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.

 

A theory - Trump, Mueller, Uranium 1 and an intricate plan to expose the corruption.

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 03:01 AM
link   
So I came across a post on twitter by a user named Stealth Jeff.

He puts forth a theory that makes a lot of sense regarding the Uranium 1 mess and the Clintons / Obamas illegal and ethical problems. His theory links in an FBI investigation and supplies information where this agent sent preservation of documentation orders over a few days. Those orders went to every single agency who was involved in approving the Uranium 1 deal.

He also talks about Mueller's involvement in the Uranium 1 mess and pointed out a fact many dont know (courtesy of wikileaks). The investigation he was involved in that took him to Russia with Uranium that had been seized by authorities. The Uranium was traced back to Russia and Russia was provided a sample (the one Mueller dropped off) to verify its origin as Russian (For those who dont know yes identification of nuclear material and who owns it is trackable.

His entire theory is way to long to spell out so I will provide the link and I urge people to read it in its entirety with an open mind.

* - The cliff note version essentially is those in Clinton / Obama administration were involved in the bribery kick back corruption mess.
* - Trump / Sessions / Comey and Mueller came up with this plan to expose the corruption
* - The election was suppose to go to Hillary so none of this ever saw the light of day - except Trump won.
* - Trump was filled in by a member of the IC community about what was going on.
* - A plan / IC operation was developed in order to have the criminal parties involved feel safe by "going after Trump".
* - Trump plays it up in the media about how he wants to be Putins friend.
* - Criminals relax and become complacent and mistakes are made because they think they are in the clear.
* - Mueller's team is loaded with supposed Clinton supporters however it was done so when the hammer does fall they cant scream it was a republican / conservative witch hunt.
* - The goal was to get someone inside to flip an inside person, opening the flood gates. It looks like the Podesta's were it.
* - By the time people involved figure out whats occurring it is to late to do anything to hide / destroy evidence. They will be caught looking the wrong way.

This is a brief overview but it is an interesting theory / read. People who are following in twitter started to link to articles when this started to the present. They have made connections with some odd articles that, on their own, seem innocuous and uninteresting (like the former head of the NSA meeting with Trump and then being removed from his position by Obama admin) but when plugged into the timeline theory makes more sense. They also make some interesting connections with the undercover FBI investigation using the informant who was just released from his NDA.


Links -
* - Stealth Jeff - Twitter post
* - TTTThread reader for twitter - entire post that is easier to read
* - Trump’s Long Game to Drain the Swamp

Sources that support the theory
* - Top Obama military official under fire as he meets Trump
* - Is Mueller Actually Working For Trump?
* - Ur anium One: Previously Undiscovered FOIA Documents Could Be Game-Changer in Investigation…
* - CHRONIC OBSTRUCTION ALERT: JAMES COMEY & BARACK OBAMA, Bones in the throat of American Justice!

* - Info / article on the Uranium Mueller took to Russia




As I said it is just a theory and many people in the twitter post exchange are falling on both sides of the theory. I figure some of our members here would be interested in some conspiracy theory's on this topic and to date this is the most thought out and supported one I have seen.

Thoughts?

ETA - Some of my thoughts.
I remember some time back an Obama scandal was in the news (I forget which one). I remember seeing a discussion (maybe on this site) talking about the depth of corruption and that if it ever got exposed it would essentially bring down the government because so many people at high levels were involved. If anyone remembers this please let me know.

Personally speaking I think the theory is at least plausible.
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 03:46 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

There were other agencies besides the State Department that signed off on the Uranium deal. How come those other signatures are NEVER part of the story?



That said, the possibility that a foreign entity would take a majority stake in the uranium operation meant that the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, or CFIUS, had to approve the deal. So did the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Utah’s nuclear regulator.

The membership of CFIUS includes the State Department, meaning that the Secretary of State would have had a voice. The panel also includes the attorney general and the secretaries of the Treasury (who chairs the committee), Defense, Commerce, Energy and Homeland Security, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

CFIUS did approve the proposal, and in 2013, Russia assumed 100 percent ownership of Uranium One and renamed the company Uranium One Holding.

Why would the United States allow the transfer of a uranium company?

As others, including a New York Times’ investigation, have suggested, the United States was still seeking to "reset" its relationship with Russia and trying to get the Kremlin on board with its Iran nuclear deal. But another factor may have been that, at the end of the day, the Russian deal wasn’t that big.

Russia’s purchase of the company "had as much of an impact on national security as it would have if they set the money on fire," said Jeffrey Lewis, a nuclear nonproliferation expert at the Middlebury Institute and former director at the New America Foundation, in an interview with PolitiFact last year. "That’s probably why (CFIUS and the NRC) approved it."


www.politifact.com...


edit on 5-11-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 03:51 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

If I am not mistaken that is in his theory. It goes along with the preservation orders for documents to the very departments involved in approving the deal.

Did you read the info provided?
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: dfnj2015

If I am not mistaken that is in his theory. It goes along with the preservation orders for documents to the very departments involved in approving the deal.

Did you read the info provided?


The thing is with so many departments and people involved how could it be a conspiracy? And on top that, the deal is to some small company with, "had as much of an impact on national security as it would have if they set the money on fire,".

You could just assume all government is corrupt I guess but some of this is superstition. Unless you have documentary evidence of a big chuck of money going from A to B for some quid pro quo then it's really all conjecture. But go on saying whatever floats your boat.

I have no love Hillary but politically based wild speculations for scoring points gets boring after a while.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:04 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

The deal was signed off on by 9 people - the heads of each agency.
A Canadian company was used as a middleman to disguise the fact it was going to Russia so it would not trip any alarms.

Given the behavior of the Clinton / Obama administration its not a huge leap to think a lot of people in government are in fact corrupt.

Anyways its a theory so make of it what you will.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:18 AM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I, for one, am not assuming everyone involved was corrupt, and the national security angle is questionable.

That is not the point. I believe bribes were taken, and arms were twisted. Pay for play and bribery need to be exposed.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:34 AM
link   
Well ill say his theory doesn't make sense. But then again I don't think the deal the Clinton's made has anything to do with US uranium reserves. That's just a smoke screen the amount of Uranium produced i's very low. Holding reserves means nothing. The press especially fox is making a big deal of this it really isn't. What people don't get is reserves means it hasn't been mind but is an estimate of what could be there.

Where that scandal is and no one is looking is this.




In 2005, Bill Clinton and Frank Giustra visited Kazakhstan. Giustra is a massive donor to the Clinton Foundation.



Giustra’s goal was to buy uranium mines in Kazakhstan. To this end, he and Bill Clinton met with leaders of the Kazakhstan government.

As a result of the visit, Giustra got major mining concessions, which were approved by the Kazakhstan government. Kazakhstan got Bill Clinton publicly to praise its alleged progress in democracy and human rights. The Clintons received a $31 million donation to their Foundation from Giustra, along with a pledge to donate $100 million more.


This explains Bill wanting to meet with the Russian in charge of their nuclear programs. As well as the timing of his speech in moscow he was trying to shake down the Russians for the rest of the money they promised.

www.powerlineblog.com...
edit on 11/5/17 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:44 AM
link   
I read it too. Couple that with the arrests in Saudi Arabia and Trump leaving to go to Asia and I can't hope but wonder if it is true. If so we will see the swamp getting drained rapidly, so fast they don't have time to react. The house of sand the democratic party has built is about to get knocked down by a tidal wave they themselves created. I do so hope this is true!



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 04:55 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

I want to believe this theory, but honestly it seems to good to be true.

We shall find out soon, maybe as early as tomorrow once some of these sealed indictments are revealed.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 05:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: proximo
a reply to: Xcathdra

I want to believe this theory, but honestly it seems to good to be true.

We shall find out soon, maybe as early as tomorrow once some of these sealed indictments are revealed.


2 more sealed indictments were registered in DC yesterday.

as I said its just a theory but it does make sense (at least to me) and does explain some of the weirder aspects of this mess. Comey's private twitter account had an interesting post about being loyal to a higher power. Not sure f he was referencing religion or something else.

Here is the name he uses on twitter - Reinhold Niebuhr
There will be a picture of his face.
Reinhold Niebuhr@FormerBu
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 05:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Earlier this year, Senators Feinstein and Grassley were briefed on something (in a closed door meeting) that seemed to have them visibly shaken after they heard it.
How have the actions of Feinstein since then played with the theory in the OP?
It seems to me that she has been relatively quiet since then.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:01 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

I am curious if the info D. Brazile is putting out might be related. She also let it be known that Clintons health was so bad she almost replaced her with Biden.

Also the FBI announced they were turning all files on the different investigations over to the intel committees in Congress. I am seeing (but not confirmed by any agencies) that the different Clinton investigations (uranium 1, emails, the awan brothers, etc) are now all linked together / overlapping.

If any of this is true it should be an interesting week.

Interesting you bring up Feinstein. Recently she has found herself in the position of defending Trump. She pissed of Democrats at one of her functions in California recently where she stated Trump needs to be given a chance. She also got it from the left for something else she did in relation to Trump however I am drawing a blank on that one. Lemme dig into it.

Possibly related / unrelated -
There are now 20 current Republicans in the House who are retiring and will not be running for reelection in 2018. There are some Democrats who are now going after Trump, chastising him for calling for investigations into Democrats. Seems out of place given the info coming out about Clinton.

The Sanders campaign also announced Clinton rigged the primaries and that they now have proof. Apparently the DNC/Clinton people tried to spin it saying the agreement the Clinton campaign made with the DNC was also made to the Sanders campaign. Since wikileaks released the Clinton/DNC agreement the Sanders people noticed there was a side deal between Clinton-DNC that was not into the Sanders agreement and the Sanders campaign was never notified of it.

I dunno.. I just get the feeling something big is coming...


ETA -
Has anyone else noticed the Democrats on the intel committees have been unusually quiet (more than just Feinstein)? They used to make the rounds a few times a week on their media outlets pushing the Russia trump thing. That seems to have died way down.
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:05 AM
link   
a reply to: dragonridr

The theory actually talks about an FBI investigation going back to 2006. It is possible Bills trip to central Asia was being looked at by the FBI starting in 2006.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra




Interesting you bring up Feinstein. Recently she has found herself in the position of defending Trump. She pissed of Democrats at one of her functions in California recently where she stated Trump needs to be given a chance. 

Thanks.
I had forgotten about this. So, even more than being quiet, she talked in favor of Trump... that does work with the OP theory, if she knows how this is going to play out in the end.
I too feel that we are going to hear much more coming out. Brazile partially throwing Hillary under the bus is telling.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Honestly X, it sounds like a wet dream. I'll dig through the evidence however for a more educated opinion.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:15 AM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: Xcathdra

Honestly X, it sounds like a wet dream. I'll dig through the evidence however for a more educated opinion.


Oh, I agree. It is a theory and it makes sense but like everything - politics make strange bed fellows.

For all we know Trump took the extended Asia tour to avoid being arrested from sealed indictments himself
.
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: Xcathdra




Interesting you bring up Feinstein. Recently she has found herself in the position of defending Trump. She pissed of Democrats at one of her functions in California recently where she stated Trump needs to be given a chance. 

Thanks.
I had forgotten about this. So, even more than being quiet, she talked in favor of Trump... that does work with the OP theory, if she knows how this is going to play out in the end.
I too feel that we are going to hear much more coming out. Brazile partially throwing Hillary under the bus is telling.


Brazile throwing Clinton under the bus is perplexing. She has to know that by doing that she would hurt the DNC and Democratic candidates in the 2018 elections. For her to do it on her own is plausible. I feel the timing and what she released would need to have a blessing from current DNC leadership or something else.

All of this happening at the same time seems out of place and too coincidental.



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:33 AM
link   
Too bad trump is no mastermind .
The whole bottom sort of just falls out.
Lol



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:43 AM
link   
Now I see why selling Uranium is a money maker and why controlling the resource can be detrimental to a country that relies on nuclear power - like the US. We are selling an item that we require and we are already facing shortfalls, especially in the medical sector (nuke med).

The Uranium gets sold to Russia, who in turn sells it back to the US as they supply the US with 19% of our Uranium.

**This is an older article however it covers the time frame these deals were supposedly being made by Clinton / Obama.

Uranium Market & U.S. Uranium Sources Uranium: Global Demand Growing, Shortages Possible


The United States’ Uranium Supply and Energy Independence:

Generating 20 percent of the U.S.’s electricity, the U.S.’s 104 reactors consume 55 million pounds of uranium each year, a full 25 percent of the global supply. However, the U.S. produces less than 5 percent of the global supply and imports over 90 percent of the uranium it uses.

The U.S. supply comes from various foreign countries, which may be seen in the chart below.





Under the megatons-to-megawatts agreement, the U.S.’s uranium purchases from Russia have consisted entirely of uranium recycled from decommissioned Soviet warheads. This agreement did serve U.S. national security interests for nuclear non-proliferation. However, that agreement expires in 2013, at which time U.S. utilities will purchase Russian uranium from the country’s state-run nuclear company, Rosatom, and its affiliates. This uranium will be sourced from mines, not decommissioned warheads, and will therefore cease to serve any national security interest.

Reliance on the Russian state-run nuclear company for U.S. nuclear fuel supply poses serious challenges in terms of U.S. energy security. For instance, in the winter of 2008-09, the Russian state-run natural gas company, Gazprom, suddenly cut off all natural gas exports to Eastern Europe for more than a month, leaving millions of homes without heat or electricity in the middle of one of the harshest winters in recent history.

The 1970s OPEC oil embargo is another cautionary example of the inherent risks associated with overreliance on energy imports from foreign state-run energy companies.

The potential dangers of overreliance on foreign supplies in an increasingly competitive global market are also highlighted by China’s possession of the global supply of rare earth metals. China has spent the past few decades seeking to monopolize control of these vital materials and now controls 97 percent of the world’s supply. Embargoes of these metals to Japan and Western countries in late 2010 caused severe disruptions in several major industries, including the manufacturing of solar technologies and most high-tech electronic devices.

Given the growing demand for electricity and the number of new reactor builds planned, it is likely that the markets for uranium will only grow fiercer, placing the U.S. in a precarious position indeed if it does not develop domestic uranium deposits.



Time to retool our plants to use Thorium.
edit on 5-11-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 5 2017 @ 06:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Too bad trump is no mastermind .
The whole bottom sort of just falls out.
Lol




I am sure President Hillary Clinton agrees with you...

oh, wait.

Do you have anything productive to add?



new topics

top topics



 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join