Judicial Watch Sues Justice and State Departments for Uranium One Records

Clinton operations receive tens of millions of dollars of contributions from Uranium One/Russia Interests

 

Judicial Watch

(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit against the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of State for all records of communications relating to Uranium One (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:18-cv-00722)). The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on March 29.

Judicial Watch sued the agencies after they failed to respond to two December 22, 2017, FOIA requests. Judicial Watch asked the Justice Department for:

  • All records regarding, the company Uranium One (otherwise known as Uranium One, Inc. or SXR Uranium One, Inc.), including records of communication sent to and from officials in the offices of the Attorney General and Deputy Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, and the National Security Division from January 20, 2009 through December 31, 2013.

The State Department was asked to produce:

  • Any records relating to the company Uranium One (otherwise known as Uranium One, Inc. or SXR Uranium One, Inc.), including records of communication sent to and from officials in the Office of the Secretary of State, Office of the Legal Advisor, Office of the Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, Office of Arms Control, Verification and Compliance, Office of International Security and Nonproliferation, and the Office of Political-Military Affairs from January 20, 2009 through December 31, 2013.

This lawsuit is part of Judicial Watch’s continuing investigation of the highly controversial 2010 Uranium One deal. At the time, a Russia state-owned nuclear firm, Rosatom, sought to buy Uranium One, a Canadian mining company. Because Uranium One held licenses for 20 percent of America’s uranium production capacity, the sale had to be approved by the nine members of the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), including Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who assented to the transaction. Uranium One interests contributed more than $140 million to the Clinton Foundation.

In January 2008, Judicial Watch revealed that Bill Clinton had helped Vancouver mining mogul Frank Giustra secure tens of millions of dollars’ worth of uranium. Guistra built a company that became part of Uranium One. The Clinton Foundation later received a $31.3 million donation, as well as a future pledge of $100 million. In July 2014, Judicial Watch released more than 200 Clinton conflict-of interest documents, including a record of a speech in Moscow in June 2010 sponsored by the investment bank Renaissance Capital by Bill Clinton addressing the theme of “Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States: Going Global.” The document notes that “Renaissance Capital is an investment bank focused on the emerging markets of Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and sub-Saharan Africa.” Renaissance Capital has also been linked to Russia efforts to gain control of Uranium One.

“It is simply remarkable that Judicial Watch had to sue the State and Justice Departments in federal court for basic information about the shady Uranium One deal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “It seems Judicial Watch has done more to investigate the Clinton-Russia connections than the Justice Department, even as DOJ resources are spent on supporting Mueller’s massive investigation into the fanciful Clinton Dossier-inspired Trump-Russia conspiracy theory. We hope the Uranium One cover-up ends thanks to these lawsuits.”

According to a 2013 New York Times report, the Clinton Foundation hid many of the beneficiaries of the Uranium One deal approved by CFIUS and Mrs. Clinton:

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 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 [Renaissance Capital] with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

At the time, both Rosatom and the United States government made promises intended to ease concerns about ceding control of the company’s assets to the Russians. Those promises have been repeatedly broken, records show.

Prior to the Uranium One deal, the FBI reportedly “had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.”

Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.

***

Then-Attorney General Eric Holder was among the Obama administration officials joining Hillary Clinton on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States at the time the Uranium One deal was approved. Multiple current and former government officials told The Hill they did not know whether the FBI or DOJ ever alerted committee members to the criminal activity they uncovered.

The investigation was ultimately supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rob Rosenstein, an Obama appointee who now serves as President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe …”

The pieces fall into place. All the Russian dossier roads lead right to Hillary Clinton

 

Flopping Aces

By

Last night another shoe dropped in the Russian “collusion” mystery which largely completed the puzzle of the dossier.

We learned of the massive financial tie between Alexander Downer and the Clinton’s:

Former Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer’s role in securing $25 million in aid from his country to help the Clinton Foundation fight AIDS is chronicled in decade-old government memos archived on the Australian foreign ministry’s website.

Downer and former President Clinton jointly signed a Memorandum of Understanding in February 2006 that spread out the grant money over four years for a project to provide screening and drug treatment to AIDS patients in Asia.

Sounds very nice on its face, but it was mishandled.

The materials Smith is giving the FBI focus on a 2006 memorandum of understanding between the Australian government and the Clinton Foundation’s Clinton HIV/AIDs Initiative (CHAI). Smith claims the foundation received a “$25M financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception” as a result of actions by Bill Clinton and Downer, who was then Australia’s minister of foreign affairs.

Also included in the Smith materials are evidence he believes shows “corrupt October 2006 backdating of false tender advertisements purporting to advertise the availability of a $15 million contract to provide HIV/AIDS services in Papua New Guinea on behalf of the Australian government after an agreement was already in place to pay the Clinton Foundation and/or associates.”

A third complaint concerns what Smith describes as “the $10 million financial advantage dishonestly obtained by deception between April 1, 2008, and Sept. 25, 2008, at Washington, D.C., New York, New York, and Canberra Australia involving an MOU between the Australian government, the “Clinton Climate Initiative,” and the purported “Global Carbon Capture and Storage Institute Inc.”

You’ll remember that Downer is the person who tipped off his government about his meeting with George Papadopoulos in a London bar in 2016 that democrats, who used to claim that the Russian dossier was everything, now assert that the meeting between these two was the spark for the Russian investigation. Oddly, the FBI did not disclose any of it.

Downer, now Australia’s ambassador to London, provided the account of a conversation with Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos at a London bar in 2016 that became the official reason the FBI opened the Russia counterintelligence probe.

But lawmakers say the FBI didn’t tell Congress about Downer’s prior connection to the Clinton Foundation. Republicans say they are concerned the new information means nearly all of the early evidence the FBI used to justify its election-year probe of Trump came from sources supportive of the Clintons, including the controversial Steele dossier.

This disclosure completes what The Hill reporter Alison Spann called the “four pillars” supporting the Russian dossier

Christopher Steele: Paid by the Clinton campaign and the DNC and who paid Kremlin operatives for the dirt on Trump

(Steele shopped the dossier to numerous journalists in the summer of 2016 after calling his buddies in the Kremlin for dirt on Trump. He ever went to Russia for the information)

Michael Isikoff: Wrote the Yahoo article based on the information fed to him be Steele.

Sid Blumenthal: Fed information to Christopher Steele via the Bruce Ohr at the obama State Department.

Alexander Downer: Now tied directly to the Clinton’s

It is also very curious that Downer just happened to sit next to Papadopoulos at the very same London bar and strike up a conversation about Hillary’s emails. What are the odds?

All of the information in the dossier ties directly to the Clinton’s. The circle closes. One has to wonder- were the Russians even involved at all?

Let’s add one more part- the Clinton’s bought Andrew McCabe and compromised him earlier.

You have to say this about the Clinton’s – they invest well.

Radical Islamic Scholar Hillary Let Back into U.S. as Sec. of State Jailed for Rape

JUDICIAL WATCH

 

The radical Islamic scholar that Hillary Clinton let back into the U.S. after a lengthy ban over terrorist ties is in jail on rape charges. This week a judge in France denied bail for Clinton’s pal, Tariq Ramadan, the grandson of Muslim Brotherhood founder and Hamas funder Hassan al Banna. Ramadan, a professor at Oxford University, was arrested in Paris last week and charged with raping two Muslim women. Both women were raped in France, according to a European news report. The first one, a 40-year-old disabled Muslim convert claims Ramadan raped and beat her in the southeastern city of Lyon in 2009 and the other, a 41-year-old feminist activist, says Ramadan raped her in Paris in 2012.

A respected Swiss newspaper, Tribune de Genève, has also reported that Ramadan seduced and had sexual relations with teenage girls at a Geneva school where he once taught. The women say Ramadan told them they were special before having sex with them in the back of his car. One of the women was 14 at the time and the others were 15 to 18 years old. They say Ramadan used his authority as their teacher to seduce them. Oxford University placed Ramadan on a leave of absence after the rape allegations surfaced as well as other accusations of assault and sexual harassment. Professor Ramadan’s teaching, supervising and examining duties will be reassigned, and he will not be present at the University or College,” reads a statement issued by Oxford in early November. “The University has consistently acknowledged the gravity of the allegations against Professor Ramadan, while emphasising the importance of fairness and the principles of justice and due process.”

As Barack Obama’s Secretary of State Clinton, a self-proclaimed women’s rights activist (her Hillary for America policy included confronting violence against women and has a section on sexual assault) went to bat for Ramadan. As part of an Obama administration effort to pursue a better relationship with Muslim communities, Clinton signed special orders to allow the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties had for years banned them from the United States. One of them was Ramadan. As the nation’s chief foreign affairs adviser, Clinton exercised her exemption authority to allow Ramadan and South African sociologist Adam Habib, a critic of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East, back into the country. The State Department had repeatedly denied their visa claiming the men present a national security threat.

Ramadan, one of the European Muslim world’s most prominent scholars, was the better known of the two. He openly supports the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, has worked for Iran and donates money to terrorist causes. His grandfather founded the Muslim Brotherhood, an influential Islamist group that advocates terrorism against Israel and the west and is known as the parent organization of Hamas and Al Qaeda. A few months before Clinton approved his U.S. visa, a Dutch university fired Ramadan over his extremism and his work for the Islamic Republic of Iran. The move capped the beloved Muslim professor’s assessment that London subway bombers were justified in acting out against their oppressors because the “British government is helping Iraqi people to be killed.” A well-known French author who has studied Ramadan extensively said the scholar is undoubtedly an agent of radicalization.

Clinton’s special waiver allowed Ramadan to visit four American cities after being banned from the U.S. for six years. He arrived in New York for a tour that included New Jersey, Chicago, Detroit and Washington. Permitting the controversial scholar to enter the U.S. was part of a broader government mission to create a new and improved relationship-based on mutual interest and mutual respect-with Muslims around the world.

The Russian Dossier: Enter, Sid

The strange case of the Russian dossier got even stranger this week with a new report from the Guardian raising a name from the seamy side of Clinton past. A “second Trump-Russia dossier” has been turned over to the FBI, the Guardian reported. The second dossier was compiled by Cody Shearer, who the Guardian identifies as a “a controversial political activist and former journalist who was close to the Clinton White House in the 1990s.”

That’s putting it mildly. Shearer in fact has long been linked to the sleaziest aspects of the Clinton operation, mainly through his close relationship with Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal. Longtime observers of the Clinton ecosystem know that when Cody appears, Sid Blumenthal is not far behind. A ceaseless schemer, Blumenthal was so offensive to the Obama White House that he was banned from an official role at Mrs. Clinton’s State Department. But that barely slowed him down. As documented by Judicial Watch and others, Blumenthal was a constant presence by Mrs. Clinton’s side during her State Department years.

Blumenthal and Shearer are connected to a global network of intelligence and military freelancers. They played a dangerous game meddling in Libyan affairs after the fall of Muammar Gaddafi. They supplied intelligence to Secretary of State Clinton in the weeks leading up to the Benghazi debacle and pitched deals to make money off the Libyan turmoil. ProPublica reports at length on the Blumenthal and Shearer’s Libyan efforts here. According to Judicial Watch’s reporting, during Mrs. Clinton’s State Department tenure, Blumenthal also promoted African business deals and meddled in European Union elections.

As for Shearer, he has a long history of dirty tricks. He’s been linked to Whitewater-era efforts to dirty up Bill Clinton critics; to shakedown politics involving the Cheyenne-Arapaho Indian tribe; and to fronting for Bosnian Serb butcher Radovan Karadzic. Read more about it here and here.

The Guardian reports that the new Shearer document makes some of the same allegations about Mr. Trump as the original Christopher Steele dossier, including “lewd acts at a five-star hotel” in Moscow. It also notes that Steele passed on the Shearer report to the FBI in October 2016, but would not vouch for its accuracy. That’s worth pausing over.

According to the Guardian, Steele provided “a copy [of the Shearer report] because it corresponded with what he had separately heard from his own independent sources.” If the reporting here is accurate, that’s quite a coincidence-that Cody Shearer and Christopher Steele were hearing the same things from different sources at pretty much the same time. A closer look at timelines and sources might be revealing. If Sid and Cody are behind the original Russian dossier sources, that would be big news indeed.

This Is Just The Beginning… Nunes Drops BOMBSHELL After Releasing The Memo

NoisyRoom.net

by

 

House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA) stated yesterday exactly what I said… there’s a lot more coming down the pike on all this. This is just the beginning. There will be more memos released as the committee concludes its investigation into the abuse of FISA warrants by the Obama administration. The State Department is next on the chopping block here.

While appearing on Fox News’ “Special Report” with host Bret Baier, Nunes confirmed what Monica Crowley was referring to yesterday. That the FISA memo is only the beginning of the investigation into all this corruption. When asked by Baier if more memos would come out, Nunes responded, “Yes, this completes just the FISA abuse portion of our investigation,” adding that the “investigation is ongoing.” “We are in the middle of what I call ‘phase two’ of our investigation, which involves other departments,” Nunes continued. “Specifically, the State Department and some of the involvement they had in this.”

If I were Democrats, I’d buckle up tight. This is going to be a very rough ride for them and deservedly so. When the FISA memo was released yesterday, there was a collective meltdown on the left and in the media. Democrats alleged that key facts were left out of the memo and that it endangered national security. As I understand it, the memo did not leave out key facts and in fact was of no consequence to national security either. It was marked classified to hide what they were doing. They said the memo was misleading and accused Republicans of trying to undermine Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation.

The memo asserts that former FBI Deputy Director Andy McCabe stated in closed-door testimony that without the anti-Trump dossier, the FBI would not have been able to secure surveillance warrants against the Trump campaign. It also claims the dossier’s author, Christopher Steele, expressed a personal animus toward Trump. That is true and I have noticed that none of the Democrats are outwardly contesting the memo and the contents of it… they are saying that it helps Putin and is unfair. Typical.

Nunes, who co-wrote the memo with Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), said he didn’t want to release the memo, but he had an obligation to the American people when he saw FISA abuse. And we owe Nunes a debt of gratitude for doing so. It was the right thing to do. “I have an obligation to the American people when we see FISA abuse,” Nunes said. “These are secret courts that exist to target for foreigners, for catching terrorists, for catching people who might be bad actors and the American citizens that are represented before this court have to be protected, and the only place that can protect them is the U.S. Congress when abuses do occur.”

“They wouldn’t have received a warrant without the dossier,” Nunes said. “The dossier was presented to the court as if it was true. The court was not told that the Democrats actually paid for this.” Nunes was adamant that it’s wrong that the FBI used opposition research, paid for by the Democratic Party and the Hillary Clinton campaign, to secure surveillance on at least one Trump associate. He also said there’s “damning” evidence that the courts were misled in an attempt to surveil a Trump campaign member.

Nunes characterized Democrats on the committee as dishonest actors who are not interested in the truth. “They know they’re not being honest actors, and I get tired of playing wack-a-mole everyday with the Democrats on this committee who never wanted to start this investigation in the first place,” he said, later adding: “These guys tell so many lies you can’t keep track of them.”

As for allegations about collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia, Nunes noted that much of the information in the dossier came from Russian sources. “So there’s clear evidence of collusion with the Russians,” Nunes said. “It just happens to be with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.” Exactly.

Comey Memo Edits Warrant Indictments

Flopping Aces

by Daniel John Sobieski

 

Now we know that not only did Hillary Clinton show intent in her handling of classified materials routed through her private server, but that former FBI Director James Comey and his team showed intent in letting her get away with it to the detriment of American national security.

Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, in a Thursday letter to current FBI Director Christopher Wray, reveals how edits to Comey’s exoneration memo went beyond changing “grossly negligent” to “extremely careless” but edited out content that shows the FBI knew Hillary was intentionally in violation of the Espionage Act but that, since the decision to exonerate her had already been made, they had to submit to the annals of history a lie they agreed upon:

Newly released documents obtained by Fox News reveal that then-FBI Director James Comey’s draft statement on the Hillary Clinton email probe was edited numerous times before his public announcement, in ways that seemed to water down the bureau’s findings considerably.Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, sent a letter to the FBI on Thursday that shows the multiple edits to Comey’s highly scrutinized statement.

In an early draft, Comey said it was “reasonably likely” that “hostile actors” gained access to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email account. That was changed later to say the scenario was merely “possible.”

Another edit showed language was changed to describe the actions of Clinton and her colleagues as “extremely careless” as opposed to “grossly negligent.” This is a key legal distinction.

Johnson, writing about his concerns in a letter Thursday to FBI Director Christopher Wray, said the original “could be read as a finding of criminality in Secretary Clinton’s handling of classified material.”

“This effort, seen in light of the personal animus toward then-candidate Trump by senior FBI agents leading the Clinton investigation and their apparent desire to create an ‘insurance policy’ against Mr. Trump’s election, raise profound questions about the FBI’s role and possible interference in the 2016 presidential election and the role of the same agents in Special Counsel Mueller’s investigation by President Trump,” Johnson said.

Indeed this does raise profound questions. Coupled with the text messages of lead investigator, FBI Agent Peter Strzok,who has become known as the Zelig of the FBI who mysteriously appeared at every controversial moment, expressing clear intent to prevent the election of Donald Trump, we have before us a criminal conspiracy in which the most powerful law enforcement agency on this planet conspired with one political party to defeat the candidate of the other:

The letter reveals specific edits made by senior FBI agents when Deputy Director Andrew McCabe exchanged drafts of Comey’s statement with senior FBI officials, including Peter Strzok, Strzok’s direct supervisor, E.W. “Bill” Priestap, Jonathan Moffa, and an unnamed employee from the Office of General Counsel (identified by Newsweek as DOJ Deputy General Counsel Trisha Anderson) – in what was a coordinated conspiracy among top FBI brass to decriminalize Clinton’s conduct by changing legal terms and phrases, omitting key information, and minimizing the role of the Intelligence Community in the email investigation. Doing so virtually assured that then-candidate Hillary Clinton would not be prosecuted.

Imagine what was at stake here. If the FBI had just followed the evidence where it led and drew the obvious conclusions, Hillary Clinton would have been indicted, the Democratic Party would have been irreparably shattered, with Donald Trump winning in a popular vote as well as electoral vote landslide. This, in the view of a corrupted and politicized FBI had to be prevented at all costs and the Comey memo had to be sanitized before its release:

(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net

Mystery Solved: Now We Know Why Comey Did Nothing About Hillary

IBD

Russia Scandal: No wonder former FBI Director James Comey refused to press charges last summer against Hillary Clinton for her egregious security breaches: It turns out, he may have been guilty of the same thing.

As the inside-the-beltway political publication The Hill reported, more than half of the memos FBI Director James Comey wrote after having spoken to President Trump about the Russia investigation contained classified information. The Hill cites as its sources “officials familiar with the documents.”

Not surprisingly, perhaps, Trump on Monday morning tweeted out an angry response: “James Comey leaked CLASSIFIED INFORMATION to the media. That is so illegal!”

He may be onto something there.

Continue reading