The Hillary Clinton bribery story.

UPDATE: For those with short attention spans, a new timeline from Ricochet on the Hillary scandal.

Best tidbit:

Hillary Clinton’s family’s charities are refiling at least five annual tax returns after a Reuters review found errors in how they reported donations from governments, and said they may audit other Clinton Foundation returns in case of other errors… For three years in a row beginning in 2010, the Clinton Foundation reported to the IRS that it received zero in funds from foreign and U.S. governments, a dramatic fall-off from the tens of millions of dollars in foreign government contributions reported in preceding years.

Must have been an oversight.

Today, the New York Times ran a huge story about how Hillary Clinton and Bill took large contributions to their personal “Foundation” to sell US security assets to the Russians.

The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

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.

Today, Hugh Hewitt interviewed Mitt Romney on this story and Romney stated the obvious.

What’s your reaction to this story?
MR: You know, I’ve got to tell you, I was stunned by it. I mean, it looks like bribery. I mean, there is every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of, what, 20% of America’s uranium production to Russia, and then it was covered up by lying about a meeting at her home with the principals, and by erasing emails. And you know, I presume we might know for sure whether there was or was not bribery if she hadn’t wiped out thousands of emails. But this is a very, very serious series of facts, and it looks like bribery.

Now we know why the e-mails were deleted.

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 shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

I looked at Huffington Post for reaction for the left and they have a story about Republicans and lobbyists.

About the Hillary story ?

ZERO !!!!

This should be the end of her campaign but Democrats seem not to be interested.

18 thoughts on “The Hillary Clinton bribery story.”

  1. The Clinton’s and Rodham’s are congenital career criminals.

    Both their siblings have Drug Trade convictions. These are criminals.

    However what’s “news”? What’s new? This has been a constant in their lives and careers and known since 1993 with Whitewater throughout the land. Known by those in the know before now.

    Perhaps what’s new is Hillary has reached for the disenfranchised untouchables, the working class white male and by extension Whites.

    Hillary& are of course our premier political geniuses living and probably know what they are doing. Reaching for the untouchables has of course a cost among their fellow Brahmins. Feral among their Leftist retainers.

    That’s all that’s happening. Unless one believes in a sudden change of our elites souls and practices on the matter of corruption.

    The Corrupt nature of the Clinton’s is core to their practice of government and politics. So is unleashing centrifugal forces to ride the wave to power and profit.

    Hillary didn’t turn right, she turned White.

    Left has gone feral with loathing and fear.

    Whether she is President is irrelevant, she has reached for power lying fallow. There will be others.


  2. >>I looked at Huffington Post for reaction for the left and they have a story about Republicans and lobbyists.

    Why don’t the left confront any of consequences of their policies: Detroit, Chicago, LA, etc? Why don’t they confront the results of international socialism and marxism and their decades long support for it: North Korea, the USSR, the East Bloc, Cuba and China? Why don’t they confront the countless crimes committed against their fellow citizens by the Obama administration and the Democratic Party writ large?

    The acquisition of power & money. By any means necessary.

  3. Why don’t the left confront any of consequences of their policies: Detroit, Chicago, LA, etc?

    In some cases it’s a consequence of corruption. In many cases, perhaps most cases, it’s the result of an inability to see connections between causes and effects. Sometimes this inability results from willful blindness to facts that would compromise attractive fables (“pretty lies” as a famous blogger puts it). Sometimes the inability results from simple ignorance.

  4. The number I heard spoken by several radio commentators is/was a “contribution” of $31.5 mil to their “foundation” – HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA – over a period of time.

  5. I wouldn’t be so sure there won’t be a reaction from the donks. Given the vindictiveness of the Clintons, I wouldn’t be running around yapping off the day after. But I might consider calling Lizzy Borden Warren and telling her how much I was prepared to donate to her “exploratory” committee. Events will tell.

  6. It seems most unlikely that the NYT has recovered its soul, assuming that it ever had one, and decided to stand up for political integrity. Much more likely: for reasons of their own, they have decided to destroy Hillary Clinton. Either:

    –they have their own preferred candidate (who?), or

    –they have decided that Hillary can’t win, and as the Praetorian Guard of the Democratic Party, they have decided she must be thrown overboard even prior to identification of a replacement.

  7. they have decided that Hillary can’t win, and as the Praetorian Guard of the Democratic Party,

    There is a sideline story today.

    In a manner reminiscent of the Republican Party of old, Democrats have ceded the nomination to Hillary Clinton. It is not exactly clear why this is the case. She clearly has a large following in the party and has a huge fundraising base, but that was true eight years ago as well. Perhaps it is because she lost a close race for the nomination last time that she is being handed the baton this time. Or perhaps the theory is that as the scorned candidate and cuckolded spouse she has suffered enough, that it is her turn. Whatever the reason, Hillary is off to a rocky start, and it could be a long year.

    Then there is a long attack Republicans, of course.

    Then: Hillary’s coronation has not been eagerly embraced by the Democratic left. She has been unable to convince those who have urged Elizabeth Warren to run that she shares the Massachusetts Senator’s outrage at the pandering to Wall Street, or those who admire Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders that she is animated by passion for traditional Democrat values, including support for labor and distrust of free trade, charter schools and other hallmarks of now-entrenched New Democrats.

    So free trade seems to be up there with charter schools as works of the Devil. Mandatory Koch Brothers slam.

    The issue of money is likely to haunt the Clinton campaign in the months to come. Any hope that Democrats might have had of making hay of the corrosive effects of money on our democracy–whether targeting Citizen’s United, SuperPACs or the near-$900,000,000 David and Charles Koch have committed to raise for this campaign cycle–will be neutralized by the many manifestations of the ways that the Clintons have enriched themselves and their world.

    The NY Times has associated with evil dwarves:

    The story is a product of an agreement reached by the Times, together with the Washington Post and Fox News, with Peter Schweizer, author of the forthcoming book Clinton Cash:

    More evil Republicans:

    For Americans who are distressed by seeing Republican presidential candidates catering their stances on Israel and Iran to curry favor with casino magnate and mega-donor Sheldon Adelson, or who cannot imagine that the $5 billion of Wall Street money given to Congressional campaigns over the past decade is not linked to the increasing concentration of wealth and power in the finance industry, the magnitude of the Clinton empire is troubling in and of itself.

    At least they acknowledge that the story is out there.

  8. The article states that the democrats have zero interest in the Clinton Foundation imbroglio and the transfer to Putin of US mined uranium.

    Well, did anybody actually think the democrats would care?
    I sure as hell didn’t.

    The democrat’s ONLY objective is the attainment of power. They do not care how they obtain this power. If they really believed that they could get away with the extermination – existentially speaking – of all republicans, they would do it.

    The Clinton foundation is not the first of its kind. Eva Peron of Argentina also founded and headed up a charitable “foundation,” ostensibly for the poor, which was extant from 1948 to 1955. Of course, like the Clinton foundation, the primary beneficiary was Eva Peron and her crony enablers.

    Folks like the Clintons have been around forever; dishonest, thieving, crooked, lying, money grubbing, power hungry SOBs. What is truly astounding and very frightening are all of the big and influential Clinton supporters; wealthy and very well educated who certainly know better and who do not bat an eye in throwing their enthusiastic support to the Clintons.

    This once again demonstrates that the Federal govt. MUST be dismantled and power returned to the states. Yes, many states are corrupt and wish to emulate Cuba (e.g, California, Illinois, NY, etc.) but at least their denizens can (still) leave to “freer” pastures.

  9. Several decades ago, I read a novel called “The Spike” by an experienced media person which was built around the editorial process in the msm which covered up anything unfavorable to the left as long as possible, while trumpeting any scandals, real or created, against anyone on the conservative side.

    I have found this to be a continuing tactic, and, as it gets more and more obvious, and ludicrous, there seems less and less integrity left in the media to prevent it.

    After almost two terms of the most corrupt and incompetent regime in our history, it doesn’t surprise me that their allies in the media and politics believe they can just bs their way through all of the glaring flaws in the billary track record and escort them back into power.

    Anyone who doesn’t realize how thoroughly corrupt and debased the Clinton’s are is either willfully blind, or the very definition of the low info voter who will vote for anyone the left puts forward, regardless of any moral turpitude, no matter how glaringly obvious.

    I have my own theory as to how, and why, this will all play out, but that is for another time.

  10. The corruption of the Clintons is not news. Does anybody remember the pardon of Marc Rich and Pincus Green during Bill’s last days in office? How much got paid for that? Surely it was a nine digit number.

    That they are running around the world selling favors to foreigners in complete disregard for the interests of the United States cannot surprise anyone over the age of 12.

    The only surprising thing is that the NYTimes published this article, and the e-mail article before it. What is going on with that. Surely, the NYTimes is not taking up journalism after more than a century in support of Communism.

    Has Obama decided to undermine Hillary? Why? Does he have a candidate for President? Michelle? Is he that spiteful?

    I can’t figure this one out.

  11. >>I can’t figure this one out.

    Agreed. The NYT is The Paper of The Party apparat. It’s Pravda on the Hudson. They don’t do news, that’s for pikers and bloggers and other plebs and nobodies. They do Propaganda, Perception Shaping for The Masses.

    I think folks at the senior level of The Party Machine are worried. They’re not smelling success. However, the Clintons are an important family to The Party, and they want their due. But high and deep in the machine, they’re worried. And this may be the beginning of the knifing so a stronger candidate can emerge. One who can keep the money and power flowing to The Party. The Masses must controlled, the money must flow to The Party, and above all else, Power must be maintained. Everything depends on that, comrade.

  12. Hillary may need a good excuse to get out and keep her bribes. The Mafia did not take kindly to their bribed politicians deciding to retire and keeping the money. “Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes,” comes to mind.

    Chicago has had a couple of crooked judges end up hanging over a railing or family members in the basement, like Tom Clancy’s novel Without Remorse.”

    Not that the judge was crooked but Chicago has that reputation. I remember a couple of judges having sudden accidents.

    Hillary is unlikely to have such an accident but Senator Menendez found out about Chicago rules.

  13. NSA has copies of all of Hillary’s emails. That’s their job.

    Snowden had copies. He gave these to Putin. They guarantee his safety.

  14. Perhaps a Clinton presidency would be beneficial to national recovery, in that it would make it very clear to any remaining patriots that the rule of law no longer applies – anywhere. Then a national “cleansing” can begin, using means previously kept under restraint.

  15. A national break down of the rule of law always sounds radical because it is. I seriously doubt we ever want to get to that point unless there is no alternative. Chaos and social breakdown are not end goals we should be seeking.

  16. ” Chaos and social breakdown are not end goals we should be seeking.”

    I wonder if Baltimore will serve as a warning to those considering it as a tactic ? That city has an all-black power structure and has the biggest riots outside Missouri.

  17. Off-topic: I suspect Romney spent a larger percentage every year of the money he earned through running a business which may have pruned but then allowed businesses to blossom, creating jobs, than the Clinton charitable foundation spends. (I’ve heard 10-15%, never more; the Navigators won’t analyze it because the “business model” is so, well, “unique”.) I’m sure Romney spent a larger percentage of his income on taxes than do the Clinton’s (or the average MSNBC host or the average IRS worker.) Until these Democratic strongholds are properly investigated, I don’t think we need to hear one more word about Republican fat cats and certainly the Kochs.

    Not that such deceit isn’t related to the breakdown of the rule of law – perhaps as much as the looting by out-of-towners as well as “thugs” in Ferguson and Baltimore.

Comments are closed.