Valdimir, Barack, Hillary, UraniunOne: The media coverup of the coverup begins!

The media coverup of the coverup begins.

The Washington Post ran a column titled “Making sense of Russia, uranium and Hillary Clinton” by Callum Borchers on October 19, 2017. The WaPo’s Borchers admits, in part, that, “Investigators’ findings suggest that maybe it wasn’t such a good idea to let Russia buy the [Uranium One] mining company.”

Why? Because by selling Uranium One to the Russians, Vladimir Putin, “controls one-fifth of uranium mining capacity in the United States.” Borchers notes, “Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security…”

But Borchers begins to defend the deal in general and then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a member of the committee that approved the sale, in particular. Borchers begins his column with these three paragraphs:

To hear Sean Hannity tell it, the media is ignoring “what is becoming the biggest scandal — or, at least, one of them — in American history.”

Hannity is jumping waaay ahead of the facts. So is Breitbart News, which has been running misleading headlines like this: “FBI uncovers confirmation of Hillary Clinton’s corrupt uranium deal with Russia.”

Brent Bozell, founder of the conservative Media Research Center, claims that there is “another coverup in the making.” And President Trump chimed in Thursday morning on Twitter.

Borchers gives his rationale for starting his column in this way when he wrote:

New reporting this week by the Hill has, indeed, added a layer of intrigue to the sale of a uranium mining company to Russia’s atomic energy agency, which was approved by the Clinton-led State Department and eight other U.S. government agencies. But the latest developments, as they relate to Clinton, are not as explosive as certain news outlets — eager to draw attention away from reporting on President Trump and Russia — would have you believe.

Borchers is saying don’t look at what at the left hand did, focus on what the right hand may or may not have done.

Borchers quotes the October 17th story by John Solomon and Alison Spann published in The Hill.  But Borchers only mentions in his column the FBI investigation of Russian bribery of a trucking company that carries nuclear materials. Borchers ignores the opening paragraph of the Solomon and Spann article:

Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of American uranium, the FBI 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.

Solomon and Spann also reported:

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds” from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

[ … ]

“The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion threats, all of which raised legitimate national security concerns. And none of that evidence got aired before the Obama administration made those decisions,” a person who worked on the case told The Hill, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution by U.S. or Russian officials

Borchers asks: So, did committee members — especially Clinton — know what the FBI had found? His answer: That’s unclear.

Borchers claims, “But there is reason to doubt that Clinton would have been in the know. The FBI investigation was still four years from completion at the time that the uranium deal was approved.”

The issue is not the completion of the FBI investigation, the issue is that the investigation was initiated and going on while Clinton was negotiating the deal, which became part of the Obama legacy.

Maybe Uranium One is what Loretta Lynch and Bill Clinton were discussing during their meeting on the tarmac during the election? We won’t know for sure what was discussed until the FBI releases their 30 page document, which the FBI said didn’t exist, about the Lynch/Clinton meeting.

Level of intrigue indeed.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Wall Street Whistleblower Says Clinton Foundation Purposely Hid Russian-Uranium One Payments

Why Trump’s Not Replacing Bureaucrats Enables the ‘Deep State’

---