Uranium One Deal: ‘More Evidence That the Democrats Are Perfectly Willing to Work With the Russians’

December 22, 2017

WRITER

On Thursday’s episode of “The Glenn Beck Radio Program,” Ben Shapiro filled viewers in on the latest details to emerge from the Uranium One deal involving Russians, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Democratic Party.

The latest

Today, NBC News is reporting that Attorney General Jeff Sessions ordered investigators at the Justice Department to ask FBI agents to explain all of the evidence they found in the Uranium One investigation.

Timeline: What You Need to Know About Uranium One

“At issue is a 2010 transaction in which the Obama Administration allowed the sale of U.S. uranium mining facilities to Russia’s state atomic energy company,” while Hillary was secretary of state NBC reported.

While there were no charges brought against Obama and Hillary’s camp despite allegations of corruption at the time of the sale, many Clinton Foundation donors happened to profit from the deal along with Bill and Hillary.

The evidence is staggering and the amount of details emerging can be overwhelming, but it’s something you need to know about.

Listen above to hear Ben delve into the tangled web of lies surrounding the mysterious deal.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

BEN: Okay. So this is breaking news. Attorney General Jeff Sessions apparently has ordered investigators at the Justice Department to ask FBI agents to explain all the evidence they found in the Uranium One investigation. This is a report from Tom Winter, Pete Williams, and Ken Delanian at NBC News.

Apparently, the interviews with FBI agents are part of the Justice Department's effort to fulfill a promise to an assistant's attorney general made to Congress last month, to examine whether a special council was warranted to look into what has become known as the Uranium One deal.

You remember all the details surrounding Uranium One. That issue is a 2010 transaction, in which the Obama administration allowed the sale of a US uranium mining facility, to Russian state atomic energy company. Hillary was Secretary of State at the time. The State Department was one of the nine agencies that agreed to approve the deal.

Now, senior law enforcement official was briefed on the initial FBI investigation, told NBC News, there are allegations of corruption surrounding the process, under which the US government approved the sale.

No charges were filed. But as the New York Times reported in April 2015, some of the people associated with the deal contributed millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation.

And Bill Clinton was paid half a million dollars for one speech in Moscow by a Russian investment bank with links to the transaction. Hillary says she has nothing to do with it. Of course, that is somewhat doubtful. That is somewhat doubtful.

And there are a lot of people a few weeks back who were trying to undermine the suspicions about the Uranium One deal. And I did a bit of a summary over at my website, Daily Wire, talking about what exactly happened in the Uranium One story. So here is what was true about the Uranium One deal.

There's a guy named Frank JEW-STRA. Frank JEW-STRA was the original owner of Uranium One. And people said, okay. Well, he had invested it by the time of the sale of Uranium One and its assets to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. But here is what is true: JEW-STRA owned a company called Eurasia.

That was sold to Uranium One. JEW-STRA then said he divested his personal stake in the company, but his shareholders still own 60 percent of the company. And there's no way to confirm the truth of this claim.

In 2009 and 2010, Rosatom, which is Russia's atomic energy agency, was poised to buy a majority of the company. They were barred by law from supporting American Uranium abroad. So it wasn't that Russia was going to buy the uranium, send it back to Russia, and then use it to make bombs to murder Americans or something. That was not really the concern.

The real concern here was that Russia bought Uranium One because they actually didn't want the American assets. They bought Uranium One because Uranium One had assets in other countries that they could use to make news.

In 2013, Russia bought the rest of Uranium One with the approval of the committee on foreign investment in the United States, as well as the US nuclear regulatory commission in Utah agencies.

The CFIUS includes the State Department. Hillary Clinton said she had nothing to do with the green lighting.

So how much money actually flowed from Uranium One beneficiaries to the Clinton Foundation? Well, if you don't include JEW-STRA, about $4 million.

If you include JEW-STRA, it's 145 million. But this is all a little too simplistic.

So in 2015, here's what the New York Times reported. The Uranium One acquisition actually began in 2005, while JEW-STRA still owned the company.

Bill Clinton -- Bill Clinton flew with JEW-STRA to Kazakhstan, where the two of them dined with the authoritarian president, a guy named Nursultan Nazarbayev.

Clinton then handed the Kazakh president a propaganda -- this is the New York Times not me. When he expressed support from Mr. Nazarbayev's bid to head an international national elections monitoring group, undercutting American policy and criticism of Kazakhstan's poor human rights record, by among other people, over to Clinton. Within days of the visit, JEW-STRA's fledgling Eurasia signed a preliminary deal, giving it stakes in three uranium mines controlled by Kazakhaprom, which was the Kazakhstan official energy agency.

Eurasia then in 2007 merged with Uranium One, a South African company with assets in Africa and Australia in a $3.5 billion transaction. The new company kept the Uranium One name. It was controlled by Eurasia investors, including Ian Telfer, who is a Canadian who became chairman. JEW-STRA says at that point he sold his stake.

Soon Uranium One began to snap up companies with assets in the United States.

In April 2007, it announced that it was going to purchase the uranium mill in Utah. The questions about Rosatom's control of Uranium isn't really about the Russians crafting nukes, as I say. It's about shortages of uranium in the United States and us being dependent on foreign sources for that material. And, again, about Rosatom purchasing nuclear material in Kazakhstan. And the Clintons were still involved at this time. They were involved past the sale.

This is the point. It didn't end with JEW-STRA selling Rosatom. I mean, selling Uranium One.

The new head, Ian Telfer, he gave between 1.3 million and 5.6 million in contributions to the Clinton foundation.

From a constellation of people with ties to Uranium One or Eurasia. Without the assets, the Kazakh mines, the Russians would have had no interest in the deal. Amid the influx of Uranium One-connected money, Clinton was invited to speak in Moscow in June 2010. The same month Rosatom struck its deal for a majority stake in Uranium One. So the same month that Rosatom decided to buy Uranium One,

Clinton spent time in Moscow and got 500 grand for it. It's not at all unclear that the Clintons were unrelated to Uranium One. So, again, just more evidence that Democrats are perfectly willing to work with the Russians when they saw a way to benefit from it.

5 videos that reveal the WOKE GARBAGE being taught to our kids

School today is not like it used to be...

Glenn recently covered how our medical schools have been taken over by gender-affirming, anti-racist, woke garbage, and unfortunately, it doesn't stop there. Education at all levels has been compromised by progressive ideology. From high-level university academics to grade school, American children are constantly being bombarded by the latest backward propaganda from the left. Luckily, in the age of Zoom classes and smartphones, it's harder for teachers to get away their agenda in secret. Here are five videos that show just how corrupt schools really are:

Woke teacher vandalizes pro-life display

Professor Shellyne Rodriguez, an art professor at Hunter College in New York, was caught on camera having a violent argument with a group of pro-life students who were tabling on campus. Rodriguez was later fired from her position after threatening a reporter from the New York Post, who was looking into this incident, with a machete.

Woke professor argues with student after he called police heroes

An unnamed professor from Cypress College was captured having a heated discussion with a student over Zoom. The professor verbally attacked the student, who had given a presentation on "cancel culture" and his support of law enforcement. The university later confirmed that the professor was put on leave after the incident.

Professor goes on Anti-Trump rant

Professor Olga Perez Stable Cox was filmed by a student going on an anti-Trump rant during her human-sexuality class at Orange Coast College. This rant included Professor Cox describing Trump's election as "an act of terrorism”. The student who filmed this outburst was suspended for an entire semester along with several other punishments, including a three-page apology essay to Professor Cox explaining his actions. Orange Coast College continues to defend Professor Cox, citing the student code of conduct.

Unhinged teacher caught on video going on left-wing political rant

Lehi High School teacher Leah Kinyon was filmed amid a wild, left-wing rant during a chemistry class. Kinyon made several politically charged remarks, which included encouraging students to get vaccinated and calling President Trump a "literal moron." Despite her claims that the school admins "don't give a crap" about her delusional ramblings, a statement from Lehi High School reveals that she "is no longer an employee of Alpine School District."

Far-left Berkeley law professor melts down when a Senator asks her if men can get pregnant

During a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Berkeley Law Professor Khiara M. Bridges was asked by Missouri Senator Josh Hawley to clarify earlier statements involving "people with a capacity for pregnancy." The senator's line of questioning is met with a long-winded, frantic rant accusing the senator of being transphobic. When Sen. Hawley tries to clarify further, Professor Bridges makes the outrageous claim that such a line of questioning somehow leads to trans suicides.

Woke ideology trumps medicine in America's top 5 medical schools

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Progressive ideology has infected our most prestigious medical schools and is seeping into our medical system.

As Glenn covered in his latest TV special, "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI), and leftist rhetoric have overtaken science and medicine as the focus of medical schools across the nation. The next generation of doctors and nurses is being force-fed DEI and "anti-racist" nonsense at the expense of slipping standards. This has led to a decline in people's trust in the medical industry and for good reason. Woke ideology has already been the driving force behind at least one medical malpractice case, and more are undoubtedly on the way.

All of this is being spearheaded by universities, which have integrated DEI practices into the fabric of their programs. Our top medical schools now require students and staff to participate in mandatory DEI and "anti-racist" classes and training and are adjusting the standards to reflect this new shift in focus. Here are 5 statements from the top American medical schools that show that medicine is no longer their primary focus:

Harvard Medical School

Boston Globe / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Harvard University "Unconscious bias" resource page:

“As members of HMS, we each have a responsibility to create an inclusive community that values all individuals. Barriers to inclusion may include assumptions we make about others that guide our interactions. Recognizing our Unconscious Bias is a critical step in developing a culture of equity and inclusion within HMS and in our partnerships with other communities.”

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Rob Carr / Staff | Getty Images

Pulled from the JHM Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity blog:

“One-hour live, virtual unconscious bias training ... [w]ill be required at all Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) entities for managers and above; hospital nurse leaders; credentialed providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners); and for school of medicine faculty and trainees (including residents, fellows, medical and graduate students, and research postdocs), as well as those at a manager level or above.”

Stanford University School of Medicine

Philip Pacheco / Stringer | Getty Images

Found on the Stanford Medicine Commission on Justice and Equity page:

“The Commission on Justice and Equity—composed of external and internal leaders, experts, and advocates—represents an institution-wide, collaborative effort to dismantle systemic racism and discrimination within our own community and beyond.”

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Penn Medicine Commitment to Inclusion, Equity, and Antiracism site:

“We openly acknowledge the role of structural forces of oppression as primary drivers of the disparate health outcomes. We believe that working to reverse the underrepresentation of historically excluded groups is critical in achieving equitable health outcomes. While this is an ongoing journey for our program, here are some of the tangible steps we have taken to achieve an inclusive culture”

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Jeenah Moon / Stringer | Getty Images

Pulled from the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, Justice, and Anti-Racism page:

"Courses are being revised to be more inclusive and informed by the key principle of race as a social construct and a social determinant of health. We are training faculty that Anti-Racism is not an add-on to a course. Anti-Racism is a pedagogy - a manner of teaching, designing courses, and measuring learning outcomes. We make sure that the classroom environment is inclusive by holding space for respectful conversation and ensuring that we address any “classroom ruptures”– a disorienting dilemma or situation when a bias or microaggression that may occur, providing real time opportunities for professional development, learning, and growth. Racist actions and remarks are never tolerated at Columbia University and will be dealt with following established protocols."

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.

Top 5 MOST EVIL taxes the government extorts from you

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." -Ben Franklin

The injustice of taxation has been a core issue for Americans since the very beginning of our country, and it's a problem we have yet to resolve. This belief was recently reignited in many Americans earlier this month on tax day when the numbers were crunched and it was discovered that the government was somehow owed even more hard-earned money. As Glenn recently discussed on his show, it's getting to be impossible for most Americans to afford to live comfortably, inflation is rising, and our politicians keep getting richer.

The taxpayer's burden is heavier than ever.

The government is not above some real low blows either. While taxes are a necessary evil, some taxes stretch the definition of "necessary" and emphasize the "evil." Here are the top five most despicable taxes that are designed to line the IRS coffers at your expense:

Income Tax

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." -Ben Franklin

On February 24th, 2024 we hit a very unfortunate milestone, the 101st anniversary of the 16th Amendment, which authorized federal income tax. Where does the government get the right to steal directly out of your paycheck?

Death Taxes

Dan Mullan / Staff | Getty Images

"Now my advice for those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes" -George Harrison

Not even in death can you escape the cold pursuit of the tax collector. It's not good enough that you have to pay taxes on everything you buy and every penny you make your entire life. Now the feds want a nice slice, based on the entire value of your estate, that can be as much as 40 percent. Then the state government gets to stick their slimy fingers all over whatever remains before your family is left with the crumbs. It's practically grave-robbery.

Payroll

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." -John Marshall

What's that? The nice chunk of your paycheck the government nabs before you can even get it to the bank wasn't enough? What if the government taxed your employer just for paying you? In essence, you make less than what your agreed pay rate is and it costs your employer more! Absolutely abominable.

Social Security

VALERIE MACON / Contributor | Getty Images

"We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much." -Ronald Reagan

Everyone knows the collapse of Social Security is imminent. It has limped along for years, only sustained by a torrent of tax dollars and the desperate actions of politicians. For decades, people have unwillingly forked over money into the system they will never see again.

FICA

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

"What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue." -Thomas Paine

FICA is the payroll equivalent of Social Security. Your employer has to match however much you pay. It means it costs your employer even more to pay you—again, you'll NEVER see that money. At this point, are you even working for yourself, or are you just here to generate money for the government to frivolously throw away?