According to the Wall Street Journal, the soon to be released book Clinton Cash reports three major new instances of Hillary Clinton getting massive cash donations to the Clinton Foundation at the same time that the donors were in need of her assistance as secretary of state.
The first example involves the sale of the biggest uranium mine in the USA to the atomic agency of Russia. That's right; it's not a typo. The mine that produces half of all uranium mined in the USA was sold to and agency of Putin's Russia. Sale of such a strategic asset for our national defense had to be approved by a government panel of which Hillary was a member. The sale was approved and Hillary did nothing to stop it. At the same time, the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative which is part of the Clinton Foundation got nearly three million dollars from the family charity of the chairman of the company selling the mine.
To say the least, this story is astounding. The Clintons keep saying that all donations to the foundation are listed on their website, but this contribution is mysteriously not shown. The money that was donated came from another foundation which has its own causes that it supports. There is no need for one charity to support another, so why the contribution? Most important, it is inconceivable that a secretary of state would see no problem with selling over half of America's uranium supply to a Russia led by Vladimir Putin, but the head of the oversight panel says that Hillary raised no objection to the sale.
The other two instances of what looks like graft discussed in the Journal include one in which the US ambassador to Bangldesh intervened with that country's government to push for approval of open pit mining at a site in the northern part of the country. The mine proposal came from Polo Resources, a company which just a short time before had donated two million shares to the Clinton Foundation. This is another donation which somehow does not appear on the Foundation website.
There is also a contract given to the company Digicel to provide telephone service in Haiti after the earthquake, a program run by the Clinton Foundation. The head of Digicel gave between 5 and 10 million dollars to the foundation, but the Journal says that the dates of the contributions are not known for certain.
Without a doubt, Hillary and her henchmen will tell us all that these are meaningless distractions and that there is no proof of any wrongdoing. They are wrong. These are three separate instances of action or inaction by Hillary Clinton that look and smell terrible. Add these to the ones we learned about earlier and the weight of the evidence is just too great to ignore. Hillary can no longer refuse to address these instances with specifics. Let her tell us why she said nothing to stop the sale of over half of America's uranium supply to the Russians. Let her explain why these donations were never disclosed. Let her explain how the State Department failed to take action against a major violator of the US sanctions against Iran following some rather large donations to the foundation. Let her tell us what expenses of hers the foundation picked up.
Continued silence from Hillary seems like an admission of guilt. Her silence truly makes it seem that she is a crook.
The first example involves the sale of the biggest uranium mine in the USA to the atomic agency of Russia. That's right; it's not a typo. The mine that produces half of all uranium mined in the USA was sold to and agency of Putin's Russia. Sale of such a strategic asset for our national defense had to be approved by a government panel of which Hillary was a member. The sale was approved and Hillary did nothing to stop it. At the same time, the Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative which is part of the Clinton Foundation got nearly three million dollars from the family charity of the chairman of the company selling the mine.
To say the least, this story is astounding. The Clintons keep saying that all donations to the foundation are listed on their website, but this contribution is mysteriously not shown. The money that was donated came from another foundation which has its own causes that it supports. There is no need for one charity to support another, so why the contribution? Most important, it is inconceivable that a secretary of state would see no problem with selling over half of America's uranium supply to a Russia led by Vladimir Putin, but the head of the oversight panel says that Hillary raised no objection to the sale.
The other two instances of what looks like graft discussed in the Journal include one in which the US ambassador to Bangldesh intervened with that country's government to push for approval of open pit mining at a site in the northern part of the country. The mine proposal came from Polo Resources, a company which just a short time before had donated two million shares to the Clinton Foundation. This is another donation which somehow does not appear on the Foundation website.
There is also a contract given to the company Digicel to provide telephone service in Haiti after the earthquake, a program run by the Clinton Foundation. The head of Digicel gave between 5 and 10 million dollars to the foundation, but the Journal says that the dates of the contributions are not known for certain.
Without a doubt, Hillary and her henchmen will tell us all that these are meaningless distractions and that there is no proof of any wrongdoing. They are wrong. These are three separate instances of action or inaction by Hillary Clinton that look and smell terrible. Add these to the ones we learned about earlier and the weight of the evidence is just too great to ignore. Hillary can no longer refuse to address these instances with specifics. Let her tell us why she said nothing to stop the sale of over half of America's uranium supply to the Russians. Let her explain why these donations were never disclosed. Let her explain how the State Department failed to take action against a major violator of the US sanctions against Iran following some rather large donations to the foundation. Let her tell us what expenses of hers the foundation picked up.
Continued silence from Hillary seems like an admission of guilt. Her silence truly makes it seem that she is a crook.
No comments:
Post a Comment