« What? That can't be!! | Main | Tillerson dosn't have a clue ... »

25 October 2017


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Eric Newhill

Just to check my level set, as I understand it, Uranium One isn't exactly as Trump's dumbed down sound bite for mass consumption has it, yet it is, ultimately pretty bad.

What I [think] I understand; A Canadian company, Uranium One, controls significant Uranium mining rights all over the globe; including in the US. The Russians proposed, and eventually received, approval to purchase a controlling interest in the company. Clinton is a member of the committee that assessed the proposed purchase. Obama had the final say, but the president tends to rubber stamp a deal. During the time +/- the proposed Russian purchase of controlling interest was being considered by SFIUS (the committee) the Clinton Foundation began receiving large sums of money from Canadian sources related to the deal.

The Russians cannot actually take the 20% of US uranium they now control out of the country (though some reports are that they have). However, we (Americans) would have to have Russian cooperation to access 20% of Uranium in US soil. The real kicker here is that the Russians, through Uranium One, gained access to much larger uranium deposits in Kazakhstan and that Uranium can be moved to wherever the Russians desire. In fact, it is likely that access to that uranium is why the Russians were interested in Uranium One. So that was handed to them by the Obama admin. and Clinton.

Sound about right?

Publius Tacitus

Yep. That sums it up.


Great information. Thank you for lining everything out so clearly.

I have not read the Dossier, of course. I have read reports about some of its most bizarre contentions, especially those about Trump's supposed activities in Russian hotel rooms. Those made me wonder how anyone would take the Dossier seriously in the first place.

But then I thought to myself, "Isn't that stuff that Bill Clinton would find credible? And now that I think of it, it's also stuff that dirty old man McCain might also find credible.

Your reporting on the facts of the case is very helpful. But my gut reaction about the nature of Bill and John has also confirmed your conclusion. As for Hillary, there is nothing but gross ambition in her and no real moral compass. I can clearly seeing her doing this so she could try to explain "what happened" in regard to the loss of her chance to get back into the WH.


This is from the wikileaks on Uranium One, and I quote it to bring in the name of Frank Giustra:

"In 2007 Uranium One acquired a controlling interest in UrAsia Energy, a Canadian firm with headquarters in Vancouver, from Frank Giustra. UrAsia Energy has interests in rich uranium operations in Kazakhstan. UrAsia Energy's acquisition of its Kazakhstan uranium interests from Kazatomprom followed a trip to Almaty in 2005 by Giustra and former U.S. President Bill Clinton where they met with Nursultan Nazarbayev, the leader of Kazakhstan. Substantial contributions to the Clinton Foundation by Giustra followed, with Clinton, Giustra, and Mexican telecommunications billionaire Carlos Slim in 2007 establishing the Clinton Foundation's Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative to combat poverty in the developing world. In addition to his initial contribution of $100 million Giustra pledged to contribute half of his future earnings from mining to the initiative."



PT exelent work, unfortunately I don’t see MSM is willing to expand and spread this. From what I see they have already started to divert and contain it.


Rinat Akmetshin was at Halifax Conference with McCain in December 2016.


Kazakh official who transferred Kazakh uranium assets to Clinton's associates later sentenced to 14 years for corruption. Investigators need to look at who owned stock in acquisition.


It will be interesting to see how/if "The Establishment" manages to bury this unwinding scandal

The NY Times provided details in 2015, but so far, no follow up

John Helmer, an Australian reporter domiciled in Moscow notes:

Helmer ('Dancing with Bears') is worth watching - he regularly provides detailed references to the machinations of the Russian Oligarchy. These are a useful wakeup call to those overly idealise Putin / Russia


After 9/11, the FBI should have been cleaned out for incompetence.
Now, it needs to be cleaned out for corruption.
And I don't mean most of the "feebs" in the field;they're just keeping their heads down to get to their pension.
It's the top that's dirty - and apparently no more competent.
Then the DOJ - an arm of the Democrat party - needs to be cleaned out, including the so-called "non-partisan career professionals".....LMAO.

Peter AU

Back when following MH17, I found it took leaps of faith to follow Helmer across the large gaps between solid facts.
your linked article appears no different, linking articles from guardian, NYT, and other similar publications as facts.
Rather than linking directly to a transcript of what Putin has said, helmer will link to a NYT or guarding article for their take on what has been said. This is why it is difficult to take Helmer seriously.


The first atom bombs used uranium as fuel. Hydrogen bombs use plutonium and hydrogen. Hydrogen bombs are an order or more of magnitude more powerful.

So the Russians got some uranium, big deal. Like everything else blown orders of magnitude out of proportion but the Clintons have their greedy fingers in everything they can make a buck at. They deserve to be taken down HARD!

Correct me if I am wrong.

Peter in Toronto

Does anyone here actually know what the deal with McCain is?

What is his purpose in this chicanery? How does he get elected in Arizona when he doesn't even serve his constituents, and is more often than not, pursuing some sort of war in a distant part of the world, or acting as an agent on behalf of the security interests of Israel?

blue peacock


What do your sources tell you about how compromised Mueller is? He's been around a long time in the midst of a lot of DC shenanigans. He seems to epitomize a Swamp creature.

For those sleuthing around, there is an interesting factoid. The Democrat law firm that paid Fusion GPS for the Steele dossier, also paid Crowdstrike to "investigate" the DNC email "leak".

The Clinton's have always been among the sleaziest politicians at the highest levels of our government. They have felt invincible as they have in many ways lead the Democrat party apparat for a long time and were in the same policy mindset as the top GOP establishment.

It was clear during the general election and during the transition that there was a concerted campaign to oust Trump through innuendo and media hysteria by top leaders of both political parties, key intel agency leaders and the entirety of the MSM. Why did they do this? What are they afraid of?

I am most interested in the role of the intelligence agencies in this soft coup as Col. Lang has labeled it. I have read earlier that McCain had discussions with Comey about the Steele dossier. The FBI seems to have paid Steele or a business associated with him. Clearly, Clapper and Brennan were media hogs pitching the "Russians subverted our democracy colluding with the Trump campaign" story. What role did they play and what role did the top echelons at the CIA and the DNI play. What were the arrangements between MI6 and US intel agencies? Steele was their guy. Why did they feel the need to interfere in a US election? There can be no doubt they did not act alone. It is an easy deduction that they worked closely with their US counterparts. Where was the NSA in all this? They hoover all electronic communications. How does the unmasking requests made by Susan Rice and Samantha Powers play into this? And finally what did Barack Hussein Obama know and what did he authorize?

This is not about Trump. This is about an attempted soft coup hatched and executed at the highest levels. This is the real subversion of democracy and our republic. The lid needs to be blown on this. And IMO, it will not come about through Mueller, Sessions, MSM, et al.

blue peacock

Frank Giustra comes up a lot. He's a key player and big funder of the Clinton Foundation. I have read that he setup a charitable trust in Canada where there is less scrutiny to funnel money to the Clintons and others.

The Clintons played an instrumental role with Kazakhstan. And there obviously was some quid pro quo. I believe what Nazarbayev got was international acceptance considering he was putting the screws on his political opposition through repression.

different clue


The uranium might be for nuclear power. And if nuclear power remains much in use, the uranium would remain very valuable.


McCain's constituents have had multiple chances to fix their original mnistake
They apparently like being represented by two "flakes."
And, BTW, my niece was a staffer on the Senate Armed Services Committee and had multiple interactions with McCain; he is NOT a nice guy.


Especially NOT Sessions.
He apparently spends his days hiding underneath his desk.


Utter nonsense. When Clinton does something every other candidate does (oppo research) conservative heads explode. As far as we know, every word of the Steele Dossier (originally paid for by the GOP) is true.


Plutonium does not exist naturally. It is created from Uranium.


So the Kremlin does not have enough money to pay their hackers?
I mean who come up with this info?


I disagree. Helmer is an old pro. He has a lot of reliable sources, quite obviously. And why shouldn't he? He's been in Russia and in the newspaper business a long time. Example is his article which Yves Smith published at Naked Capitalism-- "John Helmer: Parsing the Dossier on Trump's Alleged Bedroom Antics." Helmer may not be able to answer the question whether or not Steele is in step with MI-6 in pushing the dossier, but it seems to me he gives a good background picture as to why Steele, at 52, should be out in the cold. Helmer, in London, is able to get the evaluation of Steele privately held by a number of different intelligence officers who knew him, and knew his career, and the whole background, which is no mean feat for a reporter. Steele doesn't come out of Helmer's inquiries looking good at all. Which is not what the American MSM was saying. Which simply corroborates some of the visible facts of Steele's career. He was blown by 1996 and the Russian intelligence service told him so whenever it was (earlier?) that they stole his wife's favorite shoes before an important party. But he did get his pension after twenty and then was out. Which left him desperate to make some money, given his expensive style of life, a million dollar plus house, surely private school fees for his children, a new wife, etc. etc. Helmer is one of the best on the early revelations about Steele.

Then there is again on Naked Capitalism, and surely Dances with Bears, "JOHN HELMER: MH17--the Lie to End All Truths, and New Evidence." (September 19, 2015.) In this article --actually there were a number of them--Helmer scrutinizes the report of Dutch State Prosecutor Fred Westerbeke and certain evidence that Westerbeke lets slip, including the fact that there were only 25 metal fragments found in the victim's bodies. If a BUK had been used that is an impossibility.

Helmer also examines the report of the Coroners Court of Victoria, Australia, in some detail. He states that the Australians are withholding forensic evidence and that there is something badly wrong with the report.

Helmer's reporting is very good, very thorough, and he has worked hard to tell the West that there is something disgracefully wrong with the whole MH17 investigation. It is 'stonewall and coverup', as was said during Watergate. Further, Helmer makes the interesting claim that both Obama and Putin know what happened almost immediately.

Noone has refuted Helmer, to the best of my knowledge. The West has just let MH17 slide.

So in re Helmer: Credit where credit is due.

Pacifica Advocate

It would not be far-fetched speculation that the Russians' proposed purchase of interest in Uranium One was accompanied by an "or else--", either perceived or implied.

Kazakhstan remains firmly within the Russian orbit of influence, and it is run as a fiefdom by a vicious strongman. The payments that bought the company in Canada could just as easily have been delivered to the boss of Kazakhstan, and the same result we have now achieved--with the added bonus (for the Russians) of a critical hit to a Canadian company, as well as denial of access to U.S. and Canadian consumers. Seen that way, the purchase was almost certainly the best choice among a set of bad choices.

Publius Tacitus

You are indulging in utter nonsense. This was not oppo research. This was pure disinformation and smear. If you actually read the 13 reports you'd understand that. But it is clear you are intellectually dishonest and willing to make excuses for inexcusable conduct.


How do you know that the leader of Kazakhstan is a vicious strongman (more vicious I take it than, say, the leader of UAE)?


My personal working theory is that The Establishment has decided to toss Hillary under the bus. They can milk months if not years of "Russian criminal behaviour" from this story. My understanding is that bribes were paid, and I imagine some criminal conspiracy took place that involved some Russians.

Everyone is expendable to The Establishment, and perhaps (just perhaps) Hillary has outlived her usefulness.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

February 2021

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Blog powered by Typepad