Jeff Sessions and Prosecutors ask FBI agents for info on Uranium One deal
28 replies, posted
[quote]On the orders of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, Justice Department prosecutors have begun asking FBI agents to explain the evidence they found in a now dormant criminal investigation into a controversial uranium deal that critics have linked to Bill and Hillary Clinton, multiple law enforcement officials told NBC News.
The interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department's effort to fulfill a promise an assistant attorney general made to Congress last month to examine whether a special counsel was warranted to look into what has become known as the Uranium One deal, a senior Justice Department official said.
At issue is a 2010 transaction in which the Obama Administration allowed the sale of U.S. uranium mining facilities to Russia's state atomic energy company. Hillary Clinton was secretary of state at the time, and the State Department was one of nine agencies that agreed to approve the deal after finding no threat to U.S. national security.
A senior law enforcement official who was briefed on the initial FBI investigation told NBC News there were allegations of corruption surrounding the process under which the U.S. government approved the sale. But no charges were filed.
As the New York Times reported in April 2015, some of the people associated with the deal contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation. And Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 for a Moscow speech by a Russian investment bank with links to the transaction.
Hillary Clinton has denied playing any role in the decision by the State Department to approve the sale, and the State Department official who approved it has said Clinton did not intervene in the matter. That hasn't stopped some Republicans, including President Trump, from calling the arrangement corrupt — and urging that Clinton be investigated.
In a letter to Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs Stephen Boyd said Justice Department lawyers would make recommendations to Sessions about whether an investigation should be opened or expanded, or whether a special counsel should be appointed to probe a number of issues of concern to Republicans.
In recent weeks, FBI agents who investigated the case have been asked by Justice Department prosecutors to describe the results of their probe. The agents also have been asked if there was any improper effort to squash a prosecution, the law enforcement sources say.
The senior Justice Department official said the questions were part of an effort by the Sessions team to get up to speed on the controversial case, in the face of allegations from Congressional Republicans that it was mishandled.
...[/quote]
[url]https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/prosecutors-ask-fbi-agents-info-uranium-one-deal-n831436[/url]
"Hey! Look over here!"
I want to get off Mr. Republican's BUT HILLARY! ride
This just reeks of desperation
It seems like "mishandled" is just shorthand for "not exploited for our political gain".
[URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WkFsgU_WLko"]FBI should just send this video in response[/URL]
[I]Distract, Deflect, Deny![/I]
Oh what I would give to get a peek into ol' Bob Mueller's briefcase right about now...
But the accusations are based on complete falsehoods? Why would the FBI investigate an alleged crime if the alleged improprieties are functionally impossible? I know the GOP loves this BUT HILLARY whataboutism to deflect from the shit that they're pulling, but they're accusing her of crimes that she was fundamentally incapable of committing. None of the details in these accusations are supported by reality.
The money Clinton allegedly received came from a man who hadn't been connected with the commission for years, Hillary had no control over the actual approval process (unanimously approved by nine different agencies, which Clinton had no purview over), and even the accusation that she sold Uranium to Russia is fundamentally wrong, as what was sold were shares of a Uranium mining company -- of which all the Uranium mined remains in North America for non-military usage.
Basically, every part of this accusation is simply not true or possible. It's a manufactured controversy. I'm all for the FBI investigating corruption, regardless of what party is under the microscope, but when the alleged corruption is based on abjectly [I]wrong[/I] information, how could it be anything other than a waste of time, money, resources, and manpower?
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52995003]But the accusations are based on complete falsehoods? Why would the FBI investigate an alleged crime if the alleged improprieties are functionally impossible? I know the GOP loves this BUT HILLARY whataboutism to deflect from the shit that they're pulling, but they're accusing her of crimes that she was fundamentally incapable of committing. None of the details in these accusations are supported by reality.
The money Clinton allegedly received came from a man who hadn't been connected with the commission for years, Hillary had no control over the actual approval process (unanimously approved by nine different agencies, which Clinton had no purview over), and even the accusation that she sold Uranium to Russia is fundamentally wrong, as what was sold were shares of a Uranium mining company -- of which all the Uranium mined remains in North America for non-military usage.
Basically, every part of this accusation is simply not true or possible. It's a manufactured controversy. I'm all for the FBI investigating corruption, regardless of what party is under the microscope, but when the alleged corruption is based on abjectly [I]wrong[/I] information, how [b]could it be anything other than a waste of time, money, resources, and manpower?[/b][/QUOTE]
Sounds like perfect Republican policy then.
Clinton had nothing to do with it my man
This is basically a non-story to deflect, as always. Who even cares anymore besides the idiots who still support Trump?
[key-jingling intensifies]
Plain old political theater. Couldn't stick hill-dog with a crime the first 8 investigations, what's one more giant waste of time and resources courtesy of D-money?
Tudd, do you agree that if Trump or the GOP moves to halt this investigation, that it would be a severe constitutional crisis?
You ask that like you think he's going to actually respond to someone questioning him :v:
Question: could the state department actually stop the sale
No: stop investigating hillary fucking clinton then and let her die in peace.
Didn't Fox n Friends debunk Uranium One
[QUOTE=Saxon;52996179]Didn't Fox n Friends debunk Uranium One[/QUOTE]
Shep Smith did.
Conservatives don't like him though.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;52995003]But the accusations are based on complete falsehoods? Why would the FBI investigate an alleged crime if the alleged improprieties are functionally impossible? I know the GOP loves this BUT HILLARY whataboutism to deflect from the shit that they're pulling, but they're accusing her of crimes that she was fundamentally incapable of committing. None of the details in these accusations are supported by reality.
The money Clinton allegedly received came from a man who hadn't been connected with the commission for years, Hillary had no control over the actual approval process (unanimously approved by nine different agencies, which Clinton had no purview over), and even the accusation that she sold Uranium to Russia is fundamentally wrong, as what was sold were shares of a Uranium mining company -- of which all the Uranium mined remains in North America for non-military usage.
Basically, every part of this accusation is simply not true or possible. It's a manufactured controversy. I'm all for the FBI investigating corruption, regardless of what party is under the microscope, but when the alleged corruption is based on abjectly [I]wrong[/I] information, how could it be anything other than a waste of time, money, resources, and manpower?[/QUOTE]
Remember the Ground Zero Mosque, which wasn't at Ground Zero and wasn't a mosque, but they still got everyone to refer to it as the Ground Zero Mosque?
The Republican Machine is fantastic at getting people to repeat lies.
[media]https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/943881108810293249[/media]
Love to criticize the libs for not covering a story while citing a story from NBC news
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52996518][media]https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/943881108810293249[/media]
Love to criticize the libs for not covering a story while citing a story from NBC news[/QUOTE]
NBC's twitter staffers need to be cleared to respond with 'Hey dumbass, [I]we wrote and published the article you're linking[/I]'
[QUOTE=Saxon;52996179]Didn't Fox n Friends debunk Uranium One[/QUOTE]
The News portion of Fox News, not the opinion portion that's 90% of their programming.
Cool. More political theater.
[QUOTE=Sableye;52996590]The News portion of Fox News, not the opinion portion that's 90% of their programming.[/QUOTE]
Or Shepard Smith, tbh. Even their news isn't entirely sane given they still give that fuckwit piece of trash Hannity goddamn screentime. Shep Smith is pretty much the only anchor they have with a lick of integrity.
[QUOTE=paindoc;52996654]Or Shepard Smith, tbh. Even their news isn't entirely sane given they still give that fuckwit piece of trash Hannity goddamn screentime. Shep Smith is pretty much the only anchor they have with a lick of integrity.[/QUOTE]
Could've sworn they had another one that aligned very much with Shep, can't remember his name though. The older gentleman with glasses.
[QUOTE=Zero-Point;52996772]Could've sworn they had another one that aligned very much with Shep, can't remember his name though. The older gentleman with glasses.[/QUOTE]
[URL="https://www.google.com/search?q=chris+wallace"]Chris Wallace[/URL]
[QUOTE=paindoc;52996654]Or Shepard Smith, tbh. Even their news isn't entirely sane given they still give that fuckwit piece of trash Hannity goddamn screentime. Shep Smith is pretty much the only anchor they have with a lick of integrity.[/QUOTE]
Shep Smith is *the* anchor, the rest of the programming is literally talk shows masquerading as news. What's ironic (or maybe not) is that a lot of Fox viewers (and pundits before and after his slot) hate his guts.
So Jeff Sessions recused him self of Investigating H.Clinton. He now wants to investigate H.Clinton. People say that's called Lying under Oath
Tu Quoque logical fallacies? In [i]my[/i] conservative government? It's more likely than you think!
[QUOTE=Lambeth;52996518][media]https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/943881108810293249[/media]
Love to criticize the libs for not covering a story while citing a story from NBC news[/QUOTE]
Sean. Dude.
Even your own news anchor pointed out your stupid. Just stop.
[video=youtube;kWIT7yydp4A]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWIT7yydp4A[/video]
[QUOTE=elfbarf;52997599][URL="https://www.google.com/search?q=chris+wallace"]Chris Wallace[/URL][/QUOTE]
Jon Stewart once commented on how Chris Wallace provides Fox with credibility they otherwise wouldn't have.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.