Cdub100 3,384 Posted October 17, 2017 http://archive.is/K8XvP Probably deserves it's own thread. This is nasty stuff right here. I wonder if this is what Obama meant when he told the Russian ambassador he'd have more flexibility after the election. Of course this comes as no suprise to anyone paying attention. Supposedly this is part 1 of a report on criminal activity. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cbfalcon 824 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Hand 482 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings. Typical thinking of a liberal. Do whatever it takes to go into denial. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NorthernVike 2,080 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings. Holy deflection Batman. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings.wait don't you believe the fake news pee pee story ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Djgb13 2,338 Posted October 17, 2017 Holy deflection Batman. Tell me about it. Jesus Chrysler that was a retard move if I've ever seen one 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/10/17/report-russians-used-bribes-sought-to-pad-clinton-charity-amid-obama-era-push-to-expand-us-nuclear-footprint.html Another link from Foxnews. It's just as we thought with the Clintons; sell OUR souls/country for $$. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
giraldi02 470 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings. The Hill is a pretty respectable source of information as it pertains to DC... http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2017 Turns out there was collusion after all, the liberal hack media and the hacks in Washington just got the parties involved mixed up. Where's snuffles and Mikey on this ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,594 Posted October 17, 2017 It is concerning that Russia is trying to inflitrate our government and sow discord among Americans. I would hope that we would eventually get over the cold war and start working with them. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 Hey look! a lot of the aggregator sites have fact checking built into them now! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 Hey look! a lot of the aggregator sites have fact checking built into them now! Let Snopes know. They're under the assumption you prove one facet of something as false or unproven, you label the whole thing as false. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Cdub100 3,384 Posted October 17, 2017 There is no sense in considering whether or not this is true......as you also believe Obama is ok risking his daughter to rape and you believe Greg Popovich is involved in child sex rings. Why are you lying. I never said it was ok to risk his daughter to a rapist. But the Obama's still sent their daughter to intern for democrat donor harvey wienstien knowing his history of sexual abuse. You're the knew lying slownutt. Congrats liar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 TypicalTrumptard: "Gosh, this Russia Trump thing has gone on for 4 months - NOTHING TO SEE HERE! GAAAAAWWWD,WOULD JUST JUST LET IT GO ALREADY??" Meanwhile, HRC hasn't been SOS in FIVE YEARS. The deal? SEVEN YEARS! ...But hey, keep swinging. I'm sure that Vince Foster Angle is going to pay off any day now too. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 n 2010, Hillary Clinton, as secretary of state, was one of nine federal agency heads to sign off on Russia’s purchase of a controlling stake in Uranium One, an international mining company headquartered in Canada with operations in several U.S. states. It was part of a regular process for approving international deals involving strategic assets, such as uranium, that could have implications for national security. Uranium One’s U.S. mines produced about 11 percent of the country’s total uranium production in 2014, according to Oilprice.com. But even with its control of Uranium One, Russia cannot export the material from the United States. Russia was likely more interested in Uranium One’s assets in Kazakhstan - Facts - totally unnecessary - and unwanted in Trump's Amurica. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 some investors with an interest in making the Uranium One deal go through have a long-time relationship with Bill Clinton and have donated to the Clinton Foundation. But there’s no concrete evidence those relationships or donations helped make the deal go through. Most of the donations occurred before Hillary Clinton could have known she would become secretary of state. And again, the secretary of state was one of nine agency heads that had input into the final decision, - Soo, seems like a good idea to suss out when these supposed 'bribes' were given. Short of hiriging a psychic.. As for Bill getting a speaking fee? He routinely commands speaking fees all over the world. Including one for hundreds of thousands of dollars from a Swedish Telecomm firm. - Was this pay for the screaming hot Swedish Television Programming in the US? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 The Bill and Hillary Clinton deal "allowed big Uranium to go to Russia."on (Trumps) Twitter – Monday, March 27, 2017 Now, given what we've seen with health care, tax reform, the iran deal, etc. to his (backhanded) credit, it is getting more and more difficult to suss out whether Trump truly beleives the Tropes trotted out by sources such as Fox and Brietbart, Doesn't understand the fact patterns behind them, or simply lies - counting on his rabid fans to eschew the most basic facts and truth. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 Lock her up! Jeff Sessions is the AG and Donald Trump is the President. They can start as of last January. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release Wikileaks = 100% correct on their releases. Swing and a wiff by Giants fan. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release Wikileaks = 100% correct on their releases. Swing and a wiff by Giants fan. You're citing Wikileaks to claim that that Wikileaks is correct? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BLS 313 Posted October 17, 2017 How about we remove the partisan part of the story and come the realization that Russia is bribing (apparently successfully) our own government officials. Is that not damning enough for you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
drobeski 3,061 Posted October 17, 2017 This has to be something, wiff has gone into full tilt defend his girl mode. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 http://archive.is/K8XvP Probably deserves it's own thread. This is nasty stuff right here. I wonder if this is what Obama meant when he told the Russian ambassador he'd have more flexibility after the election. Of course this comes as no suprise to anyone paying attention. Supposedly this is part 1 of a report on criminal activity. Its many twist and turns aside, the FBI nuclear industry case proved a gold mine, in part because it uncovered a new Russian money laundering apparatus that routed bribe and kickback payments through financial instruments in Cyprus, Latvia and Seychelles. A Russian financier in New Jersey was among those arrested for the money laundering, court records show. - Seems important. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 You're citing Wikileaks to claim that that Wikileaks is correct? No; that is the break down of the Uranium One deal. Clicking on the link would reveal that though. I added that part of Wikileaks track record to forego those that question the source of the Uranium One info. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 How about we remove the partisan part of the story and come the realization that Russia is bribing (apparently successfully) our own government officials. Is that not damning enough for you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release Wikileaks = 100% correct on their releases. Swing and a wiff by Giants fan. Ah, thanks, this is the WL Blog. They get stuff wrong all the time. The documents speak for themselves. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release Wikileaks = 100% correct on their releases. Swing and a wiff by Giants fan. In April 2015 the New York Times published a story about a company called "Uranium One" which was sold to Russian government-controlled interests, giving Russia effective control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. WL starts out by referencing a story that the NYT broke. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MTSkiBum 1,594 Posted October 17, 2017 How about we remove the partisan part of the story and come the realization that Russia is bribing (apparently successfully) our own government officials. Is that not damning enough for you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Strike 3,980 Posted October 17, 2017 WL starts out by referencing a story that the NYT broke. You do know that this thread has NOTHING to do with Wikileaks, don't you? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 You're citing Wikileaks to claim that that Wikileaks is correct? The bible is the 100% undisputed Word of God! how do you know? ...the BIBLE TELL ME SO! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 Ah, thanks, this is the WL Blog. They get stuff wrong all the time. The documents speak for themselves. Link? The paper trail speaks for itself too. Only a hack would dismiss the evidence against her 'Pay for Play' time in SOS and afterward. It's the very reason why she had the private email server to forego oversight. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 The bible is the 100% undisputed Word of God! how do you know? ...the BIBLE TELL ME SO! Jump on that bandwagon even if it's wrong GF........ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 "They (FBI) also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — 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, sources told The Hill. The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later. Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions. The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply." http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release Wikileaks = 100% correct on their releases. Wow. This is a tragic combination. I'll bite for a minute: Swing and a wiff by Giants fan. 1) the link - despite it's title -isn't 'wikileaks' - it is a synopsis - a summary of the supposed actual leaks. So, depending upon who's reading/writing what with what agenda - they could easily say "Canada controls 80% of the worlds uranium!" - Not true, but neither is the other line. - You 'get' that right? There's no actual leaked document that says the things you think they say. 2) Sounds like somebody rounded up - at best- there is not mention of 20% - except in the synopsis. 3) They KEY here for the Dolts like you is pretty simple - and relies upon ONE ting only: YOU (and mouth-breathers like you) don't understand the difference between a financial interest in a company and it's underlying inventory - or potential found reserves. Let me 'splain; If Warren Buffet owns 20% of Wendy's stock, he can't walk in and demand 20% of the meat patties. Now, to further that simplicity: There's a FEDERAL LAW that precludes Russia from exporting those 'meat patties'. So, in short, not only do they not control the inventory, they can't move, possess or otherwise F with the 'meat patties'. It's really not that hard. But things like this rely upon the stupidity of their consumer. - Who desperately WANTS it to be true. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr. Hand 482 Posted October 17, 2017 So cbfalcon is sho nuff? The guy that whines like a school girl about aliases. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 No; that is the break down of the Uranium One deal. Clicking on the link would reveal that though. I added that part of Wikileaks track record to forego those that question the source of the Uranium One info. - Would you actually read that thing? It points out that the NYT broke the story. - The NEW YORK TIMES. And the fact that Jose Fernandez (any relation?) helped Hillary was public knowledge. So what exactly did WL reveal that wasn't known before? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SaintsInDome2006 128 Posted October 17, 2017 You do know that this thread has NOTHING to do with Wikileaks, don't you? I would agree, please tell Mr. Fernandez. If he agrees on that point I certainly do. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Filthy Fernadez 2,696 Posted October 17, 2017 "They (FBI) also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — 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, sources told The Hill. The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later. Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions. The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply." http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/355749-fbi-uncovered-russian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration Posted again for Saints/wiff Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wiffleball 4,647 Posted October 17, 2017 I think somebody doesn't understand what a kickback is - or how it works: The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later. - Much less the concept of 'racketeering.' That's like three entirely different fact patterns in one muddled mess. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites