Dog Wonder
Veteran
Daily Sewer.Kev3188 said:
Trump Polling
- Thread starter delldude
- Start date
- Status
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
What about the other yuge border?
Dog Wonder
Veteran
That is where the French sneak in.Glenn Quagmire said:
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
"Why Russia Is Rejoicing Over Trump"
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/2016-trump-putin-russia-gop-platform-214074
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/2016-trump-putin-russia-gop-platform-214074
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #2,362
Glenn Quagmire said:
The New York Times endorsed Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, calling her “one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.” There was one big problem with the editorial. Her policy toward Russia laid the groundwork for the Russian aggression that the Pentagon now has to spend billions of dollars to prepare for. The paper somehow forgot to mention that.
The Obama/Clinton Russian “reset” policy in 2009 set the stage for Russian wars of aggression and military intervention in Ukraine and Syria, and Vladimir Putin’s decision to give sanctuary to NSA defector Edward Snowden. Snowden’s stolen documents have assisted the rise of ISIS.
When President Obama’s own Secretary of Defense Ash Carter, just a few days later, identified Russia as one of America’s biggest threats, the Times was put in a bad spot. How could it defend endorsing the former secretary of state when the Russian threat she had ignored was now taking center stage, and going to cost the U.S. billions of dollars?
It’s true that, for 25 years, administrations of both political parties have misjudged Russia. The Times and other media need to demand accountability from those who thought Russia could be our “partner” in global affairs. Instead, the paper ran an editorial endorsing Mrs. Clinton for president and cited her alleged expertise. This is the mark of a paper that is determined, for political reasons, to make Mrs. Clinton into something she is not. She was not a success. She was a failure. The editorial won’t hold up under scrutiny.
The honest approach would be to analyze why Mrs. Clinton was so wrong about Russia. Interestingly, the Times may have the answer to this question in its own pages.
Could it have something to do with the contributions to the Clinton Foundation from Russian interests? The Times itself ran the story, “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal,” on April 23, 2015. It talked about how Russian President Putin had moved “closer to his goal of controlling much of the global uranium supply chain,” based on a Russian deal to acquire a company called Uranium One—a deal that required U.S. State Department approval when Mrs. Clinton was the secretary of state.
The paper said that as the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One during the time period 2009 to 2013, millions of dollars in “donations” were flowing to the Clinton Foundation from Uranium One’s chairman and his family foundation. “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.” The deal gave the Russian government control of 20 percent of the uranium in the United States.
We can conclude that the Russian reset was an exercise in selling our national security to Russia. It was corruption. But rather than retire from public life, which would have been the honorable thing to do, Hillary Clinton decided to run for the highest office in the land, and has the support of The New York Times. She hopes the American people will forget what she did. The Times has already done so, for political reasons.
http://www.aim.org/aim-column/clinton-corruption-leads-to-russian-aggression/
Note: This article was written before the Oregon shootout in which one man was killed and another wounded.
Is uranium at the heart of the Oregon Malheur federal-protestor standoff? That’s the question I’m asking. It isn’t a flippant question.
I realize there are many other issues swirling around this event. The Hammonds, the Bundys, militias, the feds, cattle grazing on federal lands, federal land grabs, and so on. This article isn’t meant to take apart those matters.
I also want to say, at the outset, that I don’t know how many independent news outlets and websites are covering the uranium question, or which outlet initiated this line of investigation. I’m relying on one provocative January 23 article at intellihub, by Shepard Ambellas:
“Clinton Foundation took massive payoffs, promised Hammond Ranch and other publicly owned lands to Russians, along with one-fifth of our uranium ore.”
Down in the body of that article, the author provides a link to a page at the US Bureau of Land Management (BLM), which is a federal agency under the Department of the Interior.
On that BLM page (“National BLM > OR/WA > Energy > Uranium Energy”), in a section titled, “Uranium on BLM-Administered Lands in OR/WA,” [(image of webpage forthcoming)] is the following statement:
“In September 2011, a representative from Oregon Energy, L.L.C. (formally Uranium One), met with local citizens, and county and state officials, to discuss the possibility of opening a uranium oxide (‘yellowcake’) mine in southern Malheur County in southeastern Oregon. Oregon Energy is interested in developing a 17-Claim parcel of land known as the Aurora Project through an open pit mining method. Besides the mine, there would be a mill for processing. The claim area occupies about 450 acres and is also referred to as the ‘New U’ uranium claims.
“On May 7, 2012, Oregon Energy LLC made a presentation to the BLM outlining its plans for development for the mine.
https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2016/01/27/the-clintons-is-the-oregon-standoff-really-about-uranium/
Dog Wonder
Veteran
I got two blue eyes.Insp4 said:Hey Dog, this you?
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,809
- 4,343
"Donald Trump invited Russia to hack Hillary Clinton on Wednesday, asking them to find “the 30,000 emails that are missing” from her time as secretary of state."
“It would be interesting to see, I will tell you this, Russia, if you're listening I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-putin-no-relationship-226282#ixzz4FckrLljk
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
“It would be interesting to see, I will tell you this, Russia, if you're listening I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” the Republican nominee said at a news conference in Florida. “I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/07/trump-putin-no-relationship-226282#ixzz4FckrLljk
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
Kev3188
Veteran
Republicans aligning with Russia. What would Reagan think?
- Thread Starter
- Thread starter
- #2,367
Glenn Quagmire said:
Priceless, Dude.......shows the level of mistrust to the rule of law the Obama administration has brought to the masses.
Kev3188 said:
Democrats aligned with China.
Fond memories of Anita Dunn quoting Mao, Van Jones, self avowed card carrying Communist, Valerie Jarret, David Axelrod, all crowing the virtues of China and Communist ideology early in the Obama experiment.
- Status
