RUSSIA ROUTED MILLIONS TO INFLUENCE CLINTON IN URANIUM DEAL, INFORMANT TELLS CONGRESS

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.
May 21, 2007
236
138
1,593
Tulsa, OK
#2
Ha, 2010. Anything earlier, maybe 2005, 1995, 1975, 1894?

Cimarron, whatever makes you feel better about the administration you have now. If one person does something bad its okay if everyone else does.

If you had just posted the article, cool, but you had to take a dig at others. Feel better about yourself? Validate your life choices somehow? Big man now?

I bet you are a blast to have a beer with. Anybody know Cimarron personally? He posts negative post after negative post. Does he laugh? Enjoy life? Is he a Russian Troll?
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,941
15,103
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#5
Anyone want to actually comment on the content of the article....the fact that the Clintons sold out for our uranium to Russia? Or just want to take shots at the person that posted.
The Uranium Ore deal passed through the Committee on Foreign Investments. This committee had 9 voting members...one of which was Clinton. It also included the Sec of the Treasury, Sec of State (Clinton) Sec of Def, Sec of Homeland Security, Sec of Commerce and energy, the Attorney General, a US Trad Rep, and a Rep from the Office of Science and Tech Policy.

This committee had no power to stop the transaction, only approve it or recommend a suspension or prohibition of the transaction, the final say was with the POTUS.

None of the 9 members of the team objected

Also on top of this committee of 9 having a say on the deal it also required also required approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission...which approved the transfer in Nov 2010, but with the explicit rules that Russia could not export it, but in 2012 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission amended the export rule to allow some of the Uranium to be exported to Canada only..which is still in place


But it was all Hillary. Hillary played a part in it, but it was much much larger than Hillary...so any headline I see with suggesting Hillary sold US Uranium to Russia is ignorant...The US Govt sold it, Hillary was Sec of State when it happened. Was Hillary swayed by Russian money to say yes...possibly...but that doesn't account for all the other people and the other depts involved who could have said no...including Obama
 

Cowboy2U

Federal Marshal
Mar 31, 2008
10,764
1,587
1,743
#6
The Uranium Ore deal passed through the Committee on Foreign Investments. This committee had 9 voting members...one of which was Clinton. It also included the Sec of the Treasury, Sec of State (Clinton) Sec of Def, Sec of Homeland Security, Sec of Commerce and energy, the Attorney General, a US Trad Rep, and a Rep from the Office of Science and Tech Policy.

This committee had no power to stop the transaction, only approve it or recommend a suspension or prohibition of the transaction, the final say was with the POTUS.

None of the 9 members of the team objected

Also on top of this committee of 9 having a say on the deal it also required also required approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission...which approved the transfer in Nov 2010, but with the explicit rules that Russia could not export it, but in 2012 the Nuclear Regulatory Commission amended the export rule to allow some of the Uranium to be exported to Canada only..which is still in place


But it was all Hillary. Hillary played a part in it, but it was much much larger than Hillary...so any headline I see with suggesting Hillary sold US Uranium to Russia is ignorant...The US Govt sold it, Hillary was Sec of State when it happened. Was Hillary swayed by Russian money to say yes...possibly...but that doesn't account for all the other people and the other depts involved who could have said no...including Obama
Yet, only the clintons received millions on this scam. Yep, sounds like the American taxpayers came out on the screwed end of another clinton scam. And the gravy train chugs on...


http://thehill.com/policy/national-...sian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,941
15,103
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#7
Yet, only the clintons received millions on this scam. Yep, sounds like the American taxpayers came out on the screwed end of another clinton scam. And the gravy train chugs on...


http://thehill.com/policy/national-...sian-bribery-plot-before-obama-administration
I question why it cost so much in dirty money to get Clinton on board? They were the only ones who financially benefited from this....Was Clinton a hard no on this and have to be bought? Were all the other voting members and other depts willing yes votes already that didn't need to be bought? I am more worried that of all the people involved it seems only Clinton had to be bought, which leads me to think the other voters and US Govt Depts involved had no issue with it....I'm also disgusted that Clinton was bought in the process..or more likely played hard ball for money to line her own pockets for her yes vote. Slimy slimy slimy
 

Bowers2

Stackin' Joe's Cups
A/V Subscriber
Jul 31, 2006
5,921
4,806
1,743
OKC
#8
I question why it cost so much in dirty money to get Clinton on board? They were the only ones who financially benefited from this....Was Clinton a hard no on this and have to be bought? Were all the other voting members and other depts willing yes votes already that didn't need to be bought? I am more worried that of all the people involved it seems only Clinton had to be bought, which leads me to think the other voters and US Govt Depts involved had no issue with it....I'm also disgusted that Clinton was bought in the process..or more likely played hard ball for money to line her own pockets for her yes vote. Slimy slimy slimy
Perhaps this is why the Russian government favored Trump in the last election? He's cheaper!
 

ksupoke

We don't need no, thot kuntrol
A/V Subscriber
Feb 16, 2011
11,538
15,899
743
dark sarcasm in the classroom
#9
Ha, 2010. Anything earlier, maybe 2005, 1995, 1975, 1894?

Cimarron, whatever makes you feel better about the administration you have now. If one person does something bad its okay if everyone else does.

If you had just posted the article, cool, but you had to take a dig at others. Feel better about yourself? Validate your life choices somehow? Big man now?

I bet you are a blast to have a beer with. Anybody know Cimarron personally? He posts negative post after negative post. Does he laugh? Enjoy life? Is he a Russian Troll?
I do, he’s a damned good man and likely one of the 5-10 smartest people on this forum. More importantly he’s one of the only people (there are a few others I trust as well) on this forum you can confide in and not have to worry that he’s going to break confidence, if I need help I know he will help, you can think that about a lot of people but you don't know, I know. He’s got opinions just like any person with a spine does and he’s not afraid to share just because some simple minded dolts will get their feelings hurt. It’s never a personal attack like it is with so many others on this board (yours in this case but you are far from being the only one).
He doesn’t need nor ask for my defense but I’m providing it anyway.
 
Last edited:
Oct 30, 2007
2,394
2,173
1,743
#11
Ha, 2010. Anything earlier, maybe 2005, 1995, 1975, 1894?

Cimarron, whatever makes you feel better about the administration you have now. If one person does something bad its okay if everyone else does.

If you had just posted the article, cool, but you had to take a dig at others. Feel better about yourself? Validate your life choices somehow? Big man now?

I bet you are a blast to have a beer with. Anybody know Cimarron personally? He posts negative post after negative post. Does he laugh? Enjoy life? Is he a Russian Troll?
I've disagreed with Cimarron a lot throughout the years, but that's resulted in a lot of really good conversations. He's a good guy and a valued member of this board.

If you disagree with what he posted that's fine, but attacking him personally is uncalled for. :thumbdown:
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
25,941
15,103
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#13
@Cimarron I have his back. We seldom see eye to eye, but he has always been willing to reach out and try to understand topics from points of view he may not know or understand that I may hold in attempts to be fully informed. We have carried out private conversations over the last 9 years on these things and I respect the hell out of that
 
Oct 7, 2008
964
191
593
#14
@Cimarron I have his back. We seldom see eye to eye, but he has always been willing to reach out and try to understand topics from points of view he may not know or understand that I may hold in attempts to be fully informed. We have carried out private conversations over the last 9 years on these things and I respect the hell out of that
I've always thought he seemed like a good dude, may need to diversify his media portfolio a bit, but a good dude. I'm not on the same page as him on a lot of things, either (probably more than he thinks though, I just don't chime in when I agree b/c this forum already leans hard enough right as is). But I do respect the guy.
 

bleedinorange

Federal Marshal
Jan 11, 2010
14,409
28,677
743
On the highway to heck
#16
Ha, 2010. Anything earlier, maybe 2005, 1995, 1975, 1894?

Cimarron, whatever makes you feel better about the administration you have now. If one person does something bad its okay if everyone else does.

If you had just posted the article, cool, but you had to take a dig at others. Feel better about yourself? Validate your life choices somehow? Big man now?

I bet you are a blast to have a beer with. Anybody know Cimarron personally? He posts negative post after negative post. Does he laugh? Enjoy life? Is he a Russian Troll?
I do, and I trust him. He's regularly the target of assholes for daring to express his opinion (case in point) and maintains his composure while simple minds rail on. Conversely, there's you.........
 
Last edited:

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,083
9,097
243
50
Bixby-Bristow OK
#19
I question why it cost so much in dirty money to get Clinton on board? They were the only ones who financially benefited from this....Was Clinton a hard no on this and have to be bought? Were all the other voting members and other depts willing yes votes already that didn't need to be bought? I am more worried that of all the people involved it seems only Clinton had to be bought, which leads me to think the other voters and US Govt Depts involved had no issue with it....I'm also disgusted that Clinton was bought in the process..or more likely played hard ball for money to line her own pockets for her yes vote. Slimy slimy slimy
They use the foundation to wash money for others. The Clinton's weren't the final recipients of all the money. Why did Susan McDougal get that pardon. Wasn't it because she didn't testify about money laundering that appeared to be done by the Clinton's.
 

Cowboy2U

Federal Marshal
Mar 31, 2008
10,764
1,587
1,743
#20
Ha, 2010. Anything earlier, maybe 2005, 1995, 1975, 1894?

Cimarron, whatever makes you feel better about the administration you have now. If one person does something bad its okay if everyone else does.

If you had just posted the article, cool, but you had to take a dig at others. Feel better about yourself? Validate your life choices somehow? Big man now?

I bet you are a blast to have a beer with. Anybody know Cimarron personally? He posts negative post after negative post. Does he laugh? Enjoy life? Is he a Russian Troll?
Where's the pile of crap pic? I know him personally and have had a beer with him, great guy and as mentioned by another one of the very few I trust to know me. He knows his stuff...your post sucks.