Did You Know...


Chairman of uber-populist Dem candidate’s campaign wants you to trust word of corporate billionaire just this once

By Doug Powers  •  April 23, 2015 10:09 PM

**Written by Doug Powers

By now you might have already heard about Uranium One, which was a deal involving Canadian businessman Frank Giustra and Russia that just coincidentally took place when Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State while the Clinton Foundation was raking in foreign donations that they just coincidentally forgot to report on their tax filings:

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Enter longtime Clinton scandal snuffer and current chairman of Hillary 2016 John Podesta, who doesn’t like the Times’ report (you know Team Hillary’s in trouble when their main opponent right now is the New York Times).

Hillary has reportedly talked about the necessity of “toppling the one percent” if the country (or maybe the world) is to survive, but just this one time Podesta would like everybody to take the word of a corporate billionaire:

Talk about selective class warfare.

Here’s the start of the Giustra statement [emphasis not mine]:

A book that has not yet been published has caused the New York Times to publish a wildly speculative, innuendo-laced article about the Clinton Foundation and my role in contributing money to it. There is not one shred of evidence to back up the Times‘ conclusions. This is not about me, but rather an attempt to tear down Secretary Clinton and her presidential campaign. If this is what passes for investigative journalism in the United States, it is very sad.

Next thing you know the New York Times will blame Benghazi on a video or something totally irresponsible like that! How many times does Hillary have to delete her emails and trash her private server to prove that there’s nothing crooked going on here?

As a side note, here’s a nice high kick finish that just reeks of “Clinton”:

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

Maybe Podesta can produce a Russian billionaire with ties to the Clintons to vehemently deny that.

**Written by Doug Powers

Twitter @ThePowersThatBe

Chuck Schumer can stuff his effort to ruin Thanksgiving dinner

November 22, 2017 05:03 PM by Doug Powers

There’s NEVER a bad time to push Dem talking points

Epilogue XXIV: Hillary forgets different reason Bill ‘survived’ ’92 campaign

November 19, 2017 08:29 AM by Doug Powers

The neverending farewell gets more pitiful by the day

Hillary Clinton’s election loss denial circus enters 2nd year

November 17, 2017 07:45 PM by Doug Powers

Bonus: Guess what’s to blame for Wisconsin

Déjà vu: These polls about 2020 seem REALLY familiar for some reason

November 12, 2017 09:49 AM by Doug Powers

Definition of insanity

‘Scream helplessly at the sky’ event fails to remove Trump from office

November 9, 2017 05:52 PM by Doug Powers

Political activism just as the Founders envisioned

Categories: 2016 Campaign, Democrats, Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton