Clinton Found. & Uran. One
Accusations that the Clinton family and Russia each may have benefited from a “pay-for-play” scheme while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state, involving the transfer of 20% of U.S. uranium reserves to the new Russian owners of an international mining operation, Uranium One. The Clinton Foundation got $145M from investors in Uranium ONE, which was sought by Russia with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's approval. Why does no one want to report on this story? Is it different than the supposed Trump Russia scandal? Is it different than the accusations against Trump son-in-law, Jared Kushner?

Uranium One Is a Curious Case

2/14/18
By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.,
from The Wall Street Journal,
2/13/18:

A lot wasn’t known that would now be embarrassing for a President Clinton.

President Obama sought better relations with Russia, in keeping with the policy of presidents at least since FDR. He acceded in 2010 to a Russian government desire to acquire a company whose assets included a Nevada uranium mine on the widely accepted grounds that economic interdependence helps relations stay on a productive path. And, by the way, Russia cannot cart a uranium mine in Nevada back to Russia. If its national security were ever jeopardized, the U.S. could always seize the mine. So that’s not an issue. Would it have been embarrassing for the Obama policy if it were known that the uranium assets the Russian government sought to buy had been accumulated by Canadian entrepreneurs working closely with Bill Clinton ? That the Clinton Foundation received $145 million in pledged contributions from people associated with these transactions? That Mr. Clinton had been paid $500,000 for a speech in Moscow? Yes. It would have raised political difficulties for Mr. Obama’s Russia policy. It would have harmed the reputation of his secretary of state, Hillary Clinton. How would such knowledge have flavored a multiagency review in charge of approving the mine deal, inevitably tinged by Obama political interests? Hard to say. The scandal would likely have remained a political one, not a legal one. But who knows? The Watergate truism that it’s not the crime, it’s the coverup should really be modified. Once any kind of investigation is launched on any pretext, a crime can always be found. That’s a given. Not to relitigate Mrs. Clinton’s emails, but if the FBI didn’t find a basis to charge her aides with obstruction and evidence tampering, it’s only because it didn’t want to.

More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):



365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )
Leave a Reply
Name*
E-mail*
Comment