|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
18th October 2017, 11:22 AM | #1 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
FBI knew of Russian Bribery before Clinton/Obama approved Uranium Deal / New Inve
Quote:
Quote:
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...administration |
18th October 2017, 11:24 AM | #2 |
Fiend God
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
|
Nothingburger.
|
18th October 2017, 11:31 AM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
18th October 2017, 11:40 AM | #4 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
18th October 2017, 12:00 PM | #5 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,025
|
At the least, this seems to expose some hypocrisy on the left. It's not exactly the same as Russians influencing U.S. elections to be sure. But neither was the private email thing that came out that had liberals screaming hypocrisy, comparing the situation to the Hillary emails.
Also, Reddit has banned multiple users from r/news that tried to post the article. That's what got me interested. |
18th October 2017, 12:04 PM | #6 |
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 20,632
|
Just a little reminder here as the morons write in the first paragraph about "Putin's atomic energy business": Putin wasn't president during the time in question, and he isn't Russia.
Now. Time to lock her up (I think the news here is mainly that the FBI knew - there was a lot known about these deals before). |
18th October 2017, 12:43 PM | #7 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Here is an interesting timeline that should help fill in some blanks:
Timeline: The Clintons, the Russians, and Uranium |
18th October 2017, 01:03 PM | #8 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: As far away from casebro as possible.
Posts: 7,070
|
And the article specifically refers to the administration at the time.
|
__________________
There is no secret ingredient - Kung Fu Panda |
|
18th October 2017, 01:08 PM | #9 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
18th October 2017, 01:12 PM | #10 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
18th October 2017, 01:18 PM | #11 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
And the discussion seems to be is it a bad decision or not. The fact a bunch of other people with knowledge and a stake thought it was not a bad idea is important in assessing the decision quality. One aspect of a decision does not dictate the whole story of the decision.
|
18th October 2017, 01:35 PM | #12 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Have you had a chance to research anything on this? I mean, at all?
First you missed the Obama reference, now you are missing the "bribery" aspect. And you are claiming that it is a "fact" that people "with knowledge" thought it was "not a bad idea" which appear to be something you just made up out of whole cloth. |
18th October 2017, 01:43 PM | #13 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
18th October 2017, 01:51 PM | #14 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
18th October 2017, 01:57 PM | #15 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
18th October 2017, 02:07 PM | #16 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Midwest USA
Posts: 1,025
|
Did the FBI inform these agencies about the corruption? I haven't read through everything yet...
|
18th October 2017, 02:10 PM | #17 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
18th October 2017, 02:11 PM | #18 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
|
18th October 2017, 02:33 PM | #19 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
|
Those Russia investigations seem to be going very well
|
18th October 2017, 03:19 PM | #20 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes
Posts: 11,098
|
|
__________________
"Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275 |
|
18th October 2017, 03:25 PM | #21 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Hey, thanks for checking in! Always special when someone checks into a thread with really helpful comments like:
"Add "Reading the English Language" to the list of things you refuse to do." say, that just SINGS! Can I borrow that? By the way, and I hate to be a pesky sort, but you deliberately failed to, you know, quote the entire post that I read. Here it is: "A) does not mean it was a bad decision. You don't just get to claim that as given. It isn't." I put the part you deliberately cut out right back in there. Now, some would say, rwguinn (and thanks for checking in!) that the sentence I read in actual English was about as clear as *********** mud. But hat tip for checking in and managing to post literally nothing on the subject! HAT TIP! |
18th October 2017, 03:31 PM | #22 |
Banned
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 22,789
|
"Does not mean it was a bad decision" is also not asserting that it wasn't a bad decision. It is three sentences in a row. the next sentence refers to the previous sentence.
Let's try a few explicit changes to demonstrate... 1.does not mean it was a bad decision. You don't just get to claim that as given. It isn't a given. 2.does not mean it was a bad decision. You don't just get to claim that as given. It isn't a bad decision. I think it is quite clear number 1 sounds like a more coherent set of three statements than number 2. |
18th October 2017, 05:15 PM | #23 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
Is there any evidence they did anything other than donate money to her charity? Because if that is all they did I say good for them; it was a good charity and I'm sure the money was used well.
Other than that I don't care. |
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
19th October 2017, 07:33 AM | #24 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
Senate seeks to interview FBI informant in Russian nuclear bribery case
Quote:
Quote:
http://thehill.com/policy/national-s...uclear-bribery |
19th October 2017, 01:54 PM | #25 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
A Russian nuclear firm under FBI investigation was allowed to purchase US uranium supply
Good article with some background documents that I am certain avid readers will find of interest. |
19th October 2017, 02:11 PM | #26 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: No longer Philadelphia :(
Posts: 5,770
|
Clearly the Russians have been engaging in shady activities designed to harm the U.S. and profit from it for some time.
It is high time that the legitimacy of any government officials with ties to them, especially those in positions of great authority, be scrutinized. I would even say that those with such ties be removed from office until it can be reasonably verified that they are not dupes, or puppets of, the Russians. |
__________________
The man with one watch knows what time it is, the man with two watches is never sure. |
|
24th October 2017, 11:21 AM | #27 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
|
When things aren't going well, start another Clinton investigation
There are so many to choose from. Just open that old Clinton Cash book and pick a dead horse to beat. And of course you can add on another Clinton email investigation while you are at it, Trumpers need to discredit Comey some more.
House GOP launches probes into Obama-era uranium deal, Clinton email inquiry
Quote:
Two familiar GOP names are involved, Nunes and Peter King. Nunes would love to prove Putin supported Clinton:
Quote:
Fake News:
Quote:
|
24th October 2017, 11:24 AM | #28 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
House Opens Investigation into Obama Era scheme
The Oversight and Intelligence Committees’ investigation also resurrects allegations that Clinton or others in the Obama administration mishandled a government decision to green-light a deal giving Russia control over a sizable percentage of the country’s uranium resources.
Oversight committee member Ron DeSantis (R-Fla.) said Tuesday that members had identified a “witness who was a confidential informant who wants to talk about his role in this” but were trying to first get the witness released from a nondisclosure agreement with the Justice Department. Seems like the President can say the word and get that Obama/Clinton era NDA tossed in the trash. Do so now! |
24th October 2017, 11:31 AM | #29 |
Philosopher
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Cole Valley, CA
Posts: 5,335
|
"At this point, what difference does it make?"
|
__________________
So, if he's doing it by divine means, I can only tell him this: 'Mr. Geller, you're doing it the hard way.' --James Randi |
|
24th October 2017, 11:36 AM | #30 |
Just the right amount of cowbell
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Well past Hither, looking for Yon
Posts: 6,710
|
|
__________________
"In times of war, we need warriors. But this isn't a war." - Phil Plaitt |
|
24th October 2017, 11:41 AM | #31 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
Seeing as though this is only fodder for morons and idiots, I didn't bother to look into the uranium thing.
Can someone give me a cliffs notes version of what I already suspect? She had little to do with it and whatever it is is actually a nothingburger. |
24th October 2017, 11:45 AM | #32 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
Hawt Dawg!
As my old meteorologist (RIP) Dick Albert used to say about the weather... MOTS More of the Same. Yawn. |
24th October 2017, 11:46 AM | #33 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
24th October 2017, 11:51 AM | #34 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
24th October 2017, 11:53 AM | #35 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
|
|
24th October 2017, 11:55 AM | #36 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
|
Guess my thread needs to be merged, I missed this one. Except this one belongs in the CT forum and mine still belongs in the USA Politics forum.
When things aren't going well, start another Clinton investigation To answer your question, there was no pro quo, nada, none. Clinton had no influence on the uranium deal. You think if there was any evidence she had, that wouldn't have been all over the news sooner than this? Of course if you are delusional, you believe CNN and MSNBC are in on a big coverup of this news. |
24th October 2017, 11:57 AM | #37 |
Guest
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
|
|
24th October 2017, 11:57 AM | #38 |
Nasty Woman
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 96,386
|
|
24th October 2017, 12:26 PM | #39 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 13,384
|
I'm not sure about the email issues. On the one hand, Hillary destroyed allegedly unrelated emails around the time of a subpoena. On the other hand, I trust a well maintained private server more than I trust public servers.
We'll have to wait and see whether Kushner, et al, risked confidential materials. |
24th October 2017, 12:38 PM | #40 |
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 29,033
|
Another investigation. Awesome.
Oh, well, they have to have something to do. All the good golf courses will be closing down for winter soon, at least for people who don't have a In all seriousness, there have been so many investigations that they don't really raise my eyebrows anymore. When they issue their report, if there's anything in it other than, "We didn't find anything, but that's because they are hiding it." I'll pay more attention. |
Thread Tools | |
|
|