Donald Trump has recently stated that the Clintons' ties with Russia need to be investigated. What does this statement mean? Does it have anything to do with Bill Clinton's lectures in Moscow and the sale of uranium mining company Uranium One to Russia's Rosatom?
"Why isn't the House Intelligence Committee looking into the Bill & Hillary deal that allowed big Uranium to go to Russia," Donald Trump tweeted. Trump also said that Congress should investigate the "Russian speech" and the "money to Bill," as well as the "Podesta Russia Company." "Trump-Russia story is a hoax," he concluded.
Uranium One Inc. is one of the world's largest uranium mining companies with a portfolio of international assets in Kazakhstan, the US, Australia and Tanzania.
US mass media actively speculated on the purchase of Canadian Uranium One by ARMZ, a Rosatom division (Russian Federal Atomic Energy Agency). In the spring of 2008, then-chairman of the board of directors of U1, Ian Telfer, donated three million dollars to the Clinton Global Foundation. Two and a half years later, when US authorities were considering the ARMZ and U1 deal, Hillary Clinton was among the decision makers. As a result, Russia gained control over 20 percent of uranium production in the United States.
The Clinton Foundation pledged not to accept donations from foreign governments at the time when Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State. In June 2010, however, Bill Clinton received $500,000 from Renaissance Capital Bank for his speech in Moscow. The New York Times wrote that the bank was associated with the Kremlin. Furthermore, the same bank evaluated the assets of Uranium One, the newspaper also said. According to the authoritative publication, donations to the Clinton Foundation exceeded $34 million from 2008 to 2013. However, there is no evidence to prove that the money affected the sale of Uranium One to Rosatom.
Pravda.Ru requested an expert opinion from senior officer at the University of Finance, Konstantin Simonov.
"Do you think that the recent storm of Donald Trump's tweets about Hillary Clinton was just a regular "attack"? Is there a specific ground for such posts? Does Russia appear as a scarecrow here again?"
"In fact, there is a certain factual basis about the story, but it is an absolutely legal one. It is an open secret that Uranium One sponsored the Democratic Party and provided lobbyist services. Yet, there was absolutely nothing criminal about all that, everything was held within the framework of American legal procedures. At the same time, it appears that Donald Trump is trying to respond to accusations about his victory and Russian hackers. He is trying to shift the blame on Hillary Clinton."
"What are the negative aspects about Russia here?"
"Relations with Russia become some sort of a burden. They blame the Russians for everything, at any opportunity. Once again, the sponsorship support was implemented in accordance with US legislation that allows such activities. Ironically, the United States is doing everything to make the whole world believe that it is Russia that rules America. Judge for yourself: Flynn was an agent of the Kremlin; Ambassador Kislyak was a gray cardinal who "ruled" in Washington; Russian hackers ensured Trump's victory and so on.
"There is a case pending, in which someone who chairs an Internet company claims that the Russians have hacked everything that could be hacked, including the Ukrainian fire guidance system. At the same time, some people still believe that Russia is a dilapidated gas station. It turns out that Russia is a major, high-tech power, the most advanced state in the field of hacking, wiretapping and spying. In this regard, the US creates a sufficiently amusing reputation for Russia of an advanced country capable of changing presidents and forcing presidential candidates to lobby its interests. So absurd.
Editor-in-chief of "Russian Atomic Community," Pavel Yakovlev also commented on the situation:
"There were nine federal agencies of the United States, including the State Department, that were involved in the coordination of the purchase of Uranium One. Hillary Clinton chaired the State Department at that time. Independent federal and regional atomic regulation agencies, as well as the foreign investment committee also took part in the deal. The heads of all those agencies that were not related to each other put their signatures approving the deal, which showed that the deal corresponded to national interests of the United States."
Read article on the Russian version of Pravda.Ru
Following the summit in Riga on November 30, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg explained how the alliance could respond to Russia's 'new aggression against Ukraine.'