Mitt Romney Says on Hugh Hewitt Show Regarding Clinton Foundation Uranium Payments … “It Looks Like Bribery”

Mitt Romney says, “It Looks Like Bribery.”

Yesterday on the Hugh Hewitt radio show, Mitt Romney was asked what his reaction was  of the New York Times article report documenting cash flowing from the Russians amid a uranium deal to the Clinton Foundation. Romney, the former 2012 GOP presidential nominee, said that he was stunned and “it looked like bribery”. Romney went on to say that it looks like bribery and a cover up on behalf of Hillary Clinton and had she not wiped out thousands of emails, we might know more.

“You know, I’ve got to tell you, I was stunned by it. I mean, it looks like bribery.”

“I mean, there is every appearance that Hillary Clinton was bribed to grease the sale of, what, 20% of America’s uranium production to Russia, and then it was covered up by lying about a meeting at her home with the principals, and by erasing emails.  And you know, I presume we might know for sure whether there was or was not bribery if she hadn’t wiped out thousands of emails.”

“But this is a very, very serious series of facts, and it looks like bribery.”

It is too bad that Mitt Romney did not go after Barack Obama like he is now Hillary during the 2012 presidential election. Had he done so and kept his foot on Obama’s neck following the 1st Presidential debate instead of coating and playing a prevent defense, he probably would have won.

Sec. of State Hillary Clinton & the Real Russian Reset … Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

CAN YOU SAY OBSCENE CONFLICT OF INTEREST …

UNBELIEVABLE, From the New York Times comes the following connect the dots story that looks way to fishy and convenient of an incestuous relationship between then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former President Bill Clinton, The Clinton Foundation and the Russians. How in the hell can Hillary Clinton be trusted to be President of the United States? Forget email and server-gate and Benghazi-gate while she was Secretary of State and all the previous scandals that she was a part  of, we need to only look at what she did as Secretary of State and the relationships that can be best be described as suspect.  As Red State opines, Bill Clinton sold us to the ChiComs; Hillary sold us to the Russians. And this individual wants to be president. America, wake the hell up.

The headline on the website Pravda trumpeted President Vladimir V. Putin’s latest coup, its nationalistic fervor recalling an era when its precursor served as the official mouthpiece of the Kremlin: “Russian Nuclear Energy Conquers the World.”

The article, in January 2013, detailed how the Russian atomic energy agency, Rosatom, had taken over a Canadian company with uranium-mining stakes stretching from Central Asia to the American West. The deal made Rosatom one of the world’s largest uranium producers and brought Mr. Putin closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain.

But the untold story behind that story is one that involves not just the Russian president, but also a former American president and a woman who would like to be the next one.

At the heart of the tale are several men, leaders of the Canadian mining industry, who have been major donors to the charitable endeavors of former President Bill Clinton and his family. Members of that group built, financed and eventually sold off to the Russians a company that would become known as Uranium One.

Beyond mines in Kazakhstan that are among the most lucrative in the world, the sale gave the Russians control of one-fifth of all uranium production capacity in the United States. Since uranium is considered a strategic asset, with implications for national security, the deal had to be approved by a committee composed of representatives from a number of United States government agencies. Among the agencies that eventually signed off was the State Department, then headed by Mr. Clinton’s wife, Hillary Rodham Clinton.

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

And shortly after the Russians announced their intention to acquire a majority stake in Uranium One, Mr. Clinton received $500,000 for a Moscow speech from a Russian investment bank with links to the Kremlin that was promoting Uranium One stock.

Please read the entire article at the NY Times as there is too much incredible stuff in it to do in any justice with block quotes. It is time for America and especially Democrats to say enough is enough. Obviously Democrats are not going to vote for a Republican for president, but if you actually pull the lever for Hillary, you would have sold your soul, as there has never been a more corrupt person running for president that had no business doing so. If these kind of stories of scandals, corruption, influence and conspiracy were about any one else, they would have been politically destroyed. Sorry, but so should Hillary.

White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest Not Categorically Denying Clinton Foundation Donors Received Special Treatment From Sec. of State Hillary Clinton

HMM … OBAMA WHITE HOUSE NOT CATEGORICALLY DENYING CLINTON FOUNDATION DONOR AND FORMER SEC. OF STATE HILLARY CLINTON QUID PRO DOUGH SPECIAL TREATMENT …

Why would it be difficult for Barack Obama’s White House press secretary Josh Earnest to say categorically that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did not provide special treatment for those who were donors of the Clinton Foundation? One would think that would be a straight forward response of, absolutely not. However, not with the most transparent presidency in history. The Obama White House does not seem to have an answer to the accusations made from the recent book by Peter Schweizer, Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” otherwise known as Quid Pro Dough.

New York Post

The Blaze:

The new book, “Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary Rich” by Peter Schweizer, lays out the case that contributions to the foundation influenced State Department policy from 2009 to 2013, during Clinton’s tenure.

ABC News reporter Jonathan Karl asked Earnest Monday, “Can you say categorically that no donors to the Clinton Foundation – nobody paying any honoraria to former President Clinton – received any favorable treatment from this administration or from the State Department?”

Earnest talked at length about the memorandum of understanding Clinton signed when she joined the Obama administration, saying that it went above and beyond ethical guidelines, given her unique circumstances.

“I know there have been a lot of accusations made about this but not a lot of evidence,” Earnest said. “So, the president continues to be extraordinarily proud of the work Secretary Clinton did as secretary of state. For the details of some of those accusations, I’d refer you to Secretary Clinton’s campaign.”

Karl pressed, “Can you assure us absolutely no favorable treatment given to donors of the Clinton Foundation?”

Earnest repeated, “There are lots of accusations. There is no one who is marshaling the evidence for this. I don’t want to be in a position.”

Barack Obama’s DOJ Says There are No contempt Charges for Former IRS Official Lois Lerner

WHAT A JOKE, NO CONTEMPT CHARGES FOR LOIS LERNER  … MORE FROM THE MOST CORRUPT PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATION EVER.

This should come as a shock to no one …  President Barack Obama said he was going to have the most transparent and trustworthy administration ever. Of course this is much like a 300 pound man wearing a bowling shirt with the nickname “Slim” on it. And now for the latest in the IRS scandal that saw the IRS purposely and intentionally go after Conservatives and Conservative non-profit groups like the Tea Party ahead of the 2012 elections. Eric Holder and Barack Obama’s Department of Justice will not seek criminal charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner over her refusal to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March 2014. IMAGINE THAT! The DOJ claims that she did not waive her 5th Amendment privileges when she made a statement of her innocence prior to pleading the 5th because get this … “she made only a general claims of innocence.” SERIOUSLY?

The fix has been in from the outset. We not only have a corrupt government where the fox is guarding the hen house, we have one where the fox also is behind the scandal and in charge of prosecuting any such crimes at the hen house. This country has so lost its way I really am beginning to wonder for the first time in my life whether we will ever be able to get it back.

The Justice Department will not seek criminal contempt charges against former IRS official Lois Lerner, the central figure in a scandal that erupted over whether the tax agency improperly targeted conservative political groups.

Ronald Machen, the former U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, told House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) in a seven-page letter this week that he would not bring a criminal case to a grand jury over Lerner’s refusal to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee in March 2014. The House approved a criminal contempt resolution against Lerner in May 2014, and Machen’s office has been reviewing the issue since then.

Machen said the Oversight Committee “followed proper procedures” in telling Lerner that it had “rejected her claim of privilege and gave her an adequate opportunity to answer the Committee’s questions.”
IRS watchdog probing ‘potential criminal activity’ in Lerner email mess.

However, Machen said Justice Department lawyers determined that Lerner “did not waive her Fifth Amendment right by making an opening statement on May 22, 2013, because she made only a general claims of innocence.”

Machen added: “Given that assessment, we have further concluded that it is not appropriate for a United States Attorney to present the matter to the grand jury for action where, as here, the Constitution prevents the witness from being prosecuted for contempt.”

Judge Jeanine Pirro: We Need a Woman President, But Not this Woman … Does Hillary Clinton Have The Integrity To Be President?

THE ANSWER IS NO …

Judge Jeanine Pirro slammed Hillary Clinton in her opening monologue on ‘Justice with Judge Jeanine’ stating, “As much as I want a woman president … But not this woman.” Judge Jeanine Pirro ripped Hillary Clinton for not having the integrity to be president of the United States. Hillary Clinton does not have what it takes to protect America and our Constitution, she is only concerned with covering her behind and protecting herself. The rules have never applied to Hillary. How could anyone think that she is what America needs after 8 years of Obama?

“As much as I want a woman president, the latest news of deleting emails and keeping communications with her highest level staff outside of government servers, ignoring it until it became clear it wasn’t going away, tells me that Hillary Clinton is not about transparency and is not about integrity,” Judge Jeanine stated.

My personal opinion is, if Hillary Clinton becomes president in 2016, this country is finished. It is bad enough that presidents do unethical things and lie while in office. But to knowingly elect Hillary Clinton, an individual who has a past of lies, unethical behavior and hiding things from the American people would mean this country does not care anyone. It would mean, as long as you are the first of anything, like Barack Obama being the first black president or Hillary, the first female president, everything else that makes up someone being an ethical and qualified candidate does not matter. Or as Hillary would say about her past and lack of qualifications … what different does it make.

Transcript:

Alright, so she used her private email and she communicated with her top level staff through their private emails. Who cares? Will this impact your decision on whether to vote for Hillary Clinton for president?

Of course not. You won’t even remember this kerfuffle next year. But the question is much deeper than that. The question becomes: does Hillary Clinton have the integrity to be the President of the United States of America, the leader of the free world? Does Hillary Clinton have the instincts to protect us, someone other than herself?

And as much as I want a woman president, the latest news of deleting emails and keeping communications with her highest level staff outside of government servers, ignoring it until it became clear it wasn’t going away, tells me that Hillary Clinton is not about transparency and is not about integrity, that she does whatever she wants regardless of the rules.

And nobody knows scandal or loopholes better than this woman who has danced with special prosecutors, federal investigators and subpoenas for most of her professional career. It’s simply part of her history.

Now Congressman Trey Gowdy, head of the Benghazi Committee, wants to give her the benefit of the doubt, saying but “it wouldn’t be reasonable for her to be on her way to Libya to discuss Libyan policy and there are no emails from the trip.”

And I’m going to shock you tonight, in spite of my law enforcement background, to me this email investigation is almost irrelevant.

Hillary Clinton knows exactly what she’s doing. What matters to her is making history by becoming the first woman president. The rules simply don’t apply to her.

Read more