton “never intervened” in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn’t personally involved.
"
http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/

and if going to say Snopes is Fake News, then provide actual evidence beyond 'there's some money so she must be guilty'


for the record, i'd be happy if Hillary reported to jail tomorrow, so Trump & Fox can shut the hell up about her

Fox already calls this a 'scandal' with no actual wrongdoing shown (same as Benghazi)... w/ a special counsel we'd get probably another 2 years of that... then when they find nothing, it will be called rigged
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 14:40:21
i trimmed off some of Snopes article to keep the long post from being longer, feel free to read it all if you want more about the charity money and who all needed to approve the deal etc.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 14:46:19
...and if uranium is being smuggled out... it's probably with Trump's help given his man-love for Putin

or, if not w/ his help, then maybe he'll FINALLY have a single complaint about Russia? (although we can expect he'd only blame barely-related Hillary for allowing them to smuggle it rather than any fault on their part)

...not that i believe you have a credible source on the smuggling
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 15:37:35

You people are just plain sick.

You know how to tell when a liberal is lying? Their lips are moving and sound is coming out.


Why did Frank Giustra give $131.3 Million to Clinton's charity? Why did Russia get the company for a mere $13.7 Million? Ever heard of money laundering?

If Snope is correct then why does The United States Attorney General's office have a Senior Federal Prosecutor looking into the matter with a General Counsel on the table to carry on an in-depth investigation if necessary?


I will never get a common sense discussion from you people so I will wait to see how it comes out in the wash.


I just don't understand how you people can stand by and watch, no I mean help, the left destroy America and the Freedoms she stands for,

Idiots.

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 15:47:36
"Frank Giustra (born August 1957) is a Canadian businessman, mining financier and philanthropist, who also founded Lionsgate Entertainment."
- wikipedia

so he's no longer connected to the company, & not a Russian, yet his donation to a charity proves he wanted the Russians to get uranium which they haven't even gotten

but go ahead and investigate, as long as everyone promises to accept the results... Trump always accepts results he doesn't like, right?
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 15:48:50
"Why did Russia get the company for a mere $13.7 Million? "

i have no idea what this even means or if true... but they bought up 51% of the company... the price can have literally nothing to do with Hillary
Paramount
Member
Tue Nov 14 15:59:34
This is fake news.
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 16:25:00
here's one of the few decent person on Fox News explaining the whole thing very well
http://video.foxnews.com/v/5646426075001/?#sp=show-clips
not sure if Fox News let this piece air or just have it on the website where few will see :p
as it shoots holes in all of the nonsense
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 16:37:28

The Clinton charity received $145 Million.

$131.3 from Frank Giustra which leaves 13.7 Million coming from Russia going to the Clinton charity. Of course, there was a public price the Russians probably paid but I have not heard anything about that.

You can bet the finances are more twisted than an octopus' pretzel.

Let's wait and see how it turns out.


-30-

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 16:43:06
watch the link i posted above, it's Fox News so you should accept it

and if one Canadian philanthropist gives $131 million to a charity, not sure how 8 other people giving a combined $13 million is instantly suspicious (& Snopes notes only 1 was in the time-frame of the deal)

more importantly you have yet to offer any explanation of how Hillary managed to get the other 8 agencies to go along
Hot Rod
Revved Up
Tue Nov 14 16:48:48

I did.

It happened on Obama's watch.

And I asked you the question, do you think Obama had a hand in all of the scandals in his administration or do you think he was just too stupid to know what was going on?

tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 16:52:17
you'll have to list the supposed scandals... i doubt we will agree on it, as presumably this deal is a 'scandal' to you for example
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 17:11:15
right at start of tumbleweed’s fox news video it says it was supplying 20% of usa uranium production when it was bought but is now down to 11%.. and later in the video it says 89%of usa uranium comes from foreign sources

leftists won’t be happy until clintons are doubly bribed with $300 million and russia [using bribes and extortion] has sabotaged usa uranium to being 100% dependent on foreign sources

and then there’s hillary illegally hiring foreign agent to illegally collude with russians to create peepee smear dossier for campaign and illegally lying about it to fcc and others

lock her up already
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 17:12:38
*fec
Trolly
Member
Tue Nov 14 17:47:26
oh werewolf dicktaster.
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 17:58:05
there needs to be special prosecutor for all the people under obama who sold usa out to the russians starting with obama himself

http://the...commodation-of-vladimir-putin/

we know hillary’s husband took 5x facebook ads amount as bribe and the clintons together took another 1450x in bribes for uranium one corruption.. probably just the tip of iceberg for democrats under obama
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:00:59
good example how much democrats as whole sold usa down river to putin’s mercy under obama’s corrupt bribed administration

http://twitter.com/TheDemocrats/status/260497619862835201

werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:01:53
[linked video is even worse than democratic treasonous text in that tweet]
Trolly
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:04:59
oh werewolf dicktaster
tumbleweed
the wanderer
Tue Nov 14 18:06:49
well 90% of that 'bribe' came from an unrelated Canadian... not sure who the other 8 charitable givers were, but wouldn't be surprised if several/all were not Russian either (as they were only described as Uranium One investors)

and Hillary had at most a 1/9th role in approving the deal (possibly none, seen no evidence she involved herself at all)

very weak case here so far
delude
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:14:22
The Uranium One deal was not Clinton’s to veto or approve
 
Among the ways these accusations stray from the facts is in attributing a power of veto or approval to Secretary Clinton that she simply did not have. Clinton was one of nine cabinet members and department heads that sit on the CFIUS, and the secretary of the treasury is its chairperson. CFIUS members are collectively charged with evaluating proposed foreign acquisitions for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. 
All nine federal agencies and the Utah Division of Radiation Control were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton “never intervened” in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn’t personally involved.evaluating proposed foreign acquisitions for potential national security issues, then turning their findings over to the president. By law, the committee can’t veto a transaction; only the president can. 
All nine federal agencies and the Utah Division of Radiation Control were required to approve the Uranium One transaction before it could go forward. According to The New York Times, Clinton may not have even directly participated in the decision. Then-Assistant Secretary of State Jose Fernandez, whose job it was to represent the State Dept. on CFIUS, said Clinton “never intervened” in committee matters. Clinton herself has said she wasn’t personally involved.

Despite transfer of ownership, the uranium remained in the U.S.
A key fact ignored in criticisms of Clinton’s supposed involvement in the deal is that the uranium was not — nor could it be — exported, and remained under the control of U.S.-based subsidiaries of Uranium One, according to a statement by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
NRC’s review of the transfer of control request determined that the U.S. subsidiaries will
remain the licensees, will remain qualified to conduct the uranium recovery operations, and will continue to have the equipment, facilities, and procedures necessary to protect public health and safety and to minimize danger to life or property. The review also determined that the licensees will maintain adequate financial surety for eventual decommissioning of the sites. Neither Uranium One nor ARMZ holds an NRC export license, so no uranium produced at either facility may be exported.

The timing of most of the donations does not match
 
Of the $145 million allegedly contributed to the Clinton Foundation by Uranium One investors, the lion’s share — $131.3 million — came from a single donor, Frank Giustra, the company’s Canadian founder. But Giustra sold off his entire stake in the company in 2007, three years before the Russia deal and at least 18 months before Clinton became secretary of state. 
Of the remaining individuals connected with Uranium One who donated to the Clinton Foundation, only one was found to have contributed during the same time frame that the deal was taking place, according to The New York Times — Ian Telfer (also a Canadian), the company’s chairman:
His donations through the Fernwood Foundation included $1 million reported in 2009, the year his company appealed to the American Embassy to help it keep its mines in Kazakhstan; $250,000 in 2010, the year the Russians sought majority control; as well as $600,000 in 2011 and $500,000 in 2012. Mr. Telfer said that his donations had nothing to do with his business dealings, and that he had never discussed Uranium One with Mr. or Mrs. Clinton. He said he had given the money because he wanted to support Mr. Giustra’s charitable endeavors with Mr. Clinton. “Frank and I have been friends and business partners for almost 20 years,” he said. 
In addition to the Clinton Foundation donations, the New York Times also cited a $500,000 speaking fee paid to former president Bill Clinton by a Russian investment bank in June 2010, before the Uranium One deal was approved:

The $500,000 fee — among Mr. Clinton’s highest — was paid by Renaissance Capital, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin that has invited world leaders, including Tony Blair, the former British prime minister, to speak at its investor conferences.
Renaissance Capital analysts talked up Uranium One’s stock, assigning it a “buy” rating and saying in a July 2010 research report that it was “the best play” in the uranium markets.
The timing of Telfer’s Clinton Foundation donations and Bill Clinton’s Renaissance Capital speaking fee might be questionable if there was reason to believe that Hillary Clinton was instrumental in the approval of the deal with Russia, but all the evidence points to the contrary — that Clinton did not play a pivotal role, and, in fact, may not have played any role at all. Moreover, neither Clinton nor her department possessed sole power of approval over said transaction.

On 17 October 2017, The Hill reported obtaining evidence that Vadim Mikerin, a Russian official who oversaw the American operations of the Russian nuclear agency Rosatom, was being investigated for corruption by multiple U.S. agencies while the Uranium One deal was up for approval — information that apparently was not shared with U.S. officials involved in approving the transaction. The Hill also reported receiving documents and eyewitness testimony “indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow,” although no specifics about who those Russian nuclear officials were or how the money was allegedly routed to the Clinton Foundation were given. In any case, none of these revelations prove that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton participated in a quid pro quo agreement to accept payment for approval of the Uranium One deal.
On 24 October 2017, the U.S. House intelligence and oversight committees announced the launch of a joint investigation into the circumstances surrounding the Russian purchase of Uranium One.

http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-uranium-russia-deal/
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:28:44
“hillary wasn’t only person under obama who sold usa out to putin”
~democrats
Trolly
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:31:45
Oh werewolf dicktaster
werewolf dictator
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:32:57
just look at these democrat traitors who sold usa out to putin

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QS2a44F5TgM

clintons just by themselves got over $145 million in bribes and got away with it safely.. special prosecutor is needed to find out how much rest of these democrat traitors got
Trolly
Member
Tue Nov 14 18:33:39
Oh werewolf dicktaster
show deleted posts

Your Name:
Your Password:
Your Message:
Bookmark and Share