Hannity's phony-baloney Uranium One scandal fizzles into nothingness
The famous "informant" turned to have no actual information!
William Douglas Campbell testified under oath in the House Intelligence hearings. He admitted he could not support his claim that the review process was improperly influenced.
As I pointed out in detail, the entire scandal was completely concocted. Most politically-inspired accusations have at least a grain of truth, which gets magnified and distorted by spin. In this case there was absolutely no basis of any kind for the entire issue to exist. It was a complete fabrication, and it was not only false, but if you know even the slightest bit about the uranium market, or even if you know nothing about uranium but read the specifics of the deal and/or its approval, the entire "scandal" didn't even make any sense.
And yet the Trump imbeciles slurp it down hook, line, and sinker.
ReplyDeleteI agree there was probably nothing improper in the approval of the Uranium One deal. But there certainly seems to be something improper in Bill Clinton accepting a $500,000 speaking fee from a Kremlin linked bank in 2010 while his wife was not only Secretary of State, but seen as the clear front runner for the 2016 nomination. Let me put it like this, if there wasn't anything improper in accepting that fee. it damn well should have been improper.
ReplyDeleteThat analysis by Scoop on the Uranium deal was excellent.
ReplyDelete