Who’s in Putin’s Pocket — Clinton or Trump? (Clinton Uranium RussiaGate scandal)

While serving as secretary of state to President Obama, Hillary Clinton delivered one fifth of America’s uranium deposits to Russia. So charge investigators who have been delving into the murky — and very alarming — dealings of Secretary Clinton and the Clinton Foundation with a company known as Uranium One, and various “private” Russian companies and official Russian agencies.

Moreover, her critics accuse Hillary and Bill Clinton of raking in a huge fortune (over $130 million) from the American, Canadian, and Russian investors who helped arrange for these Russian companies — under the control, ultimately, of Vladimir Putin — to take control of 20 percent of our strategic uranium assets.

Indeed, according to some calculations, the Uranium One deal, involving top Clinton donors Frank Guistra and Ian Telfer, has transferred as much as 50 percent of projected American uranium production to Kremlin control.

This incredible story, with enormously important implications for our nation’s security, has been percolating for over a year, since Peter Schweizer’s bestselling exposé Clinton Cash — The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich, brought it to light. (See also here, here, here, and here.)

Why does the explosive Clinton-Uranium One story — which has been buried (naturally) by the pro-Hillary establishment media for the past year — now take on new meaning and urgency? Well, for one thing, for the past several days Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has been trying to make hay with the charge that recent comments by her Republican rival, Donald Trump, show “a very troubling willingness” to support Russian President Vladimir Putin.

In an interview with Fox News Sunday on July 31, Clinton reiterated the narrative that her campaign and her media allies had been flogging since the Democratic National Convention the previous week: that Trump’s off-the-cuff comments about her e-mail scandal amounted to Trump calling on a foreign adversary (Putin and Russia’s intel agencies) to meddle in a U.S. election and engage in cyberespionage against this country. Russia’s alleged hacking of her e-mail accounts, she said, “raises serious issues about Russian influence in our election.”

“And for Mr. Trump to both encourage that and to praise Putin despite what appears to be a deliberate effort to try to affect the election, I think, raises national security issues,” she charged. In the interview with Fox’s Chris Wallace, Clinton charged that Trump’s remarks on this issue show he is not “temperamentally fit” to be president. “If you take the encouragement that Russians hack into email accounts, if you take his quite excessive praise for Putin, his absolute allegiance to a lot of Russian wish-list foreign policy issues,” she said, it suggests that “he is not temperamentally fit to be president and commander-in-chief.”

Is that not rich? Hillary and Bill take massive bribes from Putin cronies to transfer ownership and control over the fuel for our nation’s nuclear power plants (which provide one fifth of our national electrical energy) and our nuclear weapons to Putin & Company — and then accuse her opponent of being in bed with Putin! Like the brazen thief who makes his getaway by pointing at a random passerby and yelling “Stop! Thief!,”

Hillary is hoping to distract the American electorate from her own corruption, criminality, and treason by accusing her opponent of the very thing of which she herself is most guilty. That is hardly surprising considering the crime wave that has followed Team Clinton all the way from the governor’s mansion in Little Rock to the White House, to the Senate, to the Clinton Foundation, and on to Foggy Bottom — and beyond. Remember the Clintons and Whitewatergate, Chinagate, Filegate, Fostergate, Travelgate, Troopergate, Lincoln Bedroomgate, Bimbogate, Pardongate, Wacogate, etc., etc., ad nauseum? The Clintons’ penchant for criminality virtually saturated our political vocabulary with new “gate”-suffixed scandals.

However, with the help of their “mainstream media” JournoLista friends, the Clintons have always managed to escape justice in this temporal sphere.

For the past 15 months or so, these same media pals have shielded Hillary from having to face hard questions about her central role in the uranium-for-cash deal with Putin’s minions. However, that could still be forced to the surface as a major stumbling block before the elections.

But wait — the Uranium One deal, as important and stunningly corrupt as it may be, is only the proverbial tip of the iceberg.

As we have been reporting here for years, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been one of Putin’s biggest enablers, facilitating enormous transfers of advanced technology to the Russian regime she now sees as a threat.

It was Secretary Clinton, please recall, who, in May 2009, presented Putin’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov with a red “reset” button, and then mugged with Lavrov in a giggly photo-fest celebrating the U.S.-Russian “convergence” agenda.

Clinton and Lavrov then served as joint coordinators of the U.S.-Russian Bilateral Presidential Commission established in July of that year by President Barack Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

The annual reports of the Bilateral Presidential Commission are replete with chummy photos of Clinton-Lavrov, Obama-Medvedev, Biden-Putin, etc., as well as details of the many deals worked out to give technology, knowhow, capital, and other resources to Moscow.

Among the many important projects of this type promoted by the Clinton-Lavrov team is the huge Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology, which we warned about repeatedly in The New American as far back as 2010 (see, for instance, “’Breathing Pixie Dust’ Investing in Russia,” August 5, 2010).

Putin’s new Skolkovo research and innovation center on the outskirts of Moscow, heralded as “Russia’s Silicon Valley,” is benefiting from billions of dollars of investment and prime technology from Cisco Systems, Boeing, Microsoft, Intel, Hewlett-Packard, General Electric, and other U.S. tech giants, thanks to support and promotion by Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Then there is the case of billionaire Russian playboy Mikhail Prokhorov (see here and here), who, during Clinton’s reign at State, was allowed not only to buy up the New Jersey Nets (now the Brooklyn Nets) NBA franchise and the Barclays Center in New York City, but also to play a major role through his control of the Russian investment companies ONEXIM Group and Renaissance Capital, both of which played key roles in the Clintons’ aforementioned Uranium One scandal.

Yes, Mr. Trump has made statements that may give security-conscious Americans cause for concern, but deeds speak louder than words. And Hillary Clinton’s deeds speak in 5,000 decibel thunderclaps, declaring to all (except her willfully deaf devotees) that she belongs not sitting behind the president’s desk in the White House, but serving time behind bars in the Big House.

According the idiots on the left, Trump is in Putin’s pocket...

Fact is, it was the Soros-supported Obama administration that has been helping to strengthen the Russians.

The O admin, not only handed Putin everything that he wanted on all-important missile defense and nukes, including the Iran nuke deal, which Putin loves and claims to have played a major role in, he (Obama) practically took apart our military. So don't fall for the smoke and mirrors BS coming from the Russians, or this administration. The facts speak for themselves...

____________________________________

From the campaign trail, 2008...

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:

Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090412030633/http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."
__________________________________________________________

From Investor's Business Daily, Jan 2012:

Obama To Betray Missile Defense Secrets To Moscow

Investor's Business Daily ^ | January 9, 2012 | IBD staff

Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.

It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.

He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 - linchpin of our missile defense - might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.

Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.

The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology. ..."

"In his signing statement, Obama said he would treat these legal restrictions as 'non-binding' and that 'my administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 (sic) in a manner that does not interfere with the president's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications.'

Betraying our secrets is easy for a president who betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic to placate Moscow.

Poland was to host ground-based interceptors such as those we've deployed in California and Alaska, with missile-tracking radar deployed in the Czech Republic.

Obama pulled the plug when Moscow objected. Never mind, he said, we have a better approach: a four-phase plan that calls for using three versions of the Navy's Standard SM-3 interceptor missile that forms the backbone of its Aegis missile-defense system.

The fourth phase consists of a missile still on the drawing board scheduled for deployment by 2020, a version of the SM-3 called the Block IIB. It would intercept hostile missiles in the "early intercept" phase before an enemy missile could release its warheads and decoys. The Russians want the SM-3's secrets, and Obama appears to be willing to turn them over.

The president wants to save the New Start Treaty, which the Russians have threatened to abandon if we try to fully implement President Reagan's dream of defeating a nuclear missile attack.

Russia has unilaterally asserted that any qualitative or quantitative improvement in U.S. missile defenses would be grounds for withdrawal from the treaty.

Read More At Investor's Business Daily:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/010912-597158-obama-gives-russia-missile-defense-secrets.htm#ixzz3jXmMbVwY
___________________________________________________

March 2012...

"Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it's important for him to give me space."

Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ..."

Obama: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."

"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." That statement tells us much about the president's mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration.

Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president's comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase "on all these issues," implying more is at stake than just missile defense."

Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn't be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
__________________________________________________________

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

Here's Trump's VP, Mike Pence, on Obama, Hillary, Russia, Syria and the Ukraine...

From the Oct 5, 2016 first VP debate...

“When Donald Trump and I observe that, as I’ve said, in Syria, in Iran, in Ukraine, that the small and bullying leader of Russia has been stronger on the world stage than this administration, that’s stating painful facts. That’s not an endorsement of Vladimir Putin — that’s an indictment of the weak and feckless leadership of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.”

______________________________

Also from the Oct 5, 2016 first VP debate...

QUIJANO (Moderator): I want to turn now to Syria. Two hundred fifty thousand people, 100,000 of them children, are under siege in Aleppo, Syria. Bunker buster bombs, cluster munitions, and incendiary weapons are being dropped on them by Russian and Syrian militaries. Does the U.S. have a responsibility to protect civilians and prevent mass casualties on this scale, Governor Pence?

PENCE: The United States of America needs to begin to exercise strong leadership to protect the vulnerable citizens and over 100,000 children in Aleppo. Hillary Clinton’s top priority when she became secretary of state was the Russian reset, the Russians reset.

After the Russian reset, the Russians invaded Ukraine and took over Crimea.

And the small and bullying leader of Russia is now dictating terms to the United States to the point where all the United States of America — the greatest nation on Earth — just withdraws from talks about a cease-fire while Vladimir Putin puts a missile defense system in Syria while he marshals the forces and begins — look, we have got to begin to lean into this with strong, broad-shouldered American leadership.

It begins by rebuilding our military. And the Russians and the Chinese have been making enormous investments in the military. We have the smallest Navy since 1916. We have the lowest number of troops since the end of the Second World War. We’ve got to work with Congress, and Donald Trump will, to rebuild our military and project American strength in the world.

But about Aleppo and about Syria, I truly do believe that what America ought to do right now is immediately establish safe zones, so that families and vulnerable families with children can move out of those areas, work with our Arab partners, real time, right now, to make that happen.

And secondly, I just have to tell you that the provocations by Russia need to be met with American strength.

And if Russia chooses to be involved and continue, I should say, to be involved in this barbaric attack on civilians in Aleppo, the United States of America should be prepared to use military force to strike military targets of the Assad regime to prevent them from this humanitarian crisis that is taking place in Aleppo.

There’s a broad range of other things that we ought to do, as well. We ought to deploy a missile defense shield to the Czech Republic and Poland which Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama pulled back on out of not wanting to offend the Russians back in 2009.

QUIJANO: Governor, your two minutes are up.

PENCE: We’ve just got to have American strength on the world stage. When Donald Trump becomes president of the United States, the Russians and other countries in the world will know they’re dealing with a strong American president.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/06/us/politics/vice-president-transcript.html

______________________________

And....

PENCE: What we’re dealing with is the — you know, there’s an old proverb that says the Russian bear never dies, it just hibernates.

And the truth of the matter is, the weak and feckless foreign policy of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama has awakened an aggression in Russia that first appeared a few years ago with their move in Georgia, now their move into Crimea, now their move into the wider Middle East.

And all the while, all we do is fold our arms and say we’re not having talks anymore.

To answer your question, we just need American strength. We need to — we need to marshal the resources of our allies in the region, and in the immediate, we need to act and act now to get people out of harm’s way.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

Obama To Betray Missile Defense Secrets To Moscow

Donald Trump: 'Putin has eaten Obama's lunch' on Ukraine

Here's Trump's VP, Mike Pence, on Obama, Hillary, Russia, Syria and the Ukraine...

Re: The Obama-Putin Iran Deal...

The Idiot's Guide to Chinagate

"according to some calculations, the Uranium One deal, involving top Clinton donors Frank Guistra and Ian Telfer, has transferred as much as 50 percent of projected American uranium production to Kremlin control."