[June 2018] Gohmert: Mueller “Covering” Involvement In Clinton-Uranium Deal... [trnc]

RealClearPolitics ^ | June 9, 2018 | Ian Schwartz

[ETL]

Full title:

Gohmert: Mueller “Covering” Involvement In Clinton-Uranium Deal While Trying To Have A “Coup” Against Trump

Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) said Saturday special counsel Robert Mueller is trying to cover up his involvement with the Uranium One deal that benefited the Clintons while “trying to have a coup against the president.”

REP. LOUIE GOHMERT (R-TX): Robert Mueller has done more damage during his 12 years as FBI director than any other — probably all directors put together...

He has wasted money right and left. Amazingly, he’s hired people like [Andrew] Weissmann that worked with him and [Rod] Rosenstein in investigating the Russian illegal efforts to obtain our uranium which they quashed information in order to allow the sale to go through so that Hillary could get the $145 million for her foundation.

So it is really outrageous. He’s covering for himself at the same time he’s trying to have a coup against the president.

[ETL]

Hillary Clinton & Robert Mueller Linked in Russian Uranium Exchange

American Liberty PAC ^ | Jun 20, 2017 | Kirk

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated a uranium exchange with Russian law enforcement by former FBI Director (and current chief Deep State inquisitor) Robert Mueller.

The exchange was exposed via a recent Wikileaks publication of a secret cable between Hillary’s State Department and the Russian embassy.

Hillary sent Mueller to Moscow with orders to turn over a 10 gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) which was obtained during a shadowy 2006 nuclear “sting” operation conducted in the Georgian Republic.

The ostensible reason for the transfer was to engender further trust between Russian and American law enforcement in the area of nuclear materials and to learn more about how to trace nuclear materials.

But when it comes to Hillary and Russian uranium interests, the shady Uranium One deal cannot pass unnoted.

There still has been no real investigation into how Hillary gave permission for a Russian company to acquire a quarter of the North American uranium reserves after Russian interests poured hundreds of millions into the Clinton Foundation and gave Bill Clinton six figure speaking fees.

At the very least, this exchange raises serious questions about the ability of Robert Mueller to do his job as special prosecutor on the Russian collusion charges since he already has connections to major figures in Russian law enforcement.

(Excerpt) Read more at americanlibertypac.com ...

_____________________________________________________________

Special Counsel Mueller Literally Handed Uranium to the Russians!

IWB ^ | Mark Angelides

We all know that the Russian Collusion investigation is nothing but a game to try and distract the population from actually caring about the day to day running of the country, but the charade has gone too far and some serious questions need to be asked; most especially of Special Counsel Robert Mueller.

WikiLeaks has put out a document that details then FBI Director Mueller’s itinerary on his visit to Russia to deliver 10 grams of Enriched Uranium.

One more time for those who missed it…Mueller hand delivered Highly Enriched Uranium to the Russian government!

(Excerpt) Read more at investmentwatchblog.com ...

[ETL]

Mueller’s Role in Delivering Uranium to Russians Raises Questions

Steve Byas
August 2017

The latest release late last week by Julian Assange at WikiLeaks of a 2009 State Department cable to the Russians raises fresh questions about the objectivity of Special Counsel Robert Mueller (shown), the man named to investigate any possible “collusions” between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and the Russians.

In 2009, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton directed FBI Director Mueller to deliver a sample of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU) to Russia. The uranium had reportedly been stolen. It seems particularly odd, considering that the FBI is not under the supervision of the State Department, and that the FBI director would personally make the transfer.

Assange released the controversial cable on May 17, the same day that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein tapped Mueller as an “independent” counsel to investigate any supposed Trump-Russian ties.

Trump has expressed legitimate concerns about the personnel that Mueller has hired to conduct his work. They are practically all partisan Democrats, with seven staffers having contributed large sums of money to either Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, or the Democratic National Committee. None donated any money to Trump, or to any other Republican presidential candidate in the last campaign.

Adding to that concern is the question as to what exactly was Mueller’s role in the deal between Russia and Uranium One, the company that Hillary’s husband, Bill Clinton, supported at the same time she was secretary of state. Hillary Clinton, in her role as secretary of state, voted to allow the Russian State Atomic Nuclear Energy Agency control of about 20 percent of all uranium holdings in the United States.

As revealed by WikiLeaks, Secretary of State Clinton sent a cable to John Beryle, who was U.S. Ambassador to Russia; the U.S. Ambassador to the Georgia Embassy; and U.S. ambassador to the Russian Embassy, on August 17, 2009. The cable read in part, “Action Request: Embassy Moscow is requested to alert at the highest appropriate level the Russian Federation that FBI Director Mueller plans to deliver the HEU sample once he arrives in Moscow on September 21.”

Shepard Ambellas, editor-in-chief of Intellihub.com, said in June 2017 that the classified cable indicated that the delivery of the 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources occurred during a secret “plane-side” meeting on the tarmac. (This brings up memories of Bill Clinton’s tarmac meeting in Arizona with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, where they said they just discussed their grandchildren.)

Not surprisingly, supporters of the Clintons, such as the Huffington Post, interpreted the cable in the most favorable light for Hillary and Bill Clinton. “The text and tweet released by WikiLeaks more than suggests Mueller is guilty of a serious crime, passing on nuclear material to the USA’s superpower rival. But,” the Post added, “the section it omitted from the tweet changes the entire context of Mueller’s actions.”

The portion the Post contended was not mentioned, but relevant, read, “Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia [the Russian territory, not the American state] during a nuclear smuggling sting operation … In response to the Russian request, the Georgian Government authorized the United States to share a sample of the material with the Russians for forensic analysis.”

The Post then laments, “WikiLeaks used to be a force for good in the world, playing a major role in revealing the inner workings of Guantanamo Bay and exposing events like the killing of journalists by U.S. forces in Iraq.” In other words, as long as WikiLeaks was producing negative material on a Republican president, it was a “force for good in the world.” Now that it is raising questions about the man investigating a different Republican president, not so much.

Actually, the fact that WikiLeaks appears to be nonpartisan in its activities should give it more credibility -— more so than the Huffington Post, well-known for its pro-Clinton bias.

In his highly-praised book Clinton Cash, Peter Schweizer discusses the famous “Russian Reset” initiated by Hillary Clinton when she took over the State Department. Relations between the U.S. and the Russians had degenerated during the last couple of years of the Bush administration, and Hillary publicly said she intended to reverse the worsened relations, complete with a “reset button.”

For their part, the Russians appeared pleased with her selection as secretary of state. Schweizer noted, “An important side note to the Russian reset was how it involved a collection of foreign investors who had poured vast sums of money into the Clinton Foundation and who continued to sponsor lucrative speeches for Bill. These investors stood to gain enormously from the decisions Hillary made as secretary of state.”

Schweizer explained why the Hillary “reset” was so important in the uranium deals. The Bush administration had pulled out of a uranium deal with the Russians after Russian forces went into Georgia in 2008, but the Obama administration (with Hillary taking the lead) reopened the negotiations. A deal was reached in 2010, and as Schweizer wrote, “Several multimillion-dollar Clinton Foundation donors were at the center of the deal.” In fact, “The Clinton Foundation also failed to disclose major contributions from entities controlled by those involved in the Uranium One deal. Thus, beginning in 2009, the company’s chairman, [Ian] Telfer, quietly started funneling what would become $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation through a Canadian entity he controlled.”

While the revelation of a secret meeting involving Robert Mueller in the delivery of uranium to the Russians, by itself, does not prove anything of a criminal or unethical nature, it does raise questions that merit an investigation. After all, when Mueller was FBI director under the Obama administration, he was trusted enough by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to carry out this mission. If it was a diplomatic mission, why was the FBI director involved? And if it was a law enforcement mission, why was Clinton involved?

And is Mueller sufficiently objective to conduct an impartial investigation of a Republican president?

These are questions that the mainstream media should pursue, but will not.

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/26617-mueller-s-role-in-delivering-uranium-to-russians-raises-questions

[laplata]

I’ve always said that Mueller has been destroying evidence implicating Clinton, Obama, Brennan, et al, all along.

[dhs12345]

With all of the leaking, it would be nice if someone leaked all of the details of this scandal.

[ETL]

Re: August 2017

The latest release late last week by Julian Assange at WikiLeaks of a 2009 State Department cable to the Russians raises fresh questions about the objectivity of Special Counsel Robert Mueller (shown), the man named to investigate any possible “collusions” between the presidential campaign of Donald Trump and the Russians. ...”
__________________________________________

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/864994472492453888?lang=en

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09STATE85588_a.html

[ETL]

I’ve always said that Mueller has been destroying evidence implicating Clinton, Obama, Brennan, et al

Well, this piece offers some additional details/evidence.

[Mouton]

What is truly criminal (not literally) is Muelass never considered he is so tainted he should have recused himself from this appointment and once appointed, he should have double recused himself. There is NO WAY anyone up to his eyeballs in this Clinton criminal enterprise, along with being buddies with comey, is not involved. That says it all about his ethics, he has none.

[ETL]

“While the revelation of a secret meeting involving Robert Mueller in the delivery of uranium to the Russians, by itself, does not prove anything of a criminal or unethical nature, it does raise questions that merit an investigation.

After all, when Mueller was FBI director under the Obama administration, he was trusted enough by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to carry out this mission.

If it was a diplomatic mission, why was the FBI director involved? And if it was a law enforcement mission, why was Clinton involved?

And is Mueller sufficiently objective to conduct an impartial investigation of a Republican president?

These are questions that the mainstream media should pursue, but will not.”

https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/foreign-policy/item/26617-mueller-s-role-in-delivering-uranium-to-russians-raises-questions

[BenLurkin]

bkmk

[ETL]

With all of the leaking, it would be nice if someone leaked all of the details of this scandal.

I suspect that a 'cock & bull' story was concocted in order to explain away Mueller handing an uranium 'sample' to the Russians. I believe his trip there accomplished more than what we're being told. Given Hillary's Uranium-One deal, along with the Clintons' and Obama's previous traitorous history, we have every right to be suspicious.

[Liz]

The orders came from the top.

Obama Admin. Misled About Uranium One
TruNews ^ | Dec 12, 2017 | Rick Wiles / FR Posted

In a letter to Energy Secretary Rick Perry and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairwoman Kristine Svinicki, Senate Environment & Public Works Committee Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) is demanding an explanation for how U.S. uranium left the country after the Uranium One deal.

The senator, who represents the home state of three of the company’s uranium recovery facilities, said he registered “strong concerns” about the 2010 deal with President Barack Obama. He said he now believes the response he received, and the “process” through which he received it, were “misleading.”

He notes that in March of 2011, then-NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko said that neither Uranium One nor the subsidiary of the Russian-government-owner Rosatom held the necessary export license to ship U.S. uranium out of the country. That assessment was repeated in the NRC’s recommendation to approve the Uranium One sale. However, beginning in 2012, Uranium One was able to begin exporting uranium without an export license in a move called “piggy-backing,” where it was listed merely as a supplier on another company’s export license. However, that uranium that left the country was supposed to return for “future processing.”

Not only did that uranium leave the U.S., but it was eventually exported out of Canada (the place that domiciles a branch of the Clinton Foundation). (Excerpt) Read more at trunews.com ...

[laplata]

They must not be allowed to get away with this.

[laplata]

Of course he wouldn’t recuse himself. They play by different rules and ethical standards. They are totally unethical and rules don’t apply to them because they know they can get away with it.

The penalties should be so severe and brutal that this is never attempted again. We’ll see.

[ETL]

Top senator expands probe into Obama-era Uranium One deal, says he was misled

Judson Berger, | Fox News
Dec 12, 2018

-snip-

He wants to know more about the controversial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium One to a subsidiary of Russia’s Rosatom nuclear company – and specifically, how uranium under its control made its way out of the U.S.

“Beginning in 2012, Uranium One exported U.S. uranium by ‘piggy-backing’ as a supplier on an export license” held by a shipping company, Barrasso wrote.

That’s apparently not how the process was explained to him when he first raised concerns.

Back in 2011, then-NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko assured the senator that the companies did not hold a specific “NRC export license” and would not be able to export uranium from the U.S. without one.

Yet The Hill reported last month that while the NRC never issued the license, memos show it did approve “the shipment of yellowcake uranium” from the U.S. mines to Canada in 2012 through a “third party.” The same report said the Obama administration later approved some of that material to go to Europe, “and the approval involved a process with multiple agencies.”

Barrasso, in his letter, said the response he got from Jaczko was “misleading.”

Further, he said the Department of Energy “chose to hide its role in approving exports,” by claiming at the time the issue did not fall within its “purview.”

“By stating DOE had no role in the matter, the DOE concealed the possibility of subsequent exports and their responsibility in reviewing them,” Barrasso wrote. “The DOE’s concealment, together with Chairman Jaczko’s deception, created a false narrative that there was only one agency and one process by which Uranium One could export uranium.”

The Hill report described an alternative way of approving those exports. It said that the NRC, rather than grant a direct export to Rosatom, in 2012 “authorized an amendment to an existing export license” for a trucking firm “to simply add Uranium One to the list of clients whose uranium it could move to Canada.”

Barrasso’s letter included dozens of requests for information to both agencies, covering documents related to each uranium transfer.

He set a Jan. 31 deadline. ...”

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/top-senator-expands-probe-into-obama-era-uranium-one-deal-says-he-was-misled