“I was speechless and angry in October 2010 when CFIUS approved the Uranium One sale to Rosatom.”
“U.S. prosecutors unsealed money laundering, foreign bribery and wire fraud charges…”
Hat trick or unified-field theory?
“Campbell’s FBI informant file shows Uranium One came up several times in 2010 as the sale was pending”
“‘Looks like’ is not enough basis to appoint a special counsel.”
And also Uranium One.
NBC: Podesta Group in Mueller cross-hairs.
“Would State have concerns about WJC seeing any of these folks”
Plus a Trump tweak?
“Recognizing that your work has received an excellent grade is one of the most important rewards in life.”
“Russian nuclear officials had routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation…”
You know what would have been nice? A counter-disinformation team.
“[A] thin reed upon which to base an analytical judgment.”
Truth-telling: the conclusion.
Reminder: This is the Iocane Powder cycle.
Conflicts of interest.
Culture of corruption.
The Hillary Standard.
“Why is there one standard for me, and not for everybody else?”
Follow the money.
$57.5 million as Secretary of State?
Correlation or causation?
The quid, the quo, and a couple of old pros in between.
CFIUS is more than rolling stones up a hill.
Deny, deflect, disinform.
“When you have this many, to me it’s a trend.”
As good as it gets.
Was a US Secretary of State “bribed to grease the sale of strategic assets to Russia”?
Queen pro quo.
Quid pro quo.
It’s a wash
SCOTUS seems to approve