I don't think you understand, the fact that Clintons had ZERO power to approve the deal, the State Department guy who sat on CFIUS was directly appointed by Obama as well - to say that by looking for another 30 years you guys would finally find evidence of Clintons being paid to do something they had no power to do is insane.
Hill: FBI Informant Tells Congress Moscow Routed Millions to Influence the Clintons
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
I don't think you understand, the fact that Clintons had ZERO power to approve the deal, the State Department guy who sat on CFIUS was directly appointed by Obama as well - to say that by looking for another 30 years you guys would finally find evidence of Clintons being paid to do something they had no power to do is insane.
once again this your off point patented inference with a faulty conclusion baloney.
You know that podestas leaked emails prove to the contrary... because I showed them to you.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release
What the Clinton campaign spokesman failed to disclose, however, was the fact that a few days before sending his rebuttal to the New York Times, Jose Fernandez wrote on the evening of the 17 April 2015 to John Podesta following a phone call from Mr Podesta (Email ID 2053): "John, It was good to talk to you this afternoon, and I appreciate your taking the time to call. As I mentioned, I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton, and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign".
Five days after this email (22 April 2015), Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon wrote a memo to the New York Times, declaring that "Jose Fernandez has personally attested that 'Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter',” but Fallon failed to mention that Fernandez was hardly a neutral witness in this case, considering that he had agreed with John Podesta to play a role in the Clinton campaign.
The emails show that the contacts between John Podesta and Jose Fernandez go back to the time of internal Clinton campaign concern about the then-forthcoming book and movie "Clinton Cash" by Peter Schweizer on the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
In an email dated 29 March 2015 (Email ID 2059), Jose Fernandez writes to Podesta: "Hi John, I trust you are getting a brief rest after a job well done. Thanks no doubt to your recommendation I have joined the CAP [Center for American Progress] board of trustees, which I'm finding extremely rewarding."
Julian Assange
You know that podestas leaked emails prove to the contrary... because I showed them to you.
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/press-release
What the Clinton campaign spokesman failed to disclose, however, was the fact that a few days before sending his rebuttal to the New York Times, Jose Fernandez wrote on the evening of the 17 April 2015 to John Podesta following a phone call from Mr Podesta (Email ID 2053): "John, It was good to talk to you this afternoon, and I appreciate your taking the time to call. As I mentioned, I would like to do all I can to support Secretary Clinton, and would welcome your advice and help in steering me to the right persons in the campaign".
Five days after this email (22 April 2015), Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon wrote a memo to the New York Times, declaring that "Jose Fernandez has personally attested that 'Secretary Clinton never intervened with me on any CFIUS matter',” but Fallon failed to mention that Fernandez was hardly a neutral witness in this case, considering that he had agreed with John Podesta to play a role in the Clinton campaign.
The emails show that the contacts between John Podesta and Jose Fernandez go back to the time of internal Clinton campaign concern about the then-forthcoming book and movie "Clinton Cash" by Peter Schweizer on the financial dealings of the Clinton Foundation.
In an email dated 29 March 2015 (Email ID 2059), Jose Fernandez writes to Podesta: "Hi John, I trust you are getting a brief rest after a job well done. Thanks no doubt to your recommendation I have joined the CAP [Center for American Progress] board of trustees, which I'm finding extremely rewarding."
Julian Assange
That's your first lie, Clintons didn't get millions, a public charity with public records did. No evidence Clintons personally benefited from any of it, in fact the foundation has cost them millions.
Hey idiot.
THEY HAD NO POWER TO DO THE FUCKING DEAL
How many times do I have to explain this? They had no power to approve or veto, the State Department guy who sat on CFIUS was not even a Clinton appointee, he was a direct Obama appointee. And you have no evidence that Clinton lobbied for the deal in any way.
So what is this 'deal got done' bullshit.
You are such a braindead Con, you keep repeating the same crap over and over without once stopping to think the premise of your argument.
Anybody can write a book, where is the evidence?
The witness- Campbell is dying of cancer- so he will be a tough one to back down with threats.
Also not to be too pernsickity- but the legal types here know that the declarations of a person who believes they are dying are an exception to the hearsay rule.
Just sayin- he is going to unleash a pantload before he goes, and if he goes his testimony will still carry weight. I have not read all the articles posted here today. I will get to them later but I assume they point out that he has already testified to Congress.
Not many people are beyond the reach of the threat or actuality of Arkancide, but he comes close.
And yes, I know that a white house staffer punched his wives, so - yes tards- that will buy you a couple days of distraction. Enjoy it.
Also not to be too pernsickity- but the legal types here know that the declarations of a person who believes they are dying are an exception to the hearsay rule.
Just sayin- he is going to unleash a pantload before he goes, and if he goes his testimony will still carry weight. I have not read all the articles posted here today. I will get to them later but I assume they point out that he has already testified to Congress.
Not many people are beyond the reach of the threat or actuality of Arkancide, but he comes close.
And yes, I know that a white house staffer punched his wives, so - yes tards- that will buy you a couple days of distraction. Enjoy it.
you are a joke.
my smoking gun is that the clintons are crooked and they took in millions from sources close to putin.... and then the deal got done. that is all a smart person would need to know to realize that there was 99 percent chance there was corruption there.
you are the one trying to obfuscate those facts with weak inferences and silly arguments. so I show how weak your inferences are.
the clintons had tons of power via the clinton machine to get the deal done.
that is how the clinton crime family got things done.
you need to get out of a investigation... have you former campaign guy now governor of VA give 700 grand to the wife of the FBI guy investigation your for her "campaign".
Getting the Uranium One deal done would be child's play for the clinton crime family if they took in enough money form Putin.
my smoking gun is that the clintons are crooked and they took in millions from sources close to putin.... and then the deal got done. that is all a smart person would need to know to realize that there was 99 percent chance there was corruption there.
you are the one trying to obfuscate those facts with weak inferences and silly arguments. so I show how weak your inferences are.
the clintons had tons of power via the clinton machine to get the deal done.
that is how the clinton crime family got things done.
you need to get out of a investigation... have you former campaign guy now governor of VA give 700 grand to the wife of the FBI guy investigation your for her "campaign".
Getting the Uranium One deal done would be child's play for the clinton crime family if they took in enough money form Putin.
Last edited:
That's not a smoking gun, that's an allegation.
Giustra is not close to Putin either and Clintons had no power to approve a deal or get it done.
Your entire conspiracy theory is based on a flimsy premise that collapses at the simplest scruitny. That's why, absolutely nothing has happened on this bombshell case, Trump DOJ won't even take it up, the witness is giving 'written' testimony, he is not even testifying under oath where he could be questioned.
You got no facts, if you did, this whole thing would already be in courts but there is not even a DOJ investigation!
Here's my prediction - DOJ never takes up the investigation due to lack of evidence and no charges are ever filed against Clintons. It's like your Seth Rich bullshit, take a claim with a bit of truth and twist it around to make a bullshit conspiracy.
If I am proven wrong, I will personally apologize to every single conservative on this board and delete my account.
I see you edited your post.
More buzzwords added, 'the clinton machine'.
I asked you for evidence, not another round of Breitbart talking points.
WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE?
And why were Clintons needed for a deal that nobody in the government including career bureaucrats objected to? I mean, who cares for 0.3% of Uranium that one can easily buy from international markets.
And your Mcabe attack is bullshit,
"Jill McCabe’s campaign received $467,500 from McAuliffe’s PAC and another $207,788 from the Virginia Democratic Party for the November 2015 election. McCabe wasn’t the only candidate to receive “big dollars” from McAuliffe’s PAC that year. Common Good VA gave $803,500 to state Senate candidate Jeremy McPike, who won his race, and $781,500 to Daniel Gecker, who lost his. These donations were all part of a failed effort by the Democratic governor to help the Democrats take control of the state Senate that year."
https://www.factcheck.org/2017/07/trump-wrong-campaign-donations/
Just because you support a criminal who is under investigation by his own DOJ, doesn't give you the license to call others criminal when you guys couldn't land a single charge on them after 30 years of investigating. Accept your failure and move on, Mueller is gonna get your boy, worry about that instead.
you have been presented with tons of evidence. you just don't want to believe it.
and I note... the wikileaks email from podesta shows you all need to know about how corrupt the machine is.
oh... I wish to do all I can.. for Hillary... wink wink I have important statements to make and I would not want to lie for nothing.
a few days later...
oh thanks for the job on the board for your foundation Mr. Podesta... that will look great on my resume as sell my influence to others.
and I note... the wikileaks email from podesta shows you all need to know about how corrupt the machine is.
oh... I wish to do all I can.. for Hillary... wink wink I have important statements to make and I would not want to lie for nothing.
a few days later...
oh thanks for the job on the board for your foundation Mr. Podesta... that will look great on my resume as sell my influence to others.
Last edited:
This is from the guy who co-wrote that NYTimes article which you think is evidence.
He ADMITS there is no evidence.
If there was evidence, where is the DOJ case against Clinton? Why is your 'witness' giving written testimonies instead of testifying under oath where he could be questioned? What happened to his suitcase full of cash theory? He is peddling the APCO talking point which was reported last year by right wing outlets, what is new about this? All I want is evidence that's prosecutable, I dont' want your Seth Rich kind of bullshit where you make shit up.