It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clinton Foundation Took Huge Bribe From Russians to Buy Hammond Ranch...

page: 1
35
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+10 more 
posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:27 PM
link   
Intelhub

And Malhuer reserve which contains 1/5 of US uranium ore...

The corruption in Oregon just went into hyperdrive, but very smart people are on the case. This article by IntellHub is shocking and Queen of Babalon doing her part to destroy America.

I am mobile today so short OP.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Granite

from the story..



Now, after further investigation, more pieces of the puzzle have been put in place and you’re not going to believe what characters are involved.

I’ll give you a hint–one of them is currently being investigated by the FBI and is also running on the Democratic ticket in hopes of becoming the next President of the United States. That’s right, you guessed it–none other than Hillary Rodham Clinton of the notorious Clinton crime family.

Hillary and her foundation are implicated in the dastardly scheme along with the Russian State Nuclear Energy Corporation, Rosatom, and a few dubious Canadian elite, which is where the news gets really bad.


the truth is coming out.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: Granite

from the story..



Now, after further investigation, more pieces of the puzzle have been put in place and you’re not going to believe what characters are involved.

I’ll give you a hint–one of them is currently being investigated by the FBI and is also running on the Democratic ticket in hopes of becoming the next President of the United States. That’s right, you guessed it–none other than Hillary Rodham Clinton of the notorious Clinton crime family.

Hillary and her foundation are implicated in the dastardly scheme along with the Russian State Nuclear Energy Corporation, Rosatom, and a few dubious Canadian elite, which is where the news gets really bad.


the truth is coming out.



Precisely...

This is huge event and hopefully Bundy Team will finish exposing the low level corruption.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Wasn't it Reagan who was considered the "Teflon," president?

Hilary should be known as the "Iron Woman," candidate - that criminal can commit criminal acts, then go on to spew BS regarding "individuals too big to jail."

I wonder who she was referring to with that statement? Actually - I don't wonder, she was probably bragging about herself.

The day that The Wicked Witch is no longer above the law, will be the day that I truly believe that the establishment is loosing their grip.

I, unfortunately - very, very, VERY unfortunately do not believe it will ever happen. In America, there exists the two-tiered "just-us," system - and Hilary has been riding those coat-tails for decades.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Granite

What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.

NY Times

That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.

The original reporter suggests there is a connection, but there was no obvious 'bribe'. It is a charitable foundation. It is not their personal money and it is not used for campaign funds.

edit on 23-1-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)


The Clinton Foundation did not own the ranch. A lot of agencies signed off on the sale.
edit on 23-1-2016 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:53 PM
link   
we all know she's in with the elites. it wont affect her voting turnout. typically she is the opposite of what someone would vote for but... wow.

usually one scandal takes a candidate down. but she just keeps trucking. I just wonder if there's actually hillary voters. pro-abortion and having a women part can only carry you so far


+2 more 
posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Granite

What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.

NY Times

That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.

The original reporter suggests there is a connection, but there was no obvious 'bribe'. It is a charitable foundation. It is not their personal money and it is not used for campaign funds.


The Clinton Foundation did not own the ranch. A lot of agencies signed off on the sale.


I think you understand the background very well, but you missing the key point...which is there is a systematic plan to get US citizen off land with gold, silver and uranium.


+2 more 
posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Facts / the truth do not matter to Hillary voters.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Granite

originally posted by: reldra
a reply to: Granite

What I follow, from the NY Times on this, is that the group of people that sold the company that became Uranium One, to Canadians, was later taken over by a Russian company. Some of these people donated 2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. There are no facts to show this is related. The source in the OP links to the NY Times article from April.

NY Times

That is NOT a lot of money for that foundation. I would think if it was a payoff, it would be larger.

The original reporter suggests there is a connection, but there was no obvious 'bribe'. It is a charitable foundation. It is not their personal money and it is not used for campaign funds.


The Clinton Foundation did not own the ranch. A lot of agencies signed off on the sale.


I think you understand the background very well, but you missing the key point...which is there is a systematic plan to get US citizen off land with gold, silver and uranium.


If that is true, it wouldn't serve the government to sell such lands to foreign countries.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:04 PM
link   
a reply to: PresidentCamacho

Sadly that goes with any politician, the role of political figures today is to make as much money as they can for themselves while screwing the tax payers and voters

Hillary is a declivous corrupted B since her early days as a low lawyer in the 70s.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: PresidentCamacho
Facts / the truth do not matter to Hillary voters.


I am not seeing any Hillary voters here, that I know of, based on the posts. The point of this thread is an article about how a Russian owned company ended up with land in the US with a lot of Uranium. I found it an interesting read. I didn't find it a reason to insult entire groups of people or yell out political one-liners.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:09 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Agreed...lets stay on topic because this needs to go viral.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:11 PM
link   
At this point its probably easier to ask who hasent given the clintons money.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: Granite
a reply to: reldra

Agreed...lets stay on topic because this needs to go viral.


The title of the thread is a little off and the NY Times source is the original and gives more information, but I am glad you pointed this out.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:27 PM
link   
How to find the link between donations and the Clinton, well that is easy to do, the issue is not just the donations, but that deals where done without disclosure and while Hillary was still in the state department.



Is it irresponsible to speculate that the Clinton Foundation took millions from a Canadian firm after the State Department signed off on selling the firm’s uranium assets to Russia? Why, the liberal NY Times says “It’s irresponsible not to.”


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.

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.


Why the exposure now, well let no forget that somebody is trying to sell a book on the Clintons and make a lot of money if information like this comes forward


Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.


Does the way the story comes out takes away from a possible scandal?, heck now, the Clintons are soo used to scandals that they have developed Lizard skin


www.balloon-juice.com...

I am sure that those that love Hillary find no fault and those that hates her will claim foul play.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

Precisely...

We have hammered her very hard on ATS for more than eight years and no results to show for it.

What is it going to take to stop her is a very good question.

Great post!!



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
Everybody keep talking about Hillary and it might help her abysmal poll numbers.

Seriously, she is barely leading O'malley. (Who the heck is this O'malley person anyway?)

These scandals are the only thing keeping her even remotely relevant.

Bye Felicia.



posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Granite

What can I say, when you have wealthy donors you have to go beyond your powers to keep them happy.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
A lot of Clinton donators are going to lose a lot of money.

And the economically poor will suffer idealistic nervous breakdowns as their dreams shatter.




posted on Jan, 23 2016 @ 07:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Granite

I read a lot of accusations and innuendos coupled with not a shred of proof.

Then I got to the part where your source link referenced an article from World Net Daily as if they had an ounce of credibility.

That's where I stopped wasting my time.




top topics



 
35
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join