1. COVER UP ...and
2. Run out the clock on the statute of limitations for criminal charges against Hillary, McCabe, Rosenstein, Comey, Strzok, Lynch, Mills, Abedin, Podesta, Ohr, Page, Weismann and of course, Mueller himself.
Posted on 12/27/2018 11:39:19 AM PST by Alex Baker
Those of us who have been paying attention know that serious crimes were committed at the highest levels of government in an attempt to exonerate Hillary Clinton and frame Donald Trump. There was collusion between government agencies, including collusion with foreign agents, to illegally influence the 2016 Presidential election. There is enough evidence on the table to be confident of these claims. And those of us who care about rule of law, who want to see justice done to the criminals in this conspiracy, have been waiting for years to see that happen. We hear that these serious matters are being investigated. We hear that there are whistleblowers inside the government who want to come forward and expose the corruption. We hear that there are many, many more documents which will substantiate our worst fears about one of the greatest scandals in the history of our country. We have been assured that there are several investigations looking into the various aspect of this abuse of power. Inspector General Michael Horowitz, prosecutor John Huber, and others are looking into the corruption. Mueller is supposedly tasked with exposing foreign influence on the Presidential election. But what if the investigations are carefully structured to protect criminal actions rather than expose them? "clipped” Inspector General Horowitz’s June report had the goal of soft-peddling criminal behavior. The report said that some unfortunate things were done, but there was no reason to think that bias played a key role in important decisions. It did not find fault with things like granting immunity to the man who lied to the FBI and destroyed Hillary’s illegal server. As we have learned, lying to the FBI can be fine, depending on who does the lying. Destroying subpoenaed evidence is okay too, at times. "clip" Please read entire article
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
The only US-Russia collusion that there is evidence of and that makes sense is between the Russians and the notoriously traiterous demonRats.
Projection!
Yes.
Duh.
Bingo.
If the Steele dossier Russian info was false, isn’t that evidence of a conspiracy to use false Russian intel against Trump? Where the hell is the investigation?
Are the Investigations the Cover-Up?
Yes.
Duh.
><><
Mueller has had shredders going full blast from the start.
Everyone goes only so far and then stops....
No reason, no information, it just goes dark.
1. COVER UP ...and
2. Run out the clock on the statute of limitations for criminal charges against Hillary, McCabe, Rosenstein, Comey, Strzok, Lynch, Mills, Abedin, Podesta, Ohr, Page, Weismann and of course, Mueller himself.
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 ...
_____________________________________________________________
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 ...
___________________________________________________________________________________________
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.
____________________________________________________________________
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.
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?"
Obama/Hillary/Mueller agreed to SELL 20% of OUR Uranium to RUSSIA. IN EXCHANGE, Putin agreed to help Hillary WIN the 2016 election..
Well, AS USUAL PUTIN LIED and did NOTHING to help Hillary win but Russia DID succeed in acquiring our precious Uranium.
The CONSEQUENCE of Putin's TRICK was SEVERE accusations by the Deep State's Media, ACCUSING RUSSIA OF CONSPIRING WITH TRUMP TO WIN THE ELECTION.
The relentless 24/7 media attack on Russia is more about PUNISHMENT by the Deep State for defrauding Hillary than it is about President Trump.
RUSSIA, RUSSIA, RUSSIA, shame on you for defrauding Hillary in order to get our Uranium. Hahaha...
Uranium One dates to before 2010.
For at least one year Dan Bongino has been saying that the Mueller investigations are the cover up of FBI/CIA/Obama/Hillary crimes all the way down. What else is new?
Mueller is like the magician distracting you with his left hand while he tricks you with his right hand.
Mueller is te smoke screen to keep attention away from the real crimes.
How much Uranium do you suppose the Russians bought (with Clinton's help) for these new weapons?
Don't suppose it will ever be known...
To the title, YES ... next question.
The collusion was always Clinton and that wretched hag with her ticket to Hell already punched is one lucky POS.
Hillary has wanted the White House desk since well before 2010. My theory holds water. Leaky, but nonetheless.
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/
From Investor's Business Daily, Jan 2012:
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
Former Senator Al D’Amato (R-NY) dropped a bomb on Sunday Morning Futures this AM. D’Amato told Maria Bartiromo that Hillary allowed Russia to take ownership of US uranium so they could sell it to Iran.
Hillary made it possible for the Russians to take control of one of our huge uranium producers and allow them to own the company, export the uranium and who do they sell the uranium to? Iran!
Now if people knew that and that the foundation as a result of that got $135 million. I think people would start saying, “What?”
It’s true.
In January 2013, Pravda celebrated the Russian atomic energy agency’s purchase of the company “Uranium One” in Canada.
That same company, Uranium One, owned uranium concessions in the United States. Because uranium is a strategically important commodity, the Russians would need approval from the Obama administration, including Hillary’s State Department, before the purchase took place.
Nine shareholders in Uranium One just happened to provide more than $145 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation in the run-up to State Department approval.
The Clintons took the cash from Uranium One officials before the deal was approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department. The Clintons hid the donations which is a clear violation of the Memorandum of Understanding Hillary Clinton signed with the Obama administration wherein she promised and agreed to publicly disclose all donations during her tenure as Secreatary of State. (Via Breitbart)
The New York Times reported on the crooked deal in 2015.
As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.
And then there’s this...
Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) told Greta Van Susteren the deal Hillary approved gave Putin ownership of 20 percent of US uranium and Russia sells uranium to unfriendly countries, including Iran.
______________________________________________________________
Remember those side deals Obama forged with Iran that were not part of the text of the official treaty? Now we are finding out some of the details.
Yesterday, the Washington Free Beacon reported that Iranian officials confirmed they have received at least $10 billion in cash, commodities, and assets from Washington since 2013. And that is likely a conservative estimate.
But cash is not the only thing the Islamic Republic of Iran is receiving for gracing us with their willingness to sign onto our own capitulation.
The AP is reporting that Russia, with the support of President Obama, is shipping Iran 116 metric tons of natural uranium.
While Iranian officials have obviously declined to disclose the use of such uranium, AP notes that this is enough to enrich weapons-grade uranium for nuclear bombs:
“Despite present restrictions on its enrichment program, however, the amount of natural uranium is significant should Iran decide to keep it in storage, considering its potential uses once some limits on Tehran’s nuclear activities start to expire in less than a decade.
David Albright, whose Institute of Science and International Security often briefs U.S. lawmakers on Iran’s nuclear program, says the shipment could be enriched to enough weapons-grade uranium for more than 10 simple nuclear bombs, “depending on the efficiency of the enrichment process and the design of the nuclear weapon.” ...”
____________________________________________________________________
Aug 2015
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.