It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Fox News anchor Shepherd Smith debunked what his own network has called the Hillary Clinton uranium “scandal,” infuriating Fox viewers, some of whom suggested that he ought go work for CNN or MSNBC.
Smith’s critique, which called President Trump’s accusations against Clinton “inaccurate,” was triggered by renewed calls from Republicans on Capitol Hill for a special counsel to investigate Clinton.
Smith called the statement “inaccurate in a number of ways,” noting that “the Clinton State Department had no power to veto or approve that transaction.” Rather, it must be approved by an interagency committee of the government consisting of nine department heads, including the Secretary of State.
. . . The accusation is predicated on the charge that Secretary Clinton approved the sale. She did not. A committee of nine evaluated the sale, the president approved the sale, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the U.S. to Russia.
The sense of betrayal among some was similar to sentiments expressed Wednesday about Fox’s Sean Hannity after he stopped defending Alabama U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore and gave him 24 hours to explain what Hannity called “inconsistencies” in his responses to accusations of sexual misconduct with teenage girls when he was in his 30s.
Smith called the statement “inaccurate in a number of ways,” noting that “the Clinton State Department had no power to veto or approve that transaction.
“Hillary Clinton’s State Department approved the transfer of 20 percent of America’s uranium holdings to Russia, while nine investors in the deal funneled $145 million to the Clinton Foundation,” Trump said in the speech.
“Here, the timing is inaccurate,” Smith said, noting that the source of the majority of the donations, Frank Giustra, said he sold his stake in the uranium company before the company was sold and before Clinton became secretary of State.
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others had to offer permits, and none of the uranium was exported for use by the U.S. to Russia. That is Uranium One.”
originally posted by: havok
How does this explain the millions of dollars that came into the Clinton Foundation after the sale of Uranium One?
What...$31 million was it?
This only tells me that the collusion is between the 9 departmant heads and Clinton. There is more corruption to be looked at. Who are these people? What did they have to gain from such an investment into the Foundation?
Instead if inaccuracies....let's look at the mirrors, not the smoke.
The donations were years before she became the Secretary of State and had nothing to do with the sale!!!
In April 2015, The New York Times reported that, during the acquisition, the family foundation of Uranium One's chairman made $2.35 million in donations to the Clinton Foundation. The donations which were legal were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite a prior agreement to do so. In addition, a Russian investment bank with ties to the Kremlin and which was promoting Uranium One stock paid Bill Clinton $500,000 for a speech in Moscow shortly after the acquisition was announced.