Why is the White House lying about Uranium one?

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
I haven't heard "the White House" say anything about Uranium One. I've heard the media - including the progpress - talk about it, but not Trump (which is who I presume you mean by "the White House").
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
I haven't heard "the White House" say anything about Uranium One. I've heard the media - including the progpress - talk about it, but not Trump (which is who I presume you mean by "the White House").

“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."

He repeated these claims last week in interviews and tweets

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...ump-for-inaccurate-claims-on-uranium-one-deal
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Well, when Hillary was SecState, the Russians were our good friends. Remember the reset? Remember Obama yucking it up with Putin? We were their friends. Then...........................TRUMP GOT ELECTED (in my scary Dath Vader voice), and suddenly the Russians became a major threat to our democracy. They are no longer our friends. With all of the collusion Hillary and Bill had with the Russians in doubling speaking fees, padding the Clinton Foundation in exchange for uranium control, or gathering dirt on Trump (that turned out to be completely false) in fabricating a dossier... it was TRUMP THAT COLLUDED.

I roll my eyes at the frenetic denials of impropriety by the Clintons by deflecting collusion towards Trump, and that this collusion has some criminality with it. Meuller indicts Manafort on completely unrelated charges to collusion. No evidence yet that there was collusion. But we do have evidence of Clinton collusion with the Russians, and you liberals try to convince us that there's nothing to see there.

For those of us that are paying attention and thinking with our actual brains, it's all-too-clear what's going on here, and who's lying.
 
Last edited:

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
“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."

He repeated these claims last week in interviews and tweets

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/3...ump-for-inaccurate-claims-on-uranium-one-deal

Thanks! Nice to know our President is on top of things. :yay:

I refer you to this:

Trump tweet: Obama tapped my phones at Trump Tower.
Media: BWAhahahaha! What a loony! What a dolt! He is too crazy to be President!
(months later)
Media: Obama tapped Trump's phones at Trump Tower.

Trump tweet: The DNC rigged the primary in favor of Hillary and screwed Bernie out of the nomination.
Media: BWAhahahaha! What a loony! What a dolt! He is too crazy to be President!
(months later)
Media: The DNC rigged the primary in favor of Hillary and screwed Bernie out of the nomination.


I have no doubt that the following is in our future:

Media: 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.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Well, when Hillary was SecState, the Russians were our good friends. Remember the reset? Remember Obama yucking it up with Putin? We were their friends. Then...........................TRUMP GOT ELECTED (in my scary Dath Vader voice), and suddenly the Russians became a major threat to our democracy. They are no longer our friends. With all of the collusion Hillary and Bill had with the Russians in doubling speaking fees, padding the Clinton Foundation in exchange for uranium control, or gathering dirt on Trump (that turned out to be completely false) in fabricating a dossier... it was TRUMP THAT COLLUDED.

I roll my eyes at the frenetic denials of impropriety by the Clintons by deflecting collusion towards Trump, and that this collusion has some criminality with it. Meuller indicts Manafort on completely unrelated charges to collusion. No evidence yet that there was collusion. But we do have evidence of Clinton collusion with the Russians, and you liberals try to convince us that there's nothing to see there.

For those of us that are paying attention and thinking with our actual brains, it's all-too-clear what's going on here, and who's lying.



Wow. Was that string of verbal diarrhea supposed to have a meaning? Because it was incomprehensible. And didn't answer why the White House is pushing a false narrative. The donation was given to The Clinton foundation years before she became Secretary of State. Who gives away money like that on the slim hope that someone is going to one day be in a position of power over cheap uranium? That is hardly quid pro quo
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
Thanks! Nice to know our President is on top of things. :yay:

I refer you to this:

Trump tweet: Obama tapped my phones at Trump Tower.
Media: BWAhahahaha! What a loony! What a dolt! He is too crazy to be President!
(months later)
Media: Obama tapped Trump's phones at Trump Tower.

Trump tweet: The DNC rigged the primary in favor of Hillary and screwed Bernie out of the nomination.
Media: BWAhahahaha! What a loony! What a dolt! He is too crazy to be President!
(months later)
Media: The DNC rigged the primary in favor of Hillary and screwed Bernie out of the nomination.


I have no doubt that the following is in our future:

Media: 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.

Wow. You really are hopeless if you believe any of that nonsense you wrote above.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
What part of what she posted was untrue? This is a genuine question, please respond as such.

There is no proof Obama Tapped Trumps phone.

and Brazil states clearly that

"But Brazile told Stephanopoulos she "found no evidence" the primary was "rigged."

"I said I would get to the bottom of everything, and that's what I did," Brazile said. "I called Senator Sanders to say, you know, I wanted to make sure there was no rigging of the process ... I found no evidence, none whatsoever."


It's amazing how fast you guys cling to these Trump misdirections and hang on to them like they are gospel.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-chair-donna-brazile-democratic-primaries-rigged/story?id=50942644
 

transporter

Well-Known Member

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
"But Brazile told Stephanopoulos she "found no evidence" the primary was "rigged."



that is rich considering Brazile's Book

Donna Brazile's Book About Clinton Stealing the Election Has Sold Out On Amazon


Network newscasts don't mention Brazile Clinton-DNC revelations

Brazile has written in a new book that she discovered evidence that she said showed Hillary Clinton’s campaign "rigged" the Democratic presidential primary.

"ABC's World News Tonight," "NBC Nightly News" and "CBS Evening News" all didn't report the allegations by Brazile on Thursday evening despite it receiving considerable coverage on cable news and in print and online media. Brazile was also trending as one of Twitter's top topics on Thursday.

In excerpts released to Politico Thursday, Brazile writes in her new book, "Hacks: The Inside Story of the Break-ins and Breakdowns that Put Donald Trump in the White House," that it “broke [her] heart” upon discovering evidence that she said showed the Clinton campaign "rigged" the Democratic nomination system.

“By September 7, the day I called Bernie, I had found my proof and it broke my heart,” Brazile wrote about a Sept. 7, 2016, call to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who gave Clinton a far more serious challenge for the nomination than many had expected.

Brazile also shares an arrangement between the DNC, the Clinton campaign and Clinton’s joint fundraising committee that indicated the campaign would “control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised.”

She wrote the arrangement was concocted in an effort to address the mounting debt of the party in the aftermath of President Obama's successful 2012 reelection campaign.

“The campaign had the DNC on life support, giving it money every month to meet its basic expenses, while the campaign was using the party as a fund-raising clearing house,” Brazile wrote.

“If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead. This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity," Brazile added.
 
Last edited:

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
Brazile also shares an arrangement between the DNC, the Clinton campaign and Clinton’s joint fundraising committee that indicated the campaign would “control the party’s finances, strategy, and all the money raised.”

That ^ "arrangement" is coming under more scrutiny because it may have involved many violations of campaign finance law. The Clinton campaign effectively circumvented finance restrictions on individual campaigns by hijacking the DNC as a campaign finance vehicle, with it's much larger limits/ceilings on how money could be spent.
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Wow. Was that string of verbal diarrhea supposed to have a meaning? Because it was incomprehensible. And didn't answer why the White House is pushing a false narrative. The donation was given to The Clinton foundation years before she became Secretary of State. Who gives away money like that on the slim hope that someone is going to one day be in a position of power over cheap uranium? That is hardly quid pro quo

The White House is pushing a "false narrative" because they don't believe it's false. According to politifact, your claim is only partially correct; and it certainly wasn't "years" before becoming SecState. Much of the donations were given to the foundation before Hillary became SecState; but not all of it. And it certainly doesn't answer for the $500k speech the Russians paid Bill Clinton; a fee 2-3 times more than normal. This doesn't, by any means, mean there wasn't collusion, where Hillary made promises to U1 that if they contributed, there would be lucrative deals made in their favor when she became president. Of course she never became president. But she did become SecState where she could use her influence and live up to her end of the bargain.

Of course, there is also that pesky little dossier.

It's absolutely stunning that you and MR can so clearly see collusion from Trump, when there is no evidence; but are blind to Hillary's collusion even in the face of overt evidence.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
It's absolutely stunning that you and MR can so clearly see collusion from Trump, when there is no evidence; but are blind to Hillary's collusion even in the face of overt evidence.

Not really. They're just doing what they are paid to do.
 

terbear1225

Well-Known Member
There is no proof Obama Tapped Trumps phone.

and Brazil states clearly that

"But Brazile told Stephanopoulos she "found no evidence" the primary was "rigged."

"I said I would get to the bottom of everything, and that's what I did," Brazile said. "I called Senator Sanders to say, you know, I wanted to make sure there was no rigging of the process ... I found no evidence, none whatsoever."


It's amazing how fast you guys cling to these Trump misdirections and hang on to them like they are gospel.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-chair-donna-brazile-democratic-primaries-rigged/story?id=50942644

Seems somewhat disingenuous for the former head of an organization to be the one to clear that organization from wrongdoing. Seems like a conflict of interest to me.
 

Sapidus

Well-Known Member
The White House is pushing a "false narrative" because they don't believe it's false. According to politifact, your claim is only partially correct; and it certainly wasn't "years" before becoming SecState. Much of the donations were given to the foundation before Hillary became SecState; but not all of it. And it certainly doesn't answer for the $500k speech the Russians paid Bill Clinton; a fee 2-3 times more than normal. This doesn't, by any means, mean there wasn't collusion, where Hillary made promises to U1 that if they contributed, there would be lucrative deals made in their favor when she became president. Of course she never became president. But she did become SecState where she could use her influence and live up to her end of the bargain.

Of course, there is also that pesky little dossier.

It's absolutely stunning that you and MR can so clearly see collusion from Trump, when there is no evidence; but are blind to Hillary's collusion even in the face of overt evidence.


Since when do people go around handing out $150 million dollar bribes years before someone is in line to have the power to influence a decision. Those Russians are prettt bad negotiators considering Clinton wasn’t even involved in the decision to give them the Iranium in the
End. . Also. Do you know how much uranium costs? They could have gotten much more uranium on the Black market for what they spent bribing someone with no influence or office or power to make the decision.

Your entire theory is faulty.

At least with Trump and Co every week we continue to get more and more evidence of coordination and collusion.

You are just grasping at the straws Donald tells you to.
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
At least with Trump and Co every week we continue to get more and more evidence of coordination and collusion.

And every week more and more evidence of illegal Clinton activities. I do so love symmetry. Don't you?
 
Top