Hillary Clinton...traitor?

A story from the New York Times (when the liberal paper of record goes after a liberal you have to take note) lines out how the Russians bought into a company named Uranium One. Note: they mine and process uranium, a strategic mineral. Anyway, to complete this transaction a government panel with Hillary Clinton representing the State Department had to okay the deal. This and other deals gave Russia (and Putin) control of 20% of the US supply. In return, the Clinton foundation got a 2.35 million dollar donation from the family who owns Uranium One. A donation that was not reported to the administration in violation of the rules, regs, and agreements of the executive branch. It also turns out that the Clinton foundation breaks off about 15% of their donations to go to charity and they keep the other 85% for who knows what. Maybe a $10 million condo in New York City, maybe a fancy new van, maybe a presidential campaign.

Anyway, even the New York Times is starting to think that Hillary is a dirty bird though that will probably not stop their support....unless they can get an O'Malley or a Warren.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us...pany.html?_r=0

Doesn't she look stylish in prison colors?

Traitor?

I consider her actions traitorous.

Yes, of course. Let's impeach....oh, wait.....not yet.

You guys are completely ridiculous.

So you assume that she is the president already???

I'll just like to send her to prison. This has been her goal her entire life.

So you assume that she is the president already??? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Obviously you do JDIdiot.

Did you ask for a picture of her JUNK?

A story from the New York Times (when the liberal paper of record goes after a liberal you have to take note) lines out how the Russians bought into a company named Uranium One. Note: they mine and process uranium, a strategic mineral. Anyway, to complete this transaction a government panel with Hillary Clinton representing the State Department had to okay the deal. This and other deals gave Russia (and Putin) control of 20% of the US supply. In return, the Clinton foundation got a 2.35 million dollar donation from the family who owns Uranium One. A donation that was not reported to the administration in violation of the rules, regs, and agreements of the executive branch. It also turns out that the Clinton foundation breaks off about 15% of their donations to go to charity and they keep the other 85% for who knows what. Maybe a $10 million condo in New York City, maybe a fancy new van, maybe a presidential campaign.

Anyway, even the New York Times is starting to think that Hillary is a dirty bird though that will probably not stop their support....unless they can get an O'Malley or a Warren.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us...pany.html?_r=0

Doesn't she look stylish in prison colors?

Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Once again, you omit pertinent info that doesn't bolster your case. It explicitly states in the article that the decisions of the SD were not made at her level. You have all these instances, but you have nothing connecting them all. Where is the smoking gun?

You also provide no proof for your 85/15 claim. It's a foundation, not a charity.

So you assume that she is the president already???

I'll just like to send her to prison. This has been her goal her entire life. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Your ability to discern sarcasm, nuance, humor, etc is so severely stunted that you appear to be retarded. Or special needs...whatever the term is these days. Truly, you are a fucking idiot who needs some remedial social skills training. Booger eater is what you are, right?

I hope Huma has a sealed letter at her attorney's office in case she ends up like Vince Foster.

Good move destroying your email server Hills.

Your ability to discern sarcasm, nuance, humor, etc is so severely stunted that you appear to be retarded. Or special needs...whatever the term is these days. Truly, you are a fucking idiot who needs some remedial social skills training. Booger eater is what you are, right? Originally Posted by timpage

Booger eater

Yes, I'm afraid ol' JD ate too many corn logs as a kid.

It seems the rest of the investors in Uranium 1 donated 145 million to the Clinton foundation.
There is absolutely nothing going on here, they just all felt charitable.
Hilary for President !

Has anyone other than me noticed that the Idiot Klan, errrr Clan is so mesmerized by Hillary's recent announcement that they have completely forgotten Obama will be the President for another 20+ months.

It appears that all of the other things they hate about Hillary might distract them from Benghazi.

Meanwhile, Obama's poll numbers are "TRENDING" upward!

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2...y-congress.cnn

It seems the rest of the investors in Uranium 1 donated 145 million to the Clinton foundation.
There is absolutely nothing going on here, they just all felt charitable.
Hilary for President ! Originally Posted by steamyromance

You have a link?

Once again, you omit pertinent info that doesn't bolster your case. It explicitly states in the article that the decisions of the SD were not made at her level. You have all these instances, but you have nothing connecting them all. Where is the smoking gun?

You also provide no proof for your 85/15 claim. It's a foundation, not a charity. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Yeah, just like Hunter Biden had no influence with his father in ramming a super sweet deal for the big credit card companies through congress - while the good son collected half a million in consulting fees from MBNA. The two surely had nothing to do with one another, just as Hillary's foundation being in receipt of more than $2 million in donations from Uranium One's chairman.

Its easy for her spokesperson to say that such deals are made below the secretary, but pardon me while I guffaw. We are talking about a deal that placed the majority of uranium production under Putin's control, and you are willing to believe that a State Dept lackey had more to do with it than the Secretary of State. Okey dokey then.

This could all be cleared up so easily if only we had a peek at Hillary's emails. Oh wait, since Hillary had nothing to do with the deal, how about we take a little peek at the emails of whoever actually signed the deal. No, no wait. That would be Clinton too.

I guess we will just have to take her at her word then, huh?

In a rational world, this would be the end of Hillary. But even some of our more reasonable leftists appear to be ok with this. Hillary should go to prison for this. But she won't. She'll probably become President. At least when that happens, Obama will no longer be the most dishonest and corrupt president in history.

Yeah, just like Hunter Biden had no influence with his father in ramming a super sweet deal for the big credit card companies through congress - while the good son collected half a million in consulting fees from MBNA. The two surely had nothing to do with one another, just as Hillary's foundation being in receipt of more than $2 million in donations from Uranium One's chairman.

Its easy for her spokesperson to say that such deals are made below the secretary, but pardon me while I guffaw. We are talking about a deal that placed the majority of uranium production under Putin's control, and you are willing to believe that a State Dept lackey had more to do with it than the Secretary of State. Okey dokey then.

This could all be cleared up so easily if only we had a peek at Hillary's emails. Oh wait, since Hillary had nothing to do with the deal, how about we take a little peek at the emails of whoever actually signed the deal. No, no wait. That would be Clinton too.

I guess we will just have to take her at her word then, huh? Originally Posted by SinsOfTheFlesh

You're dishonest, like your partner in crime JD. It doesn't place the majority of uranium production under Putin's control. The article states 20 percent. I'm not a math whiz, but that's not a majority. Not even half of a majority. The words you use matter. You don't get to just throw them around because you think it makes your case stronger. If you're found wanting, as in this instance, it makes your case look weaker because you had to fudge it.

You have no way of knowing if it could be easily cleared up by viewing the emails. That's speculation. As is the entire thing. If it's true, she should be charged with treason, but we don't have enough evidence, no matter how bad you WANT it to be true.

The State Dept has over 60K employees, give or take. You think the SOS has their hands in every single thing? How many people in the world do you think can give millions of dollars to a foundation? How many people have that kind of money. There are only 12 million millionaires in the entire world. Out of 8 billion people. People like that run in small circles. Look at who else they received money from. Look at who else he gave money to.